Language acquisition of Genie outside of the critical period The tragic case of feral child Genie provides a unique perspective on the roles of socialization and linguistic exposure as they relate to post-puberty language acquisition. After eleven years of isolation and abuse, Genie was discovered possessing no known language, having already passed what has theorized to be the critical period. Utilizing a variety of methods and testing, professionals attempted to aid Genie in first language acquisition over the next five years with little success. Using examples of stalled grammatical development, language acquisition compared to both normal children and late learners of American Sign Language (ASL); and the roles of linguistic exposure, socialization and brain lateralization, this paper will demonstrate support of the theory of critical period for first language acquisition as it relates to Genie’s case. Eric Lenneberg was first to propose a critical period for acquisition of a first or native language beginning around age two, and ending with the onset of puberty. Lenneberg theorized that language acquisition was not possible before age two because of a lack of maturation; and later language acquisition was inhibited by a loss of cerebral plasticity. Lenneberg believed brain lateralization occurred around the time of puberty when the cerebral dominance of the language function is complete. Arguing that the left hemisphere houses specific areas readied for language acquisition, with studies of children who have exposure to language withheld through this critical period show “atypical patterns of brain lateralization”. Lateralization is key during this critical period as children naturally and easily acquire the skills for ... ... middle of paper ... ...he “critical Period”." Brain and Language 1, no. 1 (1974): 81-107. Grimshaw, Gina M, Adelstein,Ana Bryden, M.Philip and MacKinno, G.E. "First-Language Acquisition In Adolescence: Evidence For A Critical Period For Verbal Language Development." Brain and Language 63, no. 2 (1998): 237-255. Hurford, James R.. "The evolution of the critical period for language acquisition." Cognition 40, no. 3 (1991): 159-201. Krashen, Stephen D.. "Lateralization, Language Learning, And The Critical Period: Some New Evidence." Language Learning 23, no. 1 (1973): 63-74. Lenneberg, E.H. Biological foundations of language, New York, Wiley, 1967 Rowland, Caroline. "8 - Explaining Individual Variation." In Understanding child language acquisition. New York: Routledge, 2013. 204-220. Secret of a wild child. Film. Directed by NOVA PBS. Boston, MA.: WGBH Educational Foundation, 1994.
When most people think of the process of language development in “normal” children, the concepts that come to mind are of babies imitating, picking up sounds and words from the speakers around them. Trying to imagine that a child who cannot hear one single sound a person makes can learn to speak a language is absolutely fascinating. These children range from amazin...
After Lenneberg's (1967) advanced analyses and interpretation of critical period in regards to first language acquisition, many researchers began to relate and study age issue in second language acquisition. In this area of study, Johnson and Newport (1989) is among the most prominent and leading studies which tries to seek evidence to test the Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH) in second language (L2) acquisition. This study aims to find identifying answers to the question of age-related effects on the proficiency for languages learned prior the puberty.
Kuhl, P. (2007). Is speech learning 'gated' by the social brain?. Developmental Science, 10(1), 110-120.
Genie’s case demonstrates that although it is possible with extensive training to acquire some language after the critical period, a mastery of language after this period is not possible. Aspects such as vocabulary and certain conversational skills (textbook) are possible but the underlying grammar Genie’s lack of lateralization highlights the relationship between language and lateralization although it is unclear language input is a prerequisite for language acquisition.
According to some researches, there are specific moments (especially when you are young) when you pick up languages faster and easier. (Argyres, 1995) “Lenneberg’s classic study of the stages of language acquisition as potentially largely due to stages in brain development, and/or Long’s recent, in-depth discussion and survey of research on critical vs. sensitive periods in language acquisition with regard to both first and second language acquisition.” (Argyres, 1995, Page 106) After Mandarin, I learned a few other languages but I disregarded them and I didn’t consider them to be languages I am fluent in because I can only understand some of it but cannot speak the languages well. In the Lenneberg’s classic study about the critical period of learning a language, the delayed development of a prefrontal cortex and cognitive control allow children to pick up languages easier than adults. (Lenneberg, 1967) Some researchers say that there are two hypotheses when you are learning languages as you grow older: The Exercise Hypothesis and the Maturational State Hypothesis. (Johnson & Newport, 1989) The Exercise Hypothesis states that human beings are more superior in learning languages when they are young and if they exercise their brain capacity by learning languages, learning languages will be easier when they are older.
Language is a multifaceted instrument used to communicate an unbelievable number of different things. Primary categories are information, direction, emotion, and ceremony. While information and direction define cognitive meaning, emotion language expresses emotional meaning. Ceremonial language is mostly engaged with emotions but at some level information and direction collection may be used to define a deeper meaning and purpose. There is perhaps nothing more amazing than the surfacing of language in children. Children go through a number of different stages as language develops. According to Craig and Dunn, (2010), “Even before birth, it appears that infants are prepared to respond to and learn language” (p. 112). Children develop these skills quickly with nature and nurture influences. Researchers have proposed several different theories to explain how and why language development occurs. This paper is an overview of the process of early childhood language development with research evidence supporting the information stated.
