Language Acquisition After Puberty

[Wendy G.]

Language Acquisition After Puberty
In our reading for this week, we learned of the Critical Period Hypothesis, which presents evidence that suggests that there exists in humans a critical period for the acquisition of language. The author explains that we are programmed to learn language at specific times in our lives and states that if these opportunities are missed in infancy and early childhood, we might never acquire language. Examples are given of neglected children who do not have the opportunity to learn language because of their isolation from human contact. The “natural experiments” that the text discusses are examples of how when a child does not learn language by a certain age they will never fully acquire language because they have passed these important stages (22). One subject, Genie, was rehabilitated after she was discovered, but she was never fully able to overcome the gap in her language skills because she missed the “critical period” of language acquisition in her childhood.
Since our text did not fully help me to arrive at a conclusion on the theory, I researched and found an article entitled, “The Evolution of the Critical Period for Language Acquisition” written by James R. Hurford. In this article, the author gives details of studies completed on children who became brain damaged before going through puberty. The children had the chance of recovering and developing normally despite their injury (Hurford 160). The author credits this to the idea behind the critical period hypothesis (Hurford 160). Because the children were still in childhood, their ability to regain language skills was higher than if they were past the point of puberty. Adults with the same types of injuries, on the other hand, seldom recovered their language in full, perhaps indicating that the critical period hypothesis is right: people who lose their language ability after puberty seem to have little hope of rebuilding it (Hurford 160).
As further confirmation, Hurford summarizes evidence provided by a study by Lenneberg where fifty-four children with Down’s syndrome were studied over a period of three years (Hurford 161). The study shows that from the beginning of the study to the end the children under the age of fourteen progressed in their language skills; however, those children with Down’s syndrome who were over the age of fourteen showed no progression in those same skills (Hurford 160). These individuals were the very same in terms of their language development at the beginning as at the end of the study (Hurford 160). The author of the article goes on to cite studies similar to those presented in our texts. Ultimately, Hurford seems to conclude that he does not entertain “an extreme form of the critical period hypothesis” (161). He believes that there are variables to learning language and that language acquisition is not a “single unified phenomenon” (161). Yet, Hurford does explain his belief that the studies that have been done do provide some compelling evidence in support of the critical period hypothesis. While the article presents interesting summaries of the results of various studies, it, and much like our text, did not help in my arriving at a conclusion on the critical period hypothesis. In addition, Lightbrown and Spada note that although the study of isolated children presented in the text provides evidence to support the critical period hypothesis, we must recognize that the theory is confirmed by the use of extreme and unusual cases (23). There is not enough information provided on the children before they were involved in the study to know if they had suffered any type of traumatic brain injury, had developmental delays of any kind, or were at all impaired before they were separated from human interaction (Lightbrown and Spada 23). These authors, too, seem to avoid drawing any definite conclusizons on the critical period hypothesis.
The conclusion to be drawn from the two texts that I reviewed is that I have not learned enough about the critical period hypothesis to drawn any real conclusion at all. The authors whose writing I reviewed on this topic seemed to be at a crossroads themselves. While they present solid information in the studies that they review, it feels as if they are not terribly convinced that CPH is one that we should rely on without further investigation. Reviewing other studies and reading more information on this topic would be most beneficial and enlightening as I continue with my studies in the field of linguistics.

[Diane Y.]

Your essay is extremely pretty good!I very appreciate it. Here is my respondse to your essay:


Overall response:I am really happy to read your article. I must say you are very professional to write this so introductive work. Gratefully, I got so much from that.I learned the meaning and importance of the Critical Period Hypothesis. You clearly wrote the result that if the children lose their ability to learning language and respectively distinguish between children and adults. I really like your title and first paragrap of which used puberty rather than adolescence so it become more vivid and attractive. Although I haven't easily read it in that it's expertise ,the essay is very wonderful.

Focus:You show that the author's position of the Critical Period Hypothesis on language acquisition in first paragraph and another author's in your second to support this thesis by quotes. What's more,you present a study by Leneberg. Step by step,you explain this difficulty logically and gradually. Almost of them were to show others' opinion,I think it will be easier for readers to catch your idea.
Organization and coherence:You showed the evidences successively. Each evidence is from different people, but they are from clear quotation. You represented them gradually that made the essay flows logically.
Language and grammar:You are very professional. You used very perfect grammar and language,narrating the difficult theory really clearly so that I can understand well.
Mian emphasis:I think you are very good at writing. Only thing I want to say that you showed your position at the. last paragraph,so the readers will get your idea at an end. I think you can put it before it. I am so happy to readyour essay,I got a lot from this. Thank you!