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