The Critical Period Hypothesis

Foreign language classes are often put off until high school due to the fact that this is when people believe students are most ready to learn another language. This belief is widely accepted despite the fact children are able to learn to speak like natives in foreign languages, whereas teenagers and adults usually are not able to learn how to do this. Speaking “like a native” entails being able to think in a foreign language without having to translate (Nadia 1). The ability to speak like a native in a foreign language can be easier to obtain when taught the foreign language during elementary school. Once a student passes the prime learning stages, learning a foreign language can be extremely difficult. Adults starting to learn a language have to work through an established first-language

As Zentella has studied within these three families, she finds an assortment of variation, even in individuals that come from the same family. The author argues that children coming from similar backstories range differently in their expertise in the language of their immigrated parents and the standard language of their residency. She concludes that because each family’s outlook on learning a second language and each individual’s preference challenges one another, one’s ability to learn a second language varies as well; there is no solid explanation as to why some people from the same background are more advanced in Spanish rather than English, and vice versa. Most people would not have taken into account of all the different contributions that this author describes, including gender, social preference, location, and personal beliefs. The common person would assume that acquiring a second language is possible for these families because they are surrounded by it, and that they would be able to maintain both their primary and secondary language. However, the author does analyze the contrasting opinion through observing the differences found in her study. She finds that the development of each person greatly varies to where each has different learning abilities and preferences. Where they live, whom they are in contact with, gender, and even their own personal behavior affects their unique growth. Since all have varying opinions, their decisions and values are placed accordingly to their own desire; in conclusion, these are all major factors in how people’s language skills

However, there is a critical period of learning a second language, “Many linguists believe there is a 'critical period ' (lasting roughly from birth until puberty) during which a child can easily acquire any language that he or she is regularly exposed to. Under this view, the structure of the brain changes at puberty, and after that it becomes

Judie Haynes’ article, “Stages of Second Language Acquisition”, clearly states five stages that a new learner of English may go through. In Haynes’ theory, there are five stages in total, and they are pre-production, early production, speech emergence, intermediate fluency, and advanced fluency. According to Haynes, new learners of English acquire language by going through the same stages. However, how much time each student spends at a particular stage may be different. Despite the different time length, the stages of people acquiring new language are worth discussing.

In 1781 the Articles of Confederation became the government of United States of America, a fragile new nation. This new government was just enough to hold the Country together in that period of time. Although, the effectiveness of these Articles can be debated. These Articles were in effective in the that it got the United States through a very Critical Period of time, but were also ineffective enough they had to eventually be replaced for the good of Country.

The second portion of the article is all about the stages of second language acquisition of which there are 5. In order from low level of linguistic proficiency to high level of language proficiency the five levels – as stated by the article- are: Silent/Receptive/Pre-productive, Early Production, Speech Emergence, Intermediate Fluency, and Advanced Fluency. The article goes on to

We learned in our text that the development of language is a complicated process that involves phonemes, morphemes, syntactic development among several other factors (Siegler, DeLoache, Eisenberg & Saffran, 2014, p. 218). Proper and effective development of these language skills has been shown to have a critical learning period that enables successful fluency of a language; this period usually occurs between the ages of 5 and puberty (Siegler et al., 2014, p. 220). I believe that this critical period is the backbone of the argument against bilingual education. Proponents of this argument believe that the sooner a child is immersed in the new language, the better off they will be with regards to mechanics and use of that language.

In his article, it involved the study of comparing two groups of deaf adults. The first group of adults were born with normal hearing and they had learned American Sign Language relatively late. The other group is people who were congenitally deaf. The result is that the first group largely outperformed the second group in ASL, and Pallier wrote, “This result show that experience pays a role because if only maturational factor were at play then the proficiency in ASL should only depend on age of acquisition of ASL and both groups should perform similarly. On the contrary, learning and using a language in the first years of life maintains the capacity to acquire a new language” (Pallier) From my perspective of view, critical period is effecting the first-language learning process. However, other factors also affect the learning

In contrast, “some adults have been known to acquire an authentic accent in a second language after the age of puberty, but such individuals are few and far between” (Brown, p.61, 2007). A study conducted by an anthropologist named Sorenson in the 1960’s conflicts with the Critical Period Hypothesis by proving that adults can in fact attain a perfect fluent second language acquisition just like a native speaker. This became evident when Sorenson studied the Tukano culture in South America in which people have to marry outside their ethnic group. Therefore, they marry someone who speaks another language. Once they marry into their spouse’s ethnic community they immediately start learning that specific language. Sorenson reported, “during adolescence,

According to the study of Alba, Logan, Lutz and Stults (2002), this three-generation model of language shift was documented

Many second language acquisition theories have been developed over the years. These theories examine the avenues in which second language is acquired and the avenues in which they are

There are several theories regarding language development. Work by Chomsky, Piaget and Kuhl are critical. Studies by Chomsky, as examined by Albery, Chandler, Field, Jones, Messer, Moore and Sterling (2009); Deloache, Eisenberg & Siegler (2003) argued for the innateness of language acquisition due to its complexity. Development is assisted by a language acquisition device (LAD) and universal grammar both of which holding the propensity for commonalities throughout all languages. LAD is the key to the Syntax rule. The knowledge to master the rules is held unconsciously. Chomsky concludes exposure through auditory channels as being the only requirement for learning. Arguably Kuhl (2010) writes infantile exposure to language through auditory channels only, does not contribute effectively to learning indicating the importance of human interaction. Piaget, as discussed by Ault (1977) postulated language as not being part of the earliest stages of development. Signifying within sensorimotor stage, between birth and two years, the child’s development is too reflexive. Gleitman, Fridlund and Reisberg (2004) discuss the critical period hypothesis and suggest the young brain being more suited to acquisition than the adult brain. Lenneberg (1967) (as cited in Gleitman et al 2004) advocates, brain maturation closes language acquisition capacity window. Kuhl (2010) identified, within the critical period babies develop

When discussing about “In other words”, Bialystok and Hakuta state that there is some thought that children who may appear to be learning a second languge very quickly at a vey young age (before the age of 5). They further state that accompanied by the loss of their first language, have really replaced the first language with the second language.

The idea of critical period for language acquisition was first brought into view by Eric Lenneberg in 1967. The critical period hypothesis states that idea that the learning of a language must be done within a certain time frame after a child's birth, or else it will be impossible for the acquisition of language to happen. Though Lenneberg may have not been the one to have thought up the idea, he was the person who had popularized it making psychologist question whether or not such a thing as a critical period exists(Snow). This hypothesis first came up from studying people who acquired some sort of damage to the left hemisphere of the brain, leading a patient to obtain aphasia. People who were unfortunate enough to obtain this type of language impairment were more likely to recover to having normal language abilities, if they acquired

Abstract: In second language acquisition, age factors has always been the study focus and one of the most controversial issues of linguistics. Based on the Brain Plasticity Theory and the Critical Period Hypothesis, the purpose is to prove such a hypothesis that the younger the leaner who begins to learn an second language,the greater the probability that he or she will achieve a native-like command of it.