What is the research evidence for the part the “critical period” plays in second language learning? What might be the implications for teaching?

Critical Period in Second Language Learning

 

What is the research evidence for the part the “critical period” plays in second language learning? What might be the implications for teaching?

 

Introduction

One of the arguments about adolescent or adult second language learning is that they cannot learn another language the same way as they have acquired their first in spite of the claims that the two processes are similar in many aspects. Native speakers acquire their mother tongue at an early age by picking it up in the rich cultural and linguistic environment they were born or grew up in. Adolescent or adult learners cannot feasibly do so in learning a second language because they have already lost their “magic” for picking up a language.

 

Critical Period in Second Language Learning

Critical period is defined by  (1989) as “selected timed in the life cycle in which may structures and functions become especially susceptible to specific experiences that may alter some future instantiation of that structure or function.”

In addition,  (1992) also defined “critical period as environmental events in which must happen at certain times in the development of an organism for normal development to occur.”

( 1991) defined it as “any phenomenon in which there is a maturational change in the ability to learn, with a peak in learning in some maturationally defined period and a decline in the ability to learn, given the same experiential exposure, outside of this period.”

Originally, critical period is used in species-specific behavior. It is the period when imprinting is observed in certain species such as young birds and rats.  (1987) lists four characteristics of the imprinting as below.

·         It tends to appear under well-defined developmental conditions.

·         It cannot be forgotten or revised once it has been established

·         It involves the recognition of species’ characteristics rather than individual characteristics.

·         It may be learned long before it is manifested.

 (1987) assumes that only the first characteristic above is applicable to the human language acquisition.

A pioneering work by (1967) explores the critical period hypothesis and concluded that “Between the ages of two and three years language emerges by an interaction of maturation and self-programmed learning. Between the ages of three and the early teens the possibility for primary language acquisition constitutes to be good; the individual appears to be most sensitive to stimuli at this time and to preserve some innate flexibility for the organization of brain functions to carry out the complex integration of sub-processes necessary for the smooth elaboration of speech and language. After puberty, the ability for self-organization and adjustment to the physiological demands of verbal behavior quickly declines. The brain behaves as if it had become set in its ways and primary, basic skills not acquired by that time usually remain deficient for life.” (1967)

In second learning, two very important factors which comprise the critical period hypothesis are age factor and length of learning process (1959). According to their critical period hypothesis, after puberty when the plasticity of the brain is lost, the functions of the various parts of the brain cannot be rearranged, and “complete or nativelike mastery of languages, first or second, is difficult and unlikely” (1988). Therefore, language learning is difficult for adult learners after puberty.  (1967), who further developed the critical period hypothesis, believed that the lateralization of language functions in the left hemisphere is considered to be completed by puberty. If we assume that second language learners were adults, we would not expect them to go through the similar process as children growing up in a target language situation. Grown-ups tend to have their own psychological egos and they may have been influenced by many other affective factors that may prevent them from mingling, socializing, or learning the way native-speaking children or even non-native speaking children do. Their language learning may be hindered by many affective factors or may be limited to certain situations.

The second factor is the length of the learning process. If adults learning a second language follow the similar process of children acquiring their first language in general, it may not expect any adult language learners to take all the time they need or learn in the fashion as children do to attain their proficiency. It may be theoretically sound, but realistically impossible. Time is usually not on adult language learners’ side since they themselves need to survive or support their families in the new target language environment and culture by working on jobs. They are not in a position to choose the kind of language environment that is optimal in learning a second language. Because of the biological, socio-cultural, and socio-psychological constraints, adult language learners have other problems young learners do not have. These problems include, but not limited to such affective factors as attitude, motivation, social distance or perceived social distance from the target language group.

As research (1977;  1977) has indicated, adult language learners may develop an attitude problem that will impact their learning or proficiency in a second language in one way or another. This attitude has something to do with the target language, its culture, and people. If second language learners have resentment or prejudice against a certain ethnic group, they may have a difficult time dealing with the language and culture of that particular group. Target language, culture, and its people are often closely linked together. Any bias against an ethnic group may end up affecting the learners’ attitude toward whatever symbolizes that group, including their language and culture. Attitude, in turn, is closely linked to motivation. Non-native speakers learning a second language may have different motivations.  (1972) studied several kinds of motivations of second language learners. Some may have an instrumental motivation, which means that their desire to learn a language is totally utilitarian. It is driven by the pragmatic concerns of being able to utilize a language to enter a college, get a job, or further a career. Some others may have an integrative motivation, which means that some second language learners are willing to integrate themselves within the culture of that language group and become part of that society. Generally speaking, the attitude and motivation of second language learners usually play an important role in their second language learning process. If adult learners have a negative attitude toward a language, an ethnic group, or even the target language environment, they may not be motivated to learn the said language willingly.

