|
 |
Learning Language at 14 vs 20 | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
| s_allard Triglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5431 days ago 2704 posts - 5425 votes  Speaks: French*, English, Spanish Studies: Polish | Message 49 of 55 20 April 2011 at 11:14pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
I don't know why we keep discussing this subject. Putting aside all theoretical debate about the so-called critical period or the lack of effort or desire of adults to improve their accent, there two non-controversial observations:
1. The vast majority of people who learn a foreign language at a young age (let's say less than 14) develop excellent, somewhat native-like, pronunciation. 2, The vast majority of people who start a foreign language after the age of let's say 20 never develop native-like pronunciation. Those are the facts. The problem is not really with factoid 1; it's more with 2. I have gone on record as saying here, and to Arekkusu particularly, that I have never met an English-language native speaker who has learned to speak French to near native ability at an adult age. Has Arekkusu met such individuals? Arekkusu is interested in Japanese and knows that there are thousands of foreigners living and teaching English in Japan. How many of them can pass for native speakers of Japanese even after living for over 20 years in Japan? I'm sure there are exceptions. But I'm quite sure the same observation no 2 is shared by most people here. Has Solfrid Cristin met any adult learners of Norwegian who can pass for native? This even applies probably to people who are married to Norwegians and have been living in Norway for many years. At the same time, immigrant children either here in Canada or in Norway end up speaking like natives in less than a year. Now, I admit that the explanation of observation 2 is tricky. I don't have an explanation. Arekkusu and others think that adults tend to be lazy, do not care enough or are willing to settle for phonetic mediocrity. I think there is more to it than that. But, frankly, I don't feel like arguing the issue. Whatever the ultimate explanation, the fact of the matter is that if you start a language over a certain age, there is a 99% chance you will have a non-native accent for the rest of your life. Of course, there is still that 1% chance. Go for it! 4 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| Nguyen Senior Member Vietnam Joined 5094 days ago 109 posts - 195 votes Speaks: Vietnamese | Message 50 of 55 21 April 2011 at 2:41am | IP Logged | |||||
|
My own thoughts on why the native accent is so elusive is that it may be physical developement. Childrens vocal chords are more flexible. As we encounter a foriegn language we will be faced with sounds that we are unfamiliar with. It takes alot more effort to identify and make these sounds. I have heard of African languages where the speakers vocal chords have developed in a different way to most humans as a result of speaking their language. This augmentation is not hereditary.
The puberty thing makes total sense also. You don't see many 20 year old boy soprano's? A child certainly has an advantage regarding accent. I think an adult could get there but it would require alot more work and maybe coaching. I don't think this has much effect on proficiency in other respects though. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| SamD Triglot Senior Member United States Joined 6660 days ago 823 posts - 987 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish, French Studies: Portuguese, Norwegian | Message 51 of 55 21 April 2011 at 6:27pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
We seem to agree that children have a much easier itme picking up an accent.
I'm not saying that adults should be lazy about pronunciation or accents, but it seems unrealistic to strive for being mistaken for a native unless you are learning a language for espionage purposes. I think the first priority should be communication. Do the natives understand me? Is my accent so bad or so comical are distracting that there is a problem? On the other hand, a slight foreign accent can be charming and can cue natives to slow down a bit or avoid obscure slang for a foreigner's benefit. If I learn an Asian language, nobody will ever take me for a foreigner; I just don't look the part. Even if I picked up a great Chinese/Korean/Japanese/Thai etc. accent, my face will give me away as a Westerner. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the best! 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| cpnlsn Triglot Newbie United Kingdom Joined 6174 days ago 22 posts - 29 votes Speaks: English*, French, German | Message 52 of 55 22 April 2011 at 12:12am | IP Logged | |||||
|
I know few people who have developed flawless speech in
L2. It is rare. So rare it would need a truly massive effort and wholly unrealistic for the vast majority of people. From a younger age it is possible if they live in a country the language is spoken. Otherwise I think there is little evidence of a clear advantage to young people below a certain age. For impact on accent think Arnold Schwartzenegger or Kissinger in the US as a good indication. So far as I know there's no limit on acquisition of vocab and complex grammar for adults! 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| aerozeplyn Senior Member United States Joined 5149 days ago 141 posts - 202 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Spanish, Mandarin | Message 53 of 55 02 May 2011 at 10:08am | IP Logged | |||||
