Human beings have the capacity to acquire not only a mother tongue, but also second or third languages. Consequently it is not unusual that we find much more bilingual and multilingual individuals than monolingual in our world today. Broad levels of population deal with different languages in addition to their mother tongue and this knowledge is more and more seen as normal in nearly every area of life. The potential for acquiring second languages seems to last throughout one’s lifetime but depends on many variables. According to Muriel Saville-Troike individual learners acquire second languages differently in consequence of influencing factors like age, sex, aptitude, motivation, cognitive style, personality or learning strategies. Age as an effective factor in second language acquisition is thereby one of the most controversy variables and recurring themes. The question of whether, and how, age affects this acquiring process has been a major issue in second language research since its establishment.
This paper should examine the relationship of the age to second language acquisition. Therefore a number of several studies provide different point of views and some of them will be specified in this paper. The structure is based on the book ‘Language Acquisition: The Age Factor’ by David Singleton and Lisa Ryan (2004) which was also used as main source.
In conclusion a critical review on the several positions will be carried out to see whether there is an optimal age to start acquiring a second language or not and whether a critical period hypothesis in second language acquisition exists or not.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The Age Factor in Second Language Acquisition
2.1 The Critical Period Hypothesis
2.2 Evidence for and against the CPH in Second Language Acquisition
2.2.1 The ‘Younger = Better’ Position
2.2.2 The ‘Older = Better’ Position
2.2.3 The ‘Younger = Better in Some Respects’ Position
2.2.4 The ‘Younger = Better in the Long Run’ Position
3. Conclusion
Objectives and Research Themes
This paper examines the influence of age on the process of second language acquisition, specifically investigating the validity of the Critical Period Hypothesis through a critical review of various research perspectives and experimental studies.
- The role of the Critical Period Hypothesis in linguistic research.
- Contrasting views: ‘Younger = Better’ vs. ‘Older = Better’ positions.
- Age-related differences in specific language competencies like pronunciation, morphology, and syntax.
- Long-term versus short-term language acquisition outcomes across different age groups.
Excerpt from the Book
2.1 The Critical Period Hypothesis
Within the scope of linguistic research, the theory that there is a critical or sensitive period for language acquisition plays an important role. The critical period hypothesis, also known as the critical age or sensitive period hypothesis, caused a great deal of discussion in language acquisition research up to the present day. The popularity of the critical period hypothesis is attributed to the biologist Eric Lenneberg. In his book ‘Biological Foundations of Language’ (1967) he stated that maturation constraints the child’s capacity on learning language. First language acquisition relies on brain plasticity and can no longer be accomplished once hemispheric development is complete. If language acquisition does not occur before puberty, some aspects of language can be learnt but full mastery cannot be achieved (cf. Lenneberg 1967: 178 f.).
Lenneberg based this theory on different types of evidence. On the one hand he cited feral and abused children as evidence for this thesis. Those were not able to acquire language normally after they were found. On the other hand deaf children whose development in spoken language stopped after puberty serve as evidence (cf. Lenneberg 1967: 155 ff.).
Lenneberg focuses primary on first language acquisition but already in the early seventies the theory was extended to a critical period for second language acquisition and has been tested by numerous researchers in various aspects of language over the years. The following four chapters will explain some of these studies more in detail and should provide evidence and counter-evidence for the existence of a critical period in second language acquisition.
Chapter Summaries
1. Introduction: Outlines the significance of the age factor in second language acquisition and introduces the theoretical framework based on Singleton and Ryan.
2. The Age Factor in Second Language Acquisition: Defines the core terminology and introduces the four major academic positions regarding age and language learning efficiency.
2.1 The Critical Period Hypothesis: Discusses Lenneberg’s biological foundations of the critical period and its application to second language learning.
2.2 Evidence for and against the CPH in Second Language Acquisition: Introduces the critical evaluation of studies regarding the age factor.
2.2.1 The ‘Younger = Better’ Position: Reviews research by Oyama and Asher & García suggesting younger learners achieve better pronunciation.
2.2.2 The ‘Older = Better’ Position: Examines studies by Asher & Price and Ekstrand that indicate potential advantages for adult learners in specific contexts.
2.2.3 The ‘Younger = Better in Some Respects’ Position: Details Fathman’s studies comparing age-related performance in pronunciation versus grammar.
2.2.4 The ‘Younger = Better in the Long Run’ Position: Analyzes the research of Snow and Hoefnagel-Höhle regarding initial learner performance and long-term catch-up effects.
3. Conclusion: Summarizes that the evidence remains contradictory and suggests that 'sensitive period' may be a more appropriate term than 'critical period'.
Keywords
Second Language Acquisition, Critical Period Hypothesis, Age Factor, Language Learning, Pronunciation, Morphology, Syntax, Lenneberg, Brain Plasticity, Bilingualism, Language Proficiency, Native Accent, Pedagogical Implications, Cognitive Development, Linguistic Research.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this paper?
The paper explores the relationship between a learner's age and their ability to acquire a second language, focusing on whether there is a scientifically supported optimal age for language learning.
What are the central thematic areas discussed?
The work covers the Critical Period Hypothesis, the distinction between children and adult learners, and specific linguistic domains like phonology, morphology, and syntax.
What is the main research question?
The research asks if a "critical period" for second language acquisition exists, or if the concept should be reconsidered as a more flexible "sensitive period".
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The author employs a literature-based review and secondary analysis of prominent experimental studies, such as those by Lenneberg, Oyama, Fathman, and Snow & Hoefnagel-Höhle.
What content is covered in the main body?
The main body systematically analyzes four conflicting positions: that younger is better, older is better, younger is better in specific aspects, and that younger learners are better only in the long run.
Which keywords characterize the work?
Key terms include Second Language Acquisition, Critical Period Hypothesis, Age Factor, Phonology, Morphology, and Syntax.
Does the paper support the "Younger = Better" position unconditionally?
No, the paper concludes that while younger learners may have advantages in pronunciation, the evidence is contradictory, and older learners can outperform them in other linguistic areas.
How is the "Critical Period Hypothesis" viewed by the author?
The author suggests the term "critical period" should be used with caution and potentially replaced by "sensitive period," as the research shows age-related learning capabilities are not strictly marked by puberty.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Felix B. (Autor:in), 2010, The age factor in second language acqisition, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/282584