Language acquisition is perhaps one of the most debated issues of human development. Various theories and approaches have emerged over the years to study and analyse this developmental process. One factor contributing to the differing theories is the debate between nature v’s nurture. A question commonly asked is: Do humans a...
Wilder Penfield and Lamar Roberts first introduced the idea that there is a “critical period” for learning language in 1959. This critical period is a biologically determined period referring to a period of time when learning/acquiring a language is relatively easy and typically meets with a high degree of success. German linguist Eric Lenneberg further highlights Roberts and Penfield’s findings and postulated the Critical Period Hypothesis in 1967. According to the Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH), certain biological events related to language development can only happen in the critical period. During this time, the brain possesses a degree of flexibility (ability and ease of learning a language) and becomes lateralized (assignment of language functions becomes concrete – either in the left or right hemisphere) (Marinova-Todd, S; Marshall, D & Snow, C. 2000 9-10). This critical period lasts from childhood through the onset of puberty (usually at around 12 years of age). Once this period is over, it is more difficult to learn a language because language functions in the brain have become concrete. This hypothesis can be seen with the case of Genie, a woman who was isolated from human interaction and language up to the age of 13. By the time she was rescued, she was well after the critical period for language acquisition, and as such, she did not have a full command of the English language. Had she been rescued before the age of 13, she may have had more linguistic capability. However, this accounts for firs...
The critical period hypothesis for language acquisition was popularized by neurologist Eric Lenneberg. The hypothesis suggests that if an individual is not exposed to language during a specific period in their childhood then they will have great difficulties acquiring language later in life (Redmond, 1993). I believe the two “wild children” cases of Genie and Victor provides evidence to support the critical period hypothesis. Genie’s case supports the hypothesis because although she developed a vocabulary and despite all of her intense therapy sessions, she still was not able to create meaningful and grammatically correct sentences (Garmon, 1994). Genie’s inability to create real sentences may indicate that she endured the extreme deprivation during her critical period and it prevented her from acquiring language. Victor’s case also supports the critical period hypothesis. The professionals in the documentary The Secret of The Wild Child stated: “While Victor knew how to read simple words, he never learned how to talk” (Garmon, 1994). This quote implicates that similar to Genie, Victor developed a vocabulary,
In this part, the writer will point out the importance of the biological and neural foundation of language learning by discussing the following :First, the brain anatomy. Second, l...
Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W.Ritchie and T.Bhatia (eds.) Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (San Diego, CA: Academic Press), 413-68.
If there is a critical period for language acquisition and a child receives no linguistic input during that critical period, the child would not be able to develop language to fully capacity. This will occur because the child did not receive the linguistic input during the necessary period to learn a language, critical period. However, because all humans have the innate knowledge to learn a language, the child might still
There are three main theories of child language acquisition; Cognitive Theory, Imitation and Positive Reinforcement, and Innateness of Certain Linguistic Features (Linguistics 201). All three theories offer a substantial amount of proof and experiments, but none of them have been proven entirely correct. The search for how children acquire their native language in such a short period of time has been studied for many centuries. In a changing world, it is difficult to pinpoint any definite specifics of language because of the diversity and modification throughout thousands of millions of years.
Strozer, J.R. (1994). Language acquisition after puberty.Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Web. 10 Mar. 2014.
Still today, it is the commonly held belief that children acquire their mother tongue through imitation of the parents, caregivers or the people in their environment. Linguists too had the same conviction until 1957, when a then relatively unknown man, A. Noam Chomsky, propounded his theory that the capacity to acquire language is in fact innate. This revolutionized the study of language acquisition, and after a brief period of controversy upon the publication of his book, Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, in 1964, his theories are now generally accepted as largely true. As a consequence, he was responsible for the emergence of a new field during the 1960s, Developmental Psycholinguistics, which deals with children’s first language acquisition. He was not the first to question our hitherto mute acceptance of a debatable concept – long before, Plato wondered how children could possibly acquire so complex a skill as language with so little experience of life. Experiments have clearly identified an ability to discern syntactical nuances in very young infants, although they are still at the pre-linguistic stage. Children of three, however, are able to manipulate very complicated syntactical sentences, although they are unable to tie their own shoelaces, for example. Indeed, language is not a skill such as many others, like learning to drive or perform mathematical operations – it cannot be taught as such in these early stages. Rather, it is the acquisition of language which fascinates linguists today, and how it is possible. Noam Chomsky turned the world’s eyes to this enigmatic question at a time when it was assumed to have a deceptively simple explanation.