An Article Review of Barry McLaughlin’s
“Myths and Misconceptions about Second Language Learning” In his article, “My and Misconceptions about Second Language Learning,” published in 1992, Barry McLaughlin listed five major myths and misconceptions held by the general public, or specifically by some second language teachers, as well as some contradictory viewpoints about second language learning held by different scholars. In his five main arguments, he puts specific emphases on his suggestions for second language teachers about second language teaching and learning to dispel these five myths and misconceptions. Though diverse and comprehensive, McLaughlin’s synthesis of relevant language teaching and learning studies does not provide enough
…show more content…
In terms of biological development and cognitive development, he refers to studies that suggest children’s brains work better for language learning and those that suggest adults may make better use of learning strategies and develop meta-linguistic awareness. These two contradictory propositions question whether children are better second language learners or not. In favor of child learners, the Critical Period Hypothesis, supported by Noam Chomsky’s innatist theory about second language acquisition, assumes that language learning is biologically programmed and children do not need to be taught languages. Moreover, one may fail to acquire certain skills or knowledge as long as it misses the period of time it should have acquired them. Therefore, from this viewpoint, children may be more suitable for language learning, concerning their privileged biological functions. However, since adults have more social experiences and further cognitive development, they may take more advantages from the use of learning strategies and meta-linguistic knowledge for learning about vocabulary and grammar. This concept is the opposite of Universal Grammar, which corresponds to the Critical Period Hypothesis, confirming the biological nature of a
She mentioned that children between the ages three and seven could acquire any language better than an adult. For a long time, I was convinced that the reason why I could not acquire English well enough was due to age barrier. However, this is just a theory, and it is called Critical Period Hypothesis. Based on the key concept Critical Period hypothesis, the only advantage between a child and an adult is the motivation to acquiring language. An adult would feel more pressure to quickly acquire a language versus a child who would feel less pressured to do so. The difference is the method of instruction by two different teachers teaching at two different approaches. Language can be acquired by using the basic principle of BICS - first listening and then imitating the language. Learning the accent of another language can be more difficult for adults to acquire because their mind is nearly reaching a maturity state, which the brain might become complacent or used to the accent of the first language. Therefore, it may be hard to acquire another accent as adult. The real advantage between the age differences is the ability for a child to pick up the accent of a language better than an adult, because a child spends most of their time listening to their nurturer. It may be more difficult for an adult to spend all their time listening to their teacher without investing
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.
For a number of years, Noam Chomsky has produced written artefacts relating to the use and acquisition of language. In his works, Chomsky argues that humans have an innate ability to learn how to use language. The question of an innate ability to learn language is a cross-disciplinary one, relating to the fields of psychology, philosophy and linguistics. This essay will review Chomsky’s claim of an innate predisposition to acquire language by first attempting to determine precisely what Chomsky means by this term, before looking at key arguments both supporting and refuting the claim. Finally, a conclusion will be reached as to whether Chomsky’s position can be held as valid based on the evidence reviewed to discuss the claim.
The idea of a critical period for language acquisition, first introduced by linguist Eric Lenneberg in 1967, is a popular debate amongst many people. In his initial discovery of the “critical period hypothesis,” Lenneberg stated: “there are maturational constraints on the time a first language can be acquired. First language acquisition relies on neuroplasticity. If language acquisition does not occur by puberty, some aspects of language can be learnt but full mastery cannot be achieved.” Lenneberg also stressed that in the case of bilingual individuals, the critical period is broken into phases. These individuals must learn their first language in Phase one which ends at age seven and their second language in Phase two which ends at the beginning of puberty. This hypothesis has never been proven accurate due to various conditions that both support and disprove its claim.
