Period Hypothesis For Language Acquisition Research Articles

Critical Period Hypothesis in Language Acquisition

Critical period hypothesis, a popular topic of great significance in language acquisition, was initially deprived from first language acquisition, and further applied to second language acquisition though disputes remain. Former researchers have done myriads of empirical study and concluded diverse theories. This paper purports to briefly review former researches of critical period hypothesis in both first language acquisition and second language acquisition, and then try to probe its interrelation with age effect and implicit learning.

Official Bilingualism Policy and Bilinguals

<bold>Lee, Seung-Ryul. 2018. Official Bilingualism Policy and Bilinguals, <italic>Asian Journal of Canadian Studies</italic>, 24-2. 73-95</bold>. Bilingualism is believed to be one of key identities of Canada. Unlike our expectation, bilingualism may not be a real face in provinces except New Brunswick where English and French are official languages. This paper attempts to look into the data about bilingualism issued by Statistics Canada which reveals realities of bilinguals in terms of regions and ages. The results suggest that the ratio of bilinguals has increased a little since 2011 and has, particularly, increased in the provinces near Quebec. The study also found that, reviewing the bilingualism rate of the school-age populations, the bilingual rate reached its height at the ages between 10 and 14 years old. This is consistent with the so-called critical period hypothesis in language acquisition.

Reflecting on the Primary Phonetic Learning Based on the Critical Period Hypothesis in Language Acquisition

New English Curriculum Standards of Compulsory Education points out the following specific requirements of phonetic learning in the secondary target of language learning: reading out 26 letters of the alphabet; understanding simple spelling rules; knowing the word with accent, sentence with stress; learning English pronunciation including linking, rhythm, pauses, intonation and so on. And based on the critical period of language acquisition theory and the viewpoint that Children can get the pure pronunciation of second language at a critical period, phonetic learning is the principal task in the primary English learning. The author makes some suggestions through surveying and reflecting on primary phonetic learning problems. The author makes a survey about phonetic learning in Shanxi Normal University Experiment Primary School. The author found that the importance of the phonetic learning in primary school is not valued; students phonetic learning initiative is not high; the teachers’ professional quality of phonetic should be improved and so on. Some suggestions are put forward: establishing the correct concept of the phonetic learning for pupils; using multi-sensory learning and imitation to improve pupils’ language learning initiative; developing reading English skills; improving teacher’ professional quality of phonetic. It is hoped that we can pay more attention to phonetic learning in primary school and provide more valued proposals through this research.

An Analysis of Critical Period Hypothesis in English Teaching

The Critical Period Hypothesis originated from biology and then was introduced into the field of linguistics. This paper introduces the concept of the Critical Period Hypothesis for language acquisition and some relevant literatures’ research of Critical Period Hypothesis and English teaching in China as well as analyzing the research situation. From this contrast and analysis, the enlightenment from the Critical Period Hypothesis for language acquisition to English teaching in China is much easier to obtain. This paper determines that the influence of the Critical Period Hypothesis on second language acquisition and foreign language learning is still unclear.

The benefits of sign language for deaf learners with language challenges

This article argues the importance of allowing deaf children to acquire sign language from an early age. It demonstrates firstly that the critical/sensitive period hypothesis for language acquisition can be applied to specific language aspects of spoken language as well as sign languages (i.e. phonology, grammatical processing and syntax). This makes early diagnosis and early intervention of crucial importance. Moreover, research findings presented in this article demonstrate the advantage that sign language offers in the early years of a deaf child’s life by comparing the language development milestones of deaf learners exposed to sign language from birth to those of late-signers, orally trained deaf learners and hearing learners exposed to spoken language. The controversy over the best medium of instruction for deaf learners is briefly discussed, with emphasis placed on the possible value of bilingual-bicultural programmes to facilitate the development of deaf learners’ literacy skills. Finally, this paper concludes with a discussion of the implications/recommendations of sign language teaching and Deaf education in South Africa.

The Critical Period Hypothesis for Language Acquisition and It's Implication for the Management of Communication Disorders

The Critical Period Hypothesis for Language Acquisition and It's Implication for the Management of Communication Disorders

The Critical Period for Language Acquisition: Evidence from Second Language Learning

SNOW, CATHERINE E., and HOEFNAGEL-H6HLE, MARIAN. The Critical Period for Language Acquistion: Evidence from Second Language Learning. CHILD DEVELOPMENT, 1978, 49, 1114-1128. The critical period hypothesis holds that first language acquisition must occur before cerebral lateralization is complete, at about the age of puberty. One prediction of this hypothesis is that second language acquisition will be relatively fast, successful, and qualitatively similar to first language only if it occurs before the age of puberty. This prediction was tested by studying longitudinally the naturalistic acquisition of Dutch by English speakers of different ages. The subjects were tested 3 times during their first year in Holland, with an extensive test battery designed to assess several aspects of their second language ability. It was found that the subjects in the age groups 12-15 and adult made the fastest progress during the first few months of learning Dutch and that at the end of the first year the 8-10and 12-15-year-olds had achieved the best control of Dutch. The 3-5-year-olds scored lowest on all the tests employed. These data do not support the critical period hypothesis for language acquisition.