When learning a language, both adults and children tend to overgeneralize grammatical rules. For example, in French, during language acquisition, learners often place object pronouns after the verb, mirroring the more common subject-verb-object order, even though standard French places them before the verb. Children also demonstrate overgeneralization, such as saying 'foots' instead of 'feet,' applying the regular plural rule to irregular nouns. This behavior is seen as children acting like scientists, forming hypotheses about language rules and applying them broadly.

The question arises as to why standard French deviates from this fundamental tendency to place the object after the verb. While learners initially follow this natural pattern, external factors like established norms, books, and media eventually guide them towards the standard. However, language itself changes over time, often moving towards more generalized patterns. Steven Pinker's work on English verbs illustrates this, showing a tendency for irregular verbs to become regular over time (e.g., 'shine, shone' to 'shine, shined').

Social factors also play a significant role in language change. People often use language to project an image of sophistication, leading to patterns of hypercorrection. Examples include incorrectly using 'whom' or 'Mary and I' in object positions because they sound 'fancier.' This phenomenon, termed a 'grammar virus,' is driven by the desire to appear superior or sophisticated. Similar behavior is observed in Haitian Creole, where speakers might incorrectly use rounded French vowels to demonstrate their knowledge of French.

The difficulties adults face in language learning, such as initially dropping verbal conjugations, are universal across many languages. This suggests a common learning process. Michel DeGraff argues that understanding language change, including Creole formation, requires considering the combined effects of both adult and child language acquisition. These universal processes, alongside social factors, drive linguistic evolution.

DeGraff concludes that Creole formation is not an exceptional linguistic phenomenon requiring a unique theory. Instead, it is a form of language change that can be understood through existing linguistic theories applicable to all languages. He posits that Creoles are simply languages that have undergone standard processes of acquisition and social influence, and therefore do not need a special theoretical framework separate from those applied to languages like French or English.