Gosling and Learning

Many studies have found the phenomenon that the earlier one starts learning a second language the better is the learning outcome. (Birdsong & Molis, 2001; Flege et al., 1999; Johnson & Newport, 1989/1991; Hakuta, Bialystok & Wiley, 2003; Oyama, 1976).

Some scholars believed that this might be due to the existence of a critical period for second language learning (Johnson & Newport, 1989/1991).

Because of this critical period phenomenon, if an individual learns a second language after the critical period, then it is almost impossible for him or her to master the second language to the level of a native speaker.

So people who hold the belief that “the sooner the start of learning a second language, the more effective would be the result” often cited “ Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH)” engaged in academic research to prove the standpoint.

A lot of parents are influenced by expert opinion. For this reason, most of the preschools implement bilingual education. The judgment on whether such a view is correct or not should be based on the investigation about the validity and reliability of the research findings which are in favor of CPH.

The concept of the critical period hypothesis first appeared in the field of ethology. Lorenz observed that the grey-lag geese within a few hours after birth would follow the thing that appeared in front of them, taking it as a mother. Ethologists call such a phenomenon as imprinting (Lorenz, 1961).

The period whereby the imprinting phenomenon is produced is known as the critical period. Once the critical period is over, even when another moving object appears in front, the goslings will not have the same reaction.

Lenneberg had advocated that the critical period phenomenon exists in the learning of the mother tongue. He used his clinical patients with brain injury as the subjects of the experiment.

He found that whether patients with brain injuries leading to language impairment could recover the language ability or not depended primarily on the timing of the damage.

If the damage occurred during the early stage of life, the patient would be able to recover the language ability. However, after puberty, the damage would result in permanent language impairment (Lenneberg, 1967).

From his clinical experience in medicine, Lenneberg also systematically explained the “critical period for language learning” via the neurophysiological point of view. He believed that the brain undergoes lateralization starting from the age of two.

Before the completion of the lateralization, people are using the whole brain to learn a language. Around puberty, lateralization of the brain will be completed. Since then, language learning is mainly taken care of by the left side of the brain.

The effectiveness of language learning after the lateralization of the human brain is not as good as during the whole-brain learning period. Therefore, language learning is best before completion of brain lateralization.

References

Birdsong, D. & Molis, M. (2001). On the evidence for maturational constraints in second-language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 235–249.

Flege, J.E., Yeni-Komshian, G.H., & Liu, S. (1999). Age constraints on second-language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 78–104.

Hakuta, K., Bialystok, E. & Wiley, E. (2003). Critical evidence: a test of the critical period hypothesis for second language acquisition. Psychological Sciences, 14, 31–38.

Johnson, J.S. & Newport, E.L. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning: the influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as second language. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60–99.

Johnson, J.S. & Newport, E.L. (1991). Critical period effects on universal properties of language: the status of subjacency in the acquisition of a second language. Cognition, 39, 215–258.

Lenneberg, E.H. (1967). The Biological foundations of language. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Oyama, S. (1976). A sensitive period for the acquisition of a nonnative phonological system. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 5, 261–283.

Originally published at http://poeticmindfulness.wordpress.com on September 12, 2020.