Hello and welcome to the Higher School of Economics Moscow, Russia.
In this video, we'll try to find answers to the question whether the factor
of age affects our ability to learn a second language.
And two crucial questions from the very beginning.
Is there a particular age to set the cutoff point
for a child and adult second language acquisition and why?
And the second question,
can we expect that child SLA is similar to adult SLA or must it rather
be like the first language acquisition
since child second language acquisition starts very early.
In order to provide answers to the previous two questions,
we'll have to look at the different definitions.
The first definition is about child or early second language acquisition.
So, child second language acquisition is
the successive acquisition of a second language during childhood,
where the initial exposure to target language
typically occurs beyond the age of three years,
that is, after the first language has already been established,
but before the onset of puberty.
So, more recently, there have been studies that have
subdivided L2 children into early successive bilinguals and late successive bilinguals.
Early successive bilinguals are those who fall into the age range of 3-7.
Then, the late successive bilinguals are those who begin
their second language acquisition after the age of seven but prior to puberty.
And we can note some differences when it comes to early and late child L2 acquirers.
In terms of error profiles,
that is L1 errors,
degree of L1 influence,
I remember when I was learning Greek as a child,
I had a lot of L1 influence from a Russian.
Ultimate attainment and likelihood of fossilization.
One of the main differences between the child and adult L2
learner is that child learners acquire their L2 in more naturalistic way,
within their family domain, at home,
or within kindergarden with minimal or practically no instruction at all.
And at the same time,
they continue learning their first language in a natural environment at home.
When it comes to adult SLA,
it usually takes place within
more formal instructed settings usually involving school material,
course books, teachers, tests and stress.
There is a common belief that child L2 learners in
contrast to adults are typically more successful in acquiring their L2,
and this is because L2 is assumed to be similar to L1 acquisition.
That is, it happens in a more naturalistic environment,
but is this the case?
In order to answer this question,
let's investigate this so-called critical period hypothesis.
Are there biological foundations for language acquisition that
are linked to particular period of time during brain development?
The critical period hypothesis is the subject of debate among linguists and
language acquisitionist over the extent to which
their ability to acquire language is biologically linked to age,
and puberty has often been seen as the offset time for language acquisition.
So, let's take a look at the definition itself.
Critical period is the period of time with
a distinct offset during which experience can lead to learning by an organism,
assumed to be innately programmed and irreversible.
If language input does not occur before this critical period ends,
there is a likelihood that the acquisition of child becomes more problematic.
And to test this hypothesis,
researchers have looked at cases where language experience
has not occurred until after puberty.
In one of such cases is the dramatic case of Genie.
Genie is a girl who was born in 1957
and she experienced extreme linguistic deprivation from early childhood.
She was confined to a dark room,
strapped to a sleeping bag and exposed to minimal auditory stimulation.
She was discovered 14 years later malnourished and had difficulty standing and walking.
As one would expect,
Genie's language experience was very minimal.
The experts tried to teach her to communicate and Genie's first words,
they were very limited.
So, combining two words like want milk instead of I want milk.
And then, the words were extended to four words like big elephant long trunk.
In general, Genie's language lacks structure dependence,
but what could be the possible explanation for this?
According to Curtiss, Genie's failure with language is that after a critical period,
the left hemisphere of the brain can no longer control
language acquisition due to a kind of functional atrophy of
the usual language areas brought about by
disuse due to inadequate stimulation or suppression.
But is this the case?
Well, we cannot exclude other possibilities as well.
So another possibility is that Genie's failure with language
could be related to her brain damaged before her confinement,
before or after her confinement.
So, this in general and other factors like psychological or physical damage
caused make it very difficult to view this case as
conclusive when we evaluate the critical period hypothesis.
In this way, the question whether a critical period
exists for language acquisition remains open.
And instead of a conclusion,
I would like to ask a question.
The superb ability of young children to learn
a language or two or more languages remains to be explained.
If brain maturation does not simply explain this, then what does?
Write your thoughts. Write what you're thinking.
I'll be happy to read those.
So, in the next video, we'll be looking at
dual language learners and who they are and why they are important to study.
That's all for now. Thanks for watching.
See you later. Bye bye.