-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/1909/archive/files/00b309fd69ef3382e00041bfac7a8076.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=fyBgSi9QO-MoIxiP2IINe-I%7EPVLfMDrGWEVY7Q-gk3ZrILg7njCNYyhiq9iqEtO8OvesDs6lMHNfED6Zt1d5kyh1%7EuB87uPocCa-NYYyMh0v1sSpAdY4xSgxIq45ySvYWjYmHhnG05TF8FSGVWFsp%7ExlbBWeJncgLmszrbga5pv%7Eqi64w8hfSA2Cmwgppp96KpRFIVLihYjFBq7vtporRYhQcAXVgEr7FHcf0-yndnzXRGOsVyFnTc7xQyh-6hflJxrKp8EEHYSaxaZqF08oeIPJTchz296gFefpmUfxMUnM%7E8R9Utoha6kUO%7EiTIyIBS%7E2Z%7EjVUws3A-yECMgL4bA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
302a25bd71f0d307b6bfb87590624aa1
PDF Text
Text
Effects of Age on Second
Language Acquisition and
Evidence of a Critical Period
Edward Pollock
Bachelor of Science in Biopsychology
Class of 2021
�Second Language Acquisition
• Current paradigm
• Structured, classroom lessons
• Non-immersion
• Wide range of starting ages
• But perhaps this should change
�Critical Period Hypothesis
• Period of heightened language learning abilities
• Exact underlying mechanisms are debated
• Quite evident for first language
• Role in second language acquisition debated
• Based on basic observation in language acquisition: younger is better
�Critical Period Hypothesis: Key History
• “Ideal period” first hypothesized
• Penfield & Roberts, 1959
• “Critical period” term coined and hypothesis popularized
• Lenneberg, 1967
• Adults observed to pick up second language quicker early on, potentially
suggesting a period limited to first language
• Asher & Price, 1967; Collier, 1987; Snow & Hoefnagel-Höhle, 1978
• Research finds classification error rate ranging from 5% to 40% in existing
research, potentially necessitating re-analysis of previous findings
• Vanhove, 2020
�Critical Period Explanations Over Time
• Brain not yet stiff and rigid; neural “switch” mechanism
• Penfield & Roberts, 1959
• Integration of use and play allows children to learn better due to stimulating
both hemispheres (learning settings)
• Asher & Price, 1967; Asher & Garcia, 1969; Munoz, 2008
• Biological predisposition; imprinting theory, brain plasticity
• Asher & Garcia, 1969; Birdsong, 2005a
• “Talented language learners”
• Ioup, et al., 1994
�Issues Plaguing Research
• Methodology
• Pronunciation as measure of attainment
• Inherently biased
• Poor metric to measure comprehension
• Metrics ‘replacing’ pronunciation often very similar or tied to pronunciation
• Pronunciation and similar metrics used even in 21st century
�Issues Plaguing Research cont.
• Monolingual Yardstick
• Nativelikeness as the goal of second language acquisition
• Unfair to hold bilinguals to same standards as native monolinguals
• Not typically the goal of the learner
• Bilingual ability should be measured against an ‘expert’ or ‘fluent’ bilingual
• Subjectivity
• Recording of subjective metrics will be inherently biased against non-native speakers
• Might justify re-analysis of much of the existing research to account for miss-rate
�Psycholinguistic Perspective
• Adults and older children begin learning faster in formal instruction
• Limited to first few months, after which younger children eclipse
• Critical period applicable to certain domains of language acquisition
• Spontaneous performance, ability to recognize regional accents, knowledge of abstract
syntactic structures
• Mainly morphosyntax, grammar to a lesser extent
• Language learning setting and manner play key role in severity of critical
period effects
• Non-immersion (formal, instructed, classroom) vs immersion (informal, more passive,
typically act/see what they say)
�Psycholinguistic Perspective cont.