The notion that there is empirical evidence to prove that humans have a critical period to acquire a language is, indeed, an ample fulfillment. This remarkable phenomena in which language acquisition takes part in is known as the critical period hypothesis. From the earliest incoherent babble to the utterance of a child’s first word, scientists have been able to unravel the mystery of understanding language acquisition. The critical period hypothesis originally came from linguist and neurologist, Eric Heinz Lenneberg. Linguists believe that language, in itself, has a critical component for learning. There is substantial proof for a critical period in language which stems from studies on bilinguals, deaf children who use sign language, and extreme cases of feral children like Victor and Genie that has shed light upon language acquisition.
The biological theoretical perspective comes from a man named Noam Chomsky. He believed that all children have a language acquisition device. This is defined in the book as “a biological endowment enabling the child to detect the features and rules of language, including phonology, syntax, and semantics”. The evidence found was that throughout cultures, children tend to have the same language milestones. Most begin at age two to four months by cooing and develop at 13 months with their first words.
There has been several conflicting arguments between varying theorist such as Noam Chomsky and B. F. Skinner studying Developmental Psycholinguistics, which is the study of child language, who have attempted to answer the question such as “How does a child learn his or her language so well in such a short time?” Noam Chomsky who is regarded as one of the most influential linguists (Neaum 2012), his nativist theory implies that language is an innate faculty, furthermore, he stated that all humans possess a ‘Language Acquisition Device or (LAD)’ (Neaum 2012), this contains knowledge of grammatical rules that are common in all languages throughout the world. Additionally, Chomsky states that ‘children will never acquire the necessary tools required
-Theorists such as Noam Chomsky believe that humans have a natural and universal ability to acquire language. The theory of universal grammar refers to young children knowing syntactic structure without learning it, therefore the ability to acquire grammar and language unconsciously. Furthermore, diversity is apparent primarily in specific phonological, semantic, syntactic and pragmatic features of multiple languages. However, children from different language contexts achieve milestones at similar ages.
O’Neill,S., Gish, A. (2008). Teaching English as a second language. South Melbourne, VIC: Oxford University Press.
Cummins (1996) uses the threshold hypothesis and the interdependence of language hypothesis to explain the impact of learning a second language on the first language. Cummins’ interdependence of language hypothesis (1979, 1981, 2001) is particularly relevant to IF as it refers to the interdependence of first and second literacy skills. Cummins hypothesized that skills learned in one language transfer and support language development in a second language. So strong first language skills help in the development of second language skills just as strong second language skills have a positive impact on first language skills. He believed that everyone has a “common underlying language proficiency” (1983, p. 116) such that specific parts of the brain are positively impacted by the learning of any language and this positive impact is transferable to another language.
This essay is going to illustrate the different stages in language acquisition that children pass through and elicit the theories in accordance.
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...
How do children acquire language? What are the processes of language acquisition? How do infants respond to speech? Language acquisition is the process of learning a native or a second language. Although how children learn to speak is not perfectly understood, most explanations involve both the observations that children copy what they hear and the inference that human beings have a natural aptitude for understanding grammar. Children usually learn the sounds and vocabulary of their native language through imitation, (which helps them learn to pronounce words correctly), and grammar is seldom taught to them, but instead that they rapidly acquire the ability to speak grammatically. Though, not all children learn by imitation alone. Children will produce forms of language that adults never say. For example, “I spilled milk on hisself” or “Debbie wants a cookie”. This demonstrates that children have the desire to speak correctly and have self-motivating traits to communicate. This supports the theory of Noam Chomsky (1972)-that children are able to learn grammar of a particular language because all intelligible languages are founded on a deep structure of universal grammatical rules that corresponds to an innate capacity of the human brain. Adults learning a second language pass through some of the same stages, as do children learning their native language. In the first part of this paper I will describe the process of language acquisition. The second part will review how infants respond to speech.
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.
Steven Krashen developed 5 theories of Second Language Development. The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis states that people acquire language naturally, without any formal training, simply through their interactions with others (Freeman and Freeman p.62). Language learning, however, is a more complex process which requires instruction. Both of these processes are necessary for a person to acquire a second language. Implications for teaching include creating authentic social interaction time with peers in the classroom, collaboration with peers, modeling appropriate language use and using repetition (Vose).