this cracks me up because i am relatively new to this forum, and i can just imagine s_allard marking another tally on his, "how many times we've discussed this subject" wall area. and then he continues to discuss the subject. s_allard, i want you to know for sure that i am not negating or criticizing your quote, and that i am only sharing what came to my mind as i read your words :) however, as i browsed through some comments on here, i would like to point out that my personal--and teaching--experience has showed me that there is no difference in the learning ability between a normal and healthy child, teenager, adult, or senior citizen. of course, i did not have this opinion when i first started teaching. however, when i improved as a teacher, i also realized that learning still requires the same amount of energy and effort for no matter who is doing the learning. the true difference between a 14 and 20 year old lies mainly in their personal abilities. their energy and effort is of course a big factor because if they have other priorities in life, they will also have to allocate a certain amount of energy to that priority! does this 14 year old also have soccer practice? are they dealing with abusive parents at home? or do they have a lot of free time and a sincere LOVE for a certain subject of information that they are rapidly acquiring? on the other hand, does this 20 year old also have a college report next week? are they expecting their first-born child anytime soon? or do they simply have a lot of free time and a sincere LOVE for a certain subject of information that they are rapidly acquiring? as far as energy/effort, the only way to lower the energy required to learn a piece of information is to also increase the ability of cognitive functions that are used to acquire that knowledge. when these functions are not exercised (whether you're 14, 20, or 50) then they tire out easily. however, unless your body no longer has the ability to repair or regrow, you can always improve your cognitive functions. for example, if you are good at--and in the habit of--manipulating small objects with your fingers, it may require much more mental and physical energy to manipulate larger objects with just your wrists. however, if you have exercised using the wrists/arms for a particular task, you may also become good at that. want proof of this? well, how about an example: go make yourself a cup of coffee and entirely use your arms (not your fingers or wrists). put some cream and sugar in that coffee too. this is entirely possible, (in fact, i did this last week...hence the example is fresh in my mind!) ... you may have to be patient to ensure you don't break anything or hurt yourself of course :) obviously this will require much more energy to perform this task. this only requires more energy mainly for 2 reasons: 1) you are not in the habit--and do not have the experience--of using your arms for such a task. therefore, you have to think more, rather than recollect from memory; and 2) to move the arms necessary for that task requires the use of larger muscle groups (more energy). essentially, using the arms is the wrong tool for the job, or at least they are the wrong tools when you have a fingers and a wrist/arm to guide them. in short conclusion, learning is the same way: you are using certain cognitive acquisition tools to learn a set of new skills. some of your cognitive abilities will be stronger than others, and some cognitive abilities REQUIRED to learn will take more effort because you have not built up that group of "cognitive muscles". who knows what the situation is...either way, if you are 14 and do not meet the cognitive requirements, you will most likely have a harder time learning new information compared with a 40 year old who's cognitive skills are in top shape! 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| eXtreme Newbie Australia Joined 4976 days ago 20 posts - 20 votes Speaks: English* | Message 54 of 55 02 May 2011 at 11:14am | IP Logged | |||||
|
I had a long post typed out...but I'll just shorten it to a few sentences since I cant be bothered arguing.
This topic is based on generalizations, not fact. I don't care if your personal opinion is "well 20 year old people are more mature thus are better learners", or "the brain is doing certain changes at around puberty, so 14 year olds would be superior", no. The rate of which a person can learn a language, and how well they can learn it, is not reflected in simply ages. It is reflected by how well they can "process" the information. Every single person is different in the way they process it, the speed at which they can process it, their limit on thinking and obviously how well peoples memory is (these things aren't dependent on age..) It doesn't matter if you have a study of 200 people out of the 6 billion in the world, published by some old eccentric professor with white hair, this is based on simple logic.You can call me wrong and whatnot, but thats just what I think. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| s_allard Triglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5431 days ago 2704 posts - 5425 votes Speaks: French*, English, Spanish Studies: Polish | Message 55 of 55 02 May 2011 at 2:29pm | IP Logged | |||||
I can't agree more with this quote. Yes, we are all different in terms of s of cognitive abilities. But when all is said and done, is there anybody here who really believes that it is generally better to begin a foreign language at 20 than at 14?. Is there a parent on this planet who believes that it is better for their children to start learning any subject at a later age. Is there anybody who believes that it's better to start to play a musical instrument at 20 rather than 14 or 7? I certainly agree that there are 50-year olds who have the cognitive abilities of 14-year olds, but is anybody suggesting that it's better to start a foreign language at 50 instead of 14? Come on. Let's be serious here. We can discuss this subject all we want. But the plain truth is the same. Everybody knows, and especially parents, that sooner is better than later. 3 persons have voted this message useful |
If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login. If you are not already registered you must first register
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
