Register  Login  Active Topics  Maps  

Why is there so little research?

 Language Learning Forum : Philological Room Post Reply
81 messages over 11 pages: 1 2 35 6 7 ... 4 ... 10 11 Next >>
s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5216 days ago

2704 posts - 5425 votes 
Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish

 
 Message 25 of 81
04 February 2014 at 8:18pm | IP Logged 
emk wrote:
s_allard wrote:
I don't think that any research claims that adult second language acquisition is
impossible. What all researchers
and ordinary people like ourselves have observed is the basic fact that after the approximate age of 13-15 it is
very rare to find individuals who have achieved very high levels of spoken second language proficiency.

I dispute this claim. If it's hard to find those adults, it's because people are either (a) grossly underestimating
what's required for successful language acquisition at any age or (b) they're looking in the wrong place.
Specifically:

1. It's relatively straightforward for an adult to reach B2, at least when moving between languages in the western
European Sprachbund.
2. Given 3 to 5 years of round-the-clock immersion, virtually all university-educated adults will become highly
proficient speakers of their L2. Here, "highly proficient" means C2 speaking and listening comprehension,
bordering on near-native in daily life.

These observations are based on living next to major research university, and observing many immigrants who
arrived with B2/C1 English to pursue PhDs, post docs, and research. When these students arrive, some of them
are definitely in the B2 range. Some even struggle with one-on-one conversation. But given 5 years, they all seem
to speak perfectly acceptable English. Sure, most of them have accents, but nobody cares—we have native
speakers from the southern and western US whose accents are thicker than those of the foreign students.

(It's possible I'm seeing some survivor bias—perhaps some students never reach an acceptable level of English,
and they leave, biasing my observations. There's also presumably a bias from the fact that I'm observing English
skills, and most of these students have spent 10 years or so slowly crawling to B2 starting in late childhood. But
they certainly do not sound remotely native when they arrive in their 20s.)

On some theoretical level, I suppose it's interesting that the foreign students never sound quite like native
speakers, or like kids who immigrated at age 7. But that's sort of like saying most people from Mississippi still
sound slightly southern after 25 years in New England. Sure, they never sound quite local. But who cares?

...


This is the whole point. The whole debate on the critical period hypothesis centers specifically on the acquisition
of phonology. To say that the fact that foreign adult learners still have an accent is akin to native speakers
having an accent is totally wrong. We may remark a strong regional accent in our own languages and even prefer
a cute foreign accent but the basic observation remains, very few foreign adult learners acquire native
pronunciation, whatever the accent.

I really don't see what the debate is about. Nobody is saying that adults can't learn foreign languages. Most
people simply say that it is easier to learn a foreign language as a child than as an adult.

Now, if we look at the particular case of foreign students that, according, to emk become highly proficient in
English after, let's say 5 years at the local research university. Is this surprising? They are immersed in
sophisticated English for academic purposes. They read extensively. They have a lot of interaction with native
speakers; some probably date and even marry natives. They are highly motivated to perfect their English. They
are intelligent and relatively young. Many of them take English classes

Aren't these the best conditions for learning a language at an adult age? How many develop a native-like accent
after 5 years? Few it seems. This might not be important but the fact remains that they will probably have an
accent for the rest of their lives.

At the same time, it is very likely that in that same university there are other kinds of immigrants, probably from
Latin America, doing the more menial tasks such as housekeeping and working in the cafeteria. What is their
English like after 5 years? Without going into details, I think we can safely assume that their English will not be
on par with the English of those foreign graduate students. Their accent will be thicker than that of the foreign
students.

I don't know where this idea that adults can't learn languages comes from. Certainly not from me. I don't even
believe in the critical period hypothesis. But I believe, like most parents and all systems of education in this
world that it is best to be exposed to a foreign language earlier than later. Given the choice of when their
children should learn a language, are there parents who say, "I think later is better; my child will learn better as
an adult."?

I don't want to use my own observations as the sole scientific standard but all the perfectly bilingual or
multilingual people I have ever met learned their languages at a young age, whether it's from a bilingual home or
schooling, day care, summer camps in the target language.

We don't have to look far. Here at HTLAL many people are exposed to English very young for well-known
reasons. All the polyglots started out young. To me there is no doubt, the earlier the better.
2 persons have voted this message useful



beano
Diglot
Senior Member
United KingdomRegistered users can see my Skype Name
Joined 4408 days ago

1049 posts - 2152 votes 
Speaks: English*, German
Studies: Russian, Serbian, Hungarian

 
 Message 26 of 81
04 February 2014 at 8:18pm | IP Logged 
I know a few people who were raised in communist East Germany and were certainly not able to speak
English as children or teenagers. Yet they came to Britain as young adults and now speak English to near
native levels. They arrived in a society where everything is conducted in English and almost nobody had the
inclination or ability to speak German with them. Result - they became fluent English speakers by virtue of
good old-fashioned cold immersion. Works a treat every time.
2 persons have voted this message useful



patrickwilken
Senior Member
Germany
radiant-flux.net
Joined 4319 days ago

1546 posts - 3200 votes 
Studies: German

 
 Message 27 of 81
04 February 2014 at 8:28pm | IP Logged 
ScottScheule wrote:

I certainly would prefer the critical period not exist. Alas, it seems to.