• Critical period timeframe dependent on language-learning setting
• Immersion: Little to no decline until near teen years, age 10-12 typically
• Non-immersion: Little to no decline until age nine
• Less dramatic but longer lasting decline in abilities than previously
hypothesized
• Sharper decline beginning around age 17
• End of ability for ultimate acquisition or native-like syntax
�Neurological Perspective
• Critical period ending around 17 likely due to closure of a larger period of
increased performance in behavioral domains
• Development of supporting neural ‘hardware’
• Brain develops networks to support language, which become more solid [and
as a result, lose elasticity] as we age
• Networks must be stimulated early
• Absence of a first language makes acquisition of first and subsequent language more
difficult later on in life
�Brain Differences
• PET, EEG, fMRI, and qMRI scans uncover neurological differences in learners
across age ranges
• Early multilinguals process language homogenously across the brain
• Broca’s and Wernicke’s areas activated in different patterns
• Microstuctural variations in left inferior frontal region and left fusiform gyrus
• Early passive L2 exposure results in similar levels of variance as actively being
raised bilingual
�Neuropsychological Models
• Interactive Specialization Model
• Specialized regions become more specialized and interconnected over time, thereby
losing plasticity
• Neuroemergentism Model
• Developmental change of specialized regions and networks is not isolated to one region
or skill
• Interference Model
• Second language acquisition ability restrained or stunted by continued use and
development of first language
�Observations
• Experience tutoring English to non-native speakers
• Observed expected language acquisition observations
• Observed rapid language acquisition when multilingualism established from a
young age
• More integrated language processing network
• Greater difficulty reported with English since pandemic began
• Less time outside home à less usage
• Comprehension improved drastically
• Pronunciation ≠ Comprehension
�Language Learning of the Future
• Research suggests we need change in the second language education
paradigm
• Standardize a young starting age
• Begin instruction within first few school years
• Language foundation before age ten
• Promote immersion learning
• Separate classroom where only target language is spoken/displayed
• Assessments based on use and comprehension, not repetition
�References
Asher, J. J., & García, R. (1969). The optimal age to learn a foreign language. The Modern
Language Journal, 53(5), 334–341. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.15404781.1969.tb04603.x
Asher, J. J., & Price, B. S. (1967). The learning strategy of the total physical response: Some
age differences. Child Development, 38, 1219–1227.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1127119
Birdsong, D. (2005a). Interpreting age effects in second language acquisition. In J. F. Kroll &
A. M. B. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches. (pp.
109–127). Oxford University Press.
Birdsong, D. (2005b). Nativelikeness and non-nativelikeness in L2A research. International
Review of Applied Linguistics 43 (4): 319–328.
https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2005.43.4.319
Birdsong, D., & Molis, M. (2001). On the evidence for maturational constraints in secondlanguage acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 235-239.
https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2000.2750
Bloch, C., Kaiser, A., Kuenzli, E., Zappatore, D., Haller, S., Franceschini, R., Luedi, G., Radue,
E.-W., & Nitsch, C. (2009). The age of second language acquisition determines the
variability in activation elicited by narration in three languages in Broca’s and
Wernicke’s area. Neuropsychologia, 47(3), 625–633.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.11.009
Collier, V. P. (1987). Age and rate of acquisition of second language for academic purposes.
TESOL Quarterly, 21, 617–641. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586986
Dimroth, C. (2008). Perspectives on second language acquisition at different ages. In J. Philp,
R. Oliver, & A. Mackey (Eds.), Second language acquisition and the younger learner:
Child’s play? (Vol. 23, pp. 53–79). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.23.05dim
�References cont.
Flege, J. E., Yeni-Komshian, G. H., & Liu, S. (1999). Age constraints on second-language
acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 41(1), 78–104.
https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1999.2638
Gürsoy, E. (2011). The critical period hypothesis revisited: The implications for current
foreign language teaching to young learners. Journal of Language Teaching &
Research, 2, 757-762. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.2.4.757-762
Hartshorne, J. K., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Pinker, S. (2018). A critical period for second language
acquisition: Evidence from 2/3 million English speakers. Cognition, 177, 263–277.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.04.007
Hernandez, A. E., Bodet, J. P., Gehm, K., & Shen, S. (2021). What does a critical period for
second language acquisition mean?: Reflections on Hartshorne et al. (2018).
