Missing the Point: A Response to Hyltenstam and Abrahamsson

Abstract

* Hyltenstam and Abrahamsson express a number of criticisms of our article. We deal here with their major critiques rather than with every detail they raise. We begin, though, by noting the several areas of agreement with our position that they express. They agree that younger learners are, generally, slower than older learners in the early stages of L2 learning; that rate differences are not central to arguments for the critical period hypothesis (CPH), although they ignore the fact that they are often cited in support of the critical period (CP); and that the fascinating work of neuroscientists has not yet been brought into direct connection with work assessing language proficiency. Most importantly, they agree with our conclusion that quality of L2 exposure is more important than age of initial exposure in determining outcomes and thus that a focus on age as a key factor in introducing foreign languages is a red herring. We deal, then, with the critiques not in the order of their presentation but in the order of their importance.