Another chain reaction coming out of the attitude factor is the social distance or perceived social distance proposed by  (1979). When second language learners have an attitude problem and lacks motivation, they may also have developed some perceived social distance, holding a negative view or assuming certain kind of opinion based on their understanding of the target language, culture, and its people. Acton explained that it was not particularly relevant what the actual social distance was between cultures, since what the learner perceives formed the person’s reality. People perceive the cultural environment through the filters of their own worldview and then act upon that perception. When learners encounter a new culture, their acculturation will be affected by how they perceive their own culture in relation to the culture of the target language.

Implication to teaching

Adults who spend the time and effort to learn a second or new language may do it for different reasons and purposes. The majority of them may not have the luxury of having an optimal learning environment envisioned by certain language acquisition or learning theories. They need the basic interpersonal communicative skills (1984) to survive in the target society first.

The purpose of acquiring or learning a language is for communication. To achieve such a purpose, a native speaker or a non-native speaker alike will have to possess certain degree of competence.

In second language learning and teaching, the communicative competence theory proposed by  (1980) and  (1981) is the most commonly espoused and relevant. There are four areas of communicative competences that they depicted. These include grammatical competence or linguistic competence, sociolinguistic competence, discourse competence and strategic competence. “Grammatical competence or linguistic competence includes the mastery of the language code such as lexical items, rules of word formation, sentence formation, literal meaning, pronunciation, and spelling. Sociolinguistic competence indicates the mastery of appropriate language use in different social contexts, with emphasis on appropriateness of meanings and forms. Discourse competence refers to the speaker or writers mastery of combining meanings and forms to achieve a unified text in different modes such as a telephone conversation or persuasive essay through the use of cohesion devices relating utterance forms and coherence rules to organize meanings. Finally, strategic competence requires the communicator’s mastery of verbal and non-verbal strategies to compensate for breakdowns in communication for lack of the previously mentioned competence or performance limitations such as use of dictionaries and paraphrasing to enhance communication effectiveness.” (1980; 1981)

The reason second language learners need to resort to learning grammar is that it provides some general and systematic guidance on the structure and syntax. However, some second or foreign language professionals do not consider grammar to be an important element in second or foreign language learning or teaching. They believe that language can be learned holistically through the context without explicit instruction in grammar.  (1992) claimed that “the effect of grammar is peripheral and fragile” and that “direct instruction on specific rules has a measurable impact on tests that focus the performer on form, but the effect is short-lived.”

In the same context, other professional believe that grammar is the only substance in second or foreign language teaching. They would equate language learning and teaching with grammar. Learning a second language is learning the grammar of that language. The traditional grammar-translation method is a typical example.

Age factor is an important element for us to consider in second language learning. Teaching grammar to children is easier since children are capable of acquiring a new language given the rich cultural and linguistic environment and necessary exposure to the target language. For children with less knowledge of the world, rules are acquired through hypothesis testing, not grammar teaching. It is a waste of time to teach children grammar.

However, adult second language learners are more mature compared to children. Adult are more worldly knowledge and are able to use their analytical powers in language learning. Adult language learners may have already lost “the magic” of acquiring a language that children possess; explicit grammar instruction can play a major role in their language learning process. Adult learners are able to comprehend the rules of grammar with the knowledge from either their first language or other experiences derived from their worldly knowledge. They are ready to apply the rules they have learned, and the rules of language will provide them with some perspective on the basic patterns of that language. With analysis of grammar rules and practice, they can induce or deduce meaningful hints out of these rules. In other words, by offering rules of grammar to adult learners, we are offering them a useful and pragmatic tool to compensate for their lack of intuition on the target language.

Grammar instruction does not mean presenting meaninglessly structural information that learners cannot use. On the contrary, it serves as a tool to refine and further “build on what learners already knew and to give them opportunities to deductively construct new meanings” (1999). Grammar plays a very important role in second language learning for adult learners. It provides rules and general guidance that facilitate better understanding of the structures of the target language. The purpose of language learning is to be able to effectively communicate in the target language. Linguistic or grammatical competence is an integral component of the communicative competence. Explicit grammar instruction can enhance the development of the linguistic competence and improve on second language learners’ fluency and accuracy so they can use the second language effectively to advance themselves in every aspect in the target language society.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com