Cognition, 206, 104478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104478
Ioup, G., Boustagui, E., El Tigi, M., & Moselle, M. (1994). Reexamining the critical period
hypothesis: A case study of successful adult SLA in a naturalistic environment.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 73–98.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100012596
Lenneberg, E. B. (1967). Biological foundations of language. International Journal of
American Linguistics, 35, 75-81. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548331.1967.11707799
Luo, D., Kwok, V. P. Y., Liu, Q., Li, W., Yang, Y., Zhou, K., Xu, M., Gao, J.-H., & Tan, L. H.
(2019). Microstructural plasticity in the bilingual brain. Brain and Language, 196.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2019.104654
Mayberry, R. I., & Lock, E. (2003). Age constraints on first versus second language
acquisition: Evidence for linguistic plasticity and epigenesis. Brain and Language,
87(3), 369–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00137-8
�References cont.
Munoz, C. (2008). Age-related differences in foreign language learning. Revisiting the
Empirical Evidence. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching
(IRAL), 46(3), 197–220. https://doi.org/10.1515/IRAL.2008.009
Newport, E. L. (2018). Is there a critical period for L1 but not L2? Bilingualism: Language and
Cognition, 21(5), 928–929. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728918000305
Nicoladis, E., Montanari, S., Birdsong, D., & Vanhove, J. (2016). Age of second-language
acquisition: critical periods and social concerns. In Bilingualism across the lifespan:
factors moderating language proficiency (pp. 163–181). American Psychological
Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14939-010
Norrman, G., & Bylund, E. (2015). The irreversibility of sensitive period effects in language
development: evidence from second language acquisition in international adoptees.
Developmental Science, 19(3), 513–520. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12332
Penfield, W., & Roberts, L. (1959). Speech and Brain Mechanisms.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1960.tb05163.x
Snow, C. E., & Hoefnagel-Höhle, M. (1978). The critical period for language acquisition:
Evidence from second language learning. Child Development, 49, 1114–1128.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1128751
Steinhauser, K. (2014). Event-related potentials (ERPs) in second language research: A brief
introduction to the technique, a selected review, and an invitation to reconsider
critical periods in L2. Applied Linguistics, 35(4), 393–417.
https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu028
Vanhove, J. (2020). When labeling L2 users as nativelike or not, consider classification
errors. Second Language Research, 36(4), 709–724.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658319827055
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Senior Presentations Archive
Description
An account of the resource
This archive contains materials from Wagner’s annual ‘Senior Presentations.’ This event honors outstanding students from each discipline who completed their Senior Learning Community project with excellence. The work is representative of Wagner’s highest standards, and is exemplary of the diversity of subject matter, public-facing scholarship, and civic-minded professionalism our students have attained through their four years here. These students were specially invited to present their work in a formal setting, traditionally the day of Baccalaureate. Students are encouraged to present their work in a format appropriate for their discipline, and so, the presentations vary in their format. Some might be in the form of a short video, or paper abstracts, while others might be posters or music clips. We expect this archive to serve as a resource for generations to come. Congratulations to our Seniors!
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2017 -
Rights Holder
A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource.
Wagner College, Staten Island, NY
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
If the image is of an object, state the type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Presentation
Date Digital
2021
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2021_Biopsychology_Pollock
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Edward Pollock
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
5/1/2021
Title
A name given to the resource
Effects of Age on Second Language Acquisition and Evidence of a Critical Period
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Dr. Laurence Nolan
Psychology and Biological Sciences
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
17 slides
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
U.S. and international copyright laws may protect this work. It is provided by Wagner College for scholarly or research purposes only. Commercial use or distribution is not permitted without prior permission of the copyright holder.
Rights Holder
A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource.
Wagner College, Staten Island, NY
Biology
Biopsychology
Psychology