本題可視為網路上搜尋引擎之迷你版，你的程式必須提供使用者輸入一個英文關鍵單字的介面，並在程式中讀入一文字檔 （如下例，其內容為一段英文文章）。請設計一程式，搜尋輸入檔中含此關鍵單字（大小寫不拘）的所有句子，並依序在螢幕上輸出；若輸入檔中不含此關鍵單字，則在畫面上顯示”查無此字”。
說明：複合單字（如：web-based）要採計，但隱含之字串（如：Cobweb）則不予採計。
Provide and discuss three of the evidence found in children
when they acquire their first language to prove that language is an instinct.
The basic design of language comes from a mechanism innately wired into
children. Any normal child, born anywhere in the world, of any racial,
geographical, social, or economic heritage, is capable of learning any language
to which he or she is exposed. Children can produce the sentences they have
never heard or learned. Children develop complex grammars rapidly and without
formal instruction and grow up to give consistent interpretations to novel
sentence constructions that they have never before encountered. The following
three examples which are Creole, one of Chomsky’s experiments, and Gordon’s
“mud-eater” experiment are the evidences of language instinct in children when
they acquire their first language.
First of all, when speakers of different languages have to communicate to carry
out practical tasks but do not have the opportunity to learn one another’s
languages, they develop a makeshift jargon called a pidgin. In many cases a
pidgin can be transmuted into a full complex language in one fell swoop: all it
takes is for a group of children to be exposed to the pidgin at the age when
they acquire their mother tongue. The children injected grammatical complexity
where none existed before, resulting in a brand-new, richly expressive language.
The language that results when children make a pidgin their native tongue is
called Creole.
Second evidence is from Chomsky’s experiment with three-, four-, and
five-year-olds at a day care center. This particular experiment controlled a
doll of Jabba the Hutt , of Star Wars fame. The other coaxed the child to ask a
set of questions, by saying, for example, “ Ask Jabba if the boy who is unhappy
is watching Mickey Mouse.” Jabba would inspect a picture and answer yes or no,
but it was really the child who was being tested. The children cheerfully
provided the appropriate questions, and, as Chomsky would have predicted, not a
single one of them came up with an ungrammatical string like “Is the boy who
unhappy is watching Mickey Mouse?, which the simple linear rule would have
produced.
Another evidence is from Gordon’s “mud-eater” experiment. The children produced
mice-eater but never rats-eater, even though they had no evidence from adult
speech that this is how languages works. The children respect the subtle
restrictions on combining plurals and compounds inherent in the word structure
rules. It suggests that the rules take the same form in the unconscious mind of
the child as they do in unconscious mind of the adult.
In conclusion, children have ability to learn language without any formal
instruction, and the regularity of the acquisition process across diverse
languages and environmental circumstances. Children must innately be equipped
with a plan common to the grammars of all languages, a Universal Grammar that
tells them how to distill the syntactic pattern out of the speech of their
parents. All of three examples above have demonstration of knowledge despite
“poverty of the input”, and also suggest that another basic aspect of grammar
may be innate and language is