  Newport argues that Simon appears to be ‘cleaning up’ his parents' language, that is, “bas[ing] his learning heavily on  his input, but reorganiz[ing] this input to form a cleaner, more  rule-governed system than the one to which he was exposed.”  (2001:168) She agrees that this result could be due to constraints  imposed by an innate language faculty, but argues that it is also  consistent with the existence of some more generalized propensity in  children to generate systematic rules from noisy inputs, rightly  pointing out that the latter hypothesis cannot be ruled out in  advance of empirical test. (In this context, she notes (p.170) some  preliminary studies suggesting that inferring systematic rules from  messy data may indeed be a more general feature of learning in young  children (though, interestingly, not in adults), for they can be seen to exhibit this tendency in non-linguistic pattern-learning contexts  too.) Newport concludes that “the contrasts between Simon and  his parents are in certain ways less extreme, and more  reorganizational, than might be suggested by the Language Bioprogram  Hypothesis…[H]e does not appear to be creating an entirely new language from his own innate specifications; rather, he appears to be following the predominant tendencies of his input, but he sharpens  them, extends them, and forces them to be internally  consistent.” (2001:173).