READING PREVIEW
CHAPTER 2: AGE
Summary:
L1 and L2 learning outcomes vary greatly in terms of age. One of the major focuses of SLA research has been to gain insight into the relationship between age and L2 acquisition in an effort to answer the question “is there an optimal age to learn a second language?” Empirical studies of the age factor in SLA have yielded a wide range of results, some suggesting that age is a universal, biological factor in L2 acquisition, others concluding that individual and social factors are involved. Further research in this area is necessary because evidence of a connection (or not) between age and L2 acquisition can guide language and educational policies, in particular, bilingual education policies.
Key Concepts:
- The critical period hypothesis suggests that after a certain age, it is impossible to achieve native-like ultimate attainment in the L2. Studies of feral children and deaf individuals who experienced postponed L1 acquisition suggest that a critical or sensitive period indeed exists for L1 acquisition. Likewise, biologically based critical periods are present in other species (eg. kittens, ducks, owls). Acquisition of syntactic and semantic functions of language is fundamentally different; research shows that syntax involves a critical period whereas semantics does not. However, neurocognitive studies of language and the brain are difficult to interpret in terms of a critical period for language learning.
- Research suggests that adolescents and adults acquire an L2 at a faster pace, but that children eventually “catch up” and surpass the older learners. A possible explanation for this could be that learning contexts (naturalistic vs. instructed, foreign language vs. second language) influence the frequency and type of L2 input, in turn affecting universal factors such as age.
- Correlation studies looking at age show that learners who begin acquiring their L2 before puberty are more successful in achieving ultimate attainment. However, exceptionally successful late L2 learners who begin learning their L2 in their 20s or later and indeed achieve a native-like final state in terms of L2 phonology and morphosyntax do exist, and may even be more common than previously thought. This evidence challenges the critical period hypothesis. Other findings reveal that the age factor is not influenced by biology or nature, but rather socio-affective and environmental factors.
Reflecion:
This chapter definitely cleared up some confusion that I had about age and language learning. Until now, I thought that there was a much stronger body of evidence in favor of the critical period hypothesis. I was expecting to read about more clear-cut findings saying that, basically, children acquire language more quickly and with greater ease, therefore, “the earlier, the better.” And now I see that there’s a lot of counter-evidence and many questions that still need answers. More empirical research in this area is necessary.
I found it interesting that in instructed, foreign language contexts late starters (11 years old) actually achieved better learning results than early starters (8 years old). This underscores the importance of context and illustrates that, like many theories and implications coming from SLA, there is no “one size fits all” solution.
I didn’t find any parts of the chapter particularly confusing or difficult to follow, but there are a lot of examples from research studies both for and against a critical period or age factor throughout the reading. I think it would be helpful to start by reading the summary and then go to the beginning of the chapter…hopefully the reading previews will help too!
