THE IMPACT OF CRITICAL PERIOD HYPOTHESIS ON LEARNERS` SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
Abstract
The critical period hypothesis is a theory in the field of applied linguistics that suggests there is an optimal window of time during which individuals are best able to acquire a second language. This hypothesis posits that if language learning does not occur within this critical period, it becomes significantly more challenging for individuals to attain native-like proficiency in a second language.
This paper offers a brief but broad overview of the origins of the critical period hypothesis, the evidence supporting and contradicting this theory, and its implications for language acquisition and education. Additionally, it discusses the potential impact of neuroplasticity and age-related cognitive development on language learning abilities, as well as practical applications of the critical period hypothesis in educational settings.
Keywords
How to Cite
References
Abrahamsson, N.,& K. Hyltenstam. (2009). Age of onset and nativelikeness in a second language: Listener perception versus linguistic scrutiny. Language Learning, 59(2), 249-306.
Asher, J. J., & Garcia, R. (1969). The optimal age to learn a foreign language. Modern Language Journal, 53(5), 334–341.
DeKeyser, R., Alfi-Shabtay, I., & Ravid, D. (2010). Cross-linguistic evidence for the nature of age effects in second language acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31(3), 413-438.
Hakuta, K., Bialystok E. & Wiley, E. (2003).Critical Evidence: A test of the critical-period hypothesis.
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.
Johnson, J. S., & Newport, E.L. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of the maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language.Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60–99.
Mayberry, R., & Lock, E.(2003) Age constraints on first versus second language acquisition: Evidence for linguistic plasticity and epigenesis. Brain & Language 87 ,369–384
Lenneberg Eric, H. (1967). Biological Foundations of Language. New York: Wiley.
Long, M. (1990). Maturational constraints on language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 251-285.
Oyama, S. (1978). The sensitive period and comprehension of speech. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 16, 1-17.
Patkowski, M. (1980). The sensitive period for the acquisition of syntax in a second language. Language Learning, 30, 449-472.
Patkowski, M. (1994). The critical age hypothesis and interlanguage phonology. In M. Yavas
(Ed.), First and second language phonology (pp. 205-221). San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group.
Penfield, W., & Roberts, L. (1959). Speech and brain mechanisms. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Pickering SJ , Gathercole SE (2001) Working Memory Test Battery for Children(WMTB-C) Psychological Corporation; San Antonio
Schouten, A. (2009). The Critical Period Hypothesis: Support, Challenge, and Reconceptualization. TESOL and Applied Linguistics, 9(1), 1-16.
Scovel, T. (1988). A time to speak: A psycholinguistic inquiry into the critical period for human speech. Rowley, MA: Newbury House
Scovel, T. (2000). A Critical Review of the Critical Period Research. A Critical Review of the Critical Period Research, 1(20), 213-223.
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Gulchehkra Vasliddin qizi Mardonova
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
