Page 26 - BRIDGES - ISSUE 7

Child and Adult Second Language Acquisition (SLA): pointsout that regarding age asa fac-
tor on L2 phonology, studies by
An overview of key differences and theories Oyama (1976 & 1978) found it an im-
portant variable, where performance
«« further suggested though, that the in comprehension tests was found na-

LAD which "prestructures the prop- tive-like before the age of 11,a decline
acquiring a language" being observed after this age. Regard-
Children in this way have to find out erties of grammar to a large extent ing syntax, Johnson and Newport
(consequently, manystructural prop-
about the world and learn a language (1989, cited in Ginsberg,op.cit.: 339-
at thesame time,while the adult "does erties of grammar are innate and need 41) found out that "if children are im-
not be learned)" (Klein,op.cit.:6), and
not need to reconstruct the original the existence of a Universal Grammar mersed in a second language before
conceptual representations of the in the form of innate structures com- the age of seven, they will be able to
world out of which the symbolic rep- achieve nativelike fluency; however,
resentations for language evolved. mon to all languages, can distinguish children who begin learning a second
‘
between adults and children when ac-
Adults have already done that -they language even verysoon after this age
already know the world" (Bialystok, quiring a second language, as adults will show a decline in overall perfor-
seem unable to have access to it. As
op.cit.:67), although of course there Wong Fillmore (1991, cited in mance". We have to agree with
can not be absolutes in this,since even Ginsberg’s interpretation of the find-
in the case of adults,we are faced with Ginsberg,1997:359) has suggested, ings when she suggests as a possible
"UG is available for language acquisi-
the need to gain knowledge of a new tion during childhood and then after explanation that
culture as well. It must be the case it has served this function, it is no "a human’s ability to acquire a lan-
also that a difference exists in terms of longer accessible for language learn- guage is diminished with age because
adults being more able to consciously ing later in life, forcing adults to use the language faculty either ceases to
reflect on the process of their acquir- operateor becomes less accessible af-
inga second language, and in this way different, less efficient cognitive ter the critical period has ended. As a
mechanisms." Conclusively, the sug-
they are considered to be better in gestion that UG and the LAD can be consequence,older language learners
their useof memorytechniquesincon- beneficial to child SLA and not avail- must useothercognitive mechanisms
sciously learning a second language, able to adults, remains a hypothesis to acquire a language, and these other
whereasyoung children are not simi- frequently disputed both in itself (see mechanisms are not as well suited to
larly aware of their needs in terms of the task" (1997:342).
vocabulary and are in general more e.g.Klein,op.cit.)as well as in arguing
that"adultcognition may modulate the
incapableof "conscious reflect on their B: Sociolinguisticand social psycho-
processing" (ibid.). role of UG in L2 learning" (Flynn & logical aspects ofa differentiation be-
Although the superior cognitive abili- O’Neill,1988:3) tween adult and child SLA
The above leads us to a consideration
ties of adults are undisputed, Gass & of what Klein (1986:39) refers to as
Selinker (1994:245) point out that the biological determinants of thelan- There arc alsosociolinguistic and psy-
"ironically,adoptingthecognitiveabili- guage processor,suggesting that "hu- chological reasonssuggestinga differ-
ties in a language learning task has man beings’ learning capacities [are] ence between adult and child SLA.As
been hypothesized to result in a less radically reduced with agefor biologi- Gassand Selinker (1994:245) point out,
successfullearning thanfound in chil- it issuggested that "adultsdo not want
dren, who, according to the hypoth- cal reasons". As he points out, to give up the sense of identity their
Lenneberg’s (1967)critical period hy-
esis, rely to a greater extent on a spe- accent provides.Some suggest adults
cificLanguage Acquisition Device".If pothesis proposes that "between the areunwillingtosurrender theiregoto
age of two and puberty, the human
it can be suggested that it plays a role the extent required to adopt a newlan-
in a differentiation between child and brain shows the plasticitywhich allows guage, which entails a new life-world".
a child to acquire his first
adult SLA, the LAD, an important language"(op.cit.:9).The existenceof Indeed, it can be argued that children
aspect of Chomsky’s theory of Uni- when acquiring a language are guided
versal Grammar (1965,and elsewhere) a critical period in childhood when by principles such as’acquire a social
humansare more able biologically to
might beconsidered at this point.The acquire language (as well asa second identity and within itsframework, de-
existence of such a ’device’pointsout language) than in adulthood carries velopyour personal identity’,while in
to what Klein (1986:39) sees as our the case of adult SLA, the adult has
’language faculty’, humans’ natural obvious implications regarding our already been through that, and in fact
discussion. Ginsberg (1997: 338-40)
capacityfor processing language. It is
»»
mmmmmimmmmmsmiMm : mmmim 29