But what is the real evidence for this? The original study by Johnson and Newport (1989), which was popularized in Pinker's book, looked at the language acquisition of 46 Asians who arrived at differing ages in the USA. Their finding was that only those that arrived before the age of 8 performed in language tests at native level, and there was a monotonic decline in their language performance the older they were (up to 17-years-old) when they arrived.

However, a quick search finds lots of non-replications. For instance:

Quote:
Age Constraints on Second-Language Acquisition

James Emil Flege, Grace H. Yeni-Komshian & Serena Liu

Journal of Memory and Language 41, 78 –104 (1999)

This study evaluated the critical period hypothesis for second language (L2) acquisition. The participants were 240 native speakers of Korean who differed according to age of arrival (AOA) in the United States (1 to 23 years), but were all experienced in English (mean length of residence 15 years). The native Korean participants’ pronunciation of English was evaluated by having listeners rate their sentences for overall degree of foreign accent; knowledge of English morphosyntax was evaluated using a 144-item grammaticality judgment test. As AOA increased, the foreign accents grew stronger, and the grammaticality judgment test scores decreased steadily. However, unlike the case for the foreign accent ratings, the effect of AOA on the grammaticality judgment test scores became nonsignificant when variables confounded with AOA were controlled. This suggested that the observed decrease in morphosyntax scores was not the result of passing a maturationally defined critical period. Additional analyses showed that the score for sentences testing knowledge of rule based, generalizable aspects of English morphosyntax varied as a function of how much education the Korean participants had received in the United States. The scores for sentences testing lexically based aspects of English morphosyntax, on the other hand, depended on how much the Koreans used English.


If we want to talk about the data for a critical period we should look at all the data, not the first study, and ignore the non-replications that follow. That's not how science works.

4 persons have voted this message useful



s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5216 days ago

2704 posts - 5425 votes 
Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish

 
 Message 28 of 81
04 February 2014 at 8:28pm | IP Logged 
beano wrote:
I know a few people who were raised in communist East Germany and were certainly not able to
speak
English as children or teenagers. Yet they came to Britain as young adults and now speak English to near
native levels. They arrived in a society where everything is conducted in English and almost nobody had the
inclination or ability to speak German with them. Result - they became fluent English speakers by virtue of
good old-fashioned cold immersion. Works a treat every time.


Isn't this what I've been saying? Start young, at least relatively, in complete immersion and, I surmise, strong
motivation and plenty of interaction with natives. It will work.

At the same time, how many HTLALers can claim to have learned to speak like like a native at an adult age?
1 person has voted this message useful



beano
Diglot
Senior Member
United KingdomRegistered users can see my Skype Name
Joined 4408 days ago

1049 posts - 2152 votes 
Speaks: English*, German
Studies: Russian, Serbian, Hungarian

 
 Message 29 of 81
04 February 2014 at 8:30pm | IP Logged 
s_allard wrote:
:

At the same time, it is very likely that in that same university there are other kinds of immigrants, probably
from Latin America, doing the more menial tasks such as housekeeping and working in the cafeteria. What is
their English like after 5 years? Without going into details, I think we can safely assume that their English will
not be on par with the English of those foreign graduate students. Their accent will be thicker than that of the
foreign students.



But most Mexican immigrants will live (and often work) in a Spanish-speaking enclave within the USA and will
learn enough English to "survive" (no easy task in itself. How many Americans could do he same south of the
border?)

Drop a Latino person (hope this term is acceptable) into an area where they are the only Spanish speaker for
500 miles (ok, an exaggeration, but you get my drift) and you can bet your bottom dollar that their English will
come on by leaps and bounds. What other choice would they have? Spend the rest of their lives being
ignored?

Would such a person speak English infused with academic terms? Probably not, because they won't have
that sort of background. But then again, there will be plenty of foreign students who know many scientific
words but aren't so sure of themselves in popular idiom.


1 person has voted this message useful



s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5216 days ago

2704 posts - 5425 votes 
Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish

 
 Message 30 of 81
04 February 2014 at 8:40pm | IP Logged 
patrickwilken wrote:
ScottScheule wrote:

I certainly would prefer the critical period not exist. Alas, it seems to.


But what is the real evidence for this? The original study by Johnson and Newport (1989), which was popularized
in Pinker's book, looked at the language acquisition of 46 Asians who arrived at differing ages in the USA. Their
finding was that only those that arrived before the age of 8 performed in language tests at native level, and there
was a monotonic decline in their language performance the older they were (up to 17-years-old) when they
arrived.

However, a quick search finds lots of non-replications. For instance:

Quote:
Age Constraints on Second-Language Acquisition

James Emil Flege, Grace H. Yeni-Komshian & Serena Liu

Journal of Memory and Language 41, 78 –104 (1999)

This study evaluated the critical period hypothesis for second language (L2) acquisition. The participants were
240 native speakers of Korean who differed according to age of arrival (AOA) in the United States (1 to 23 years),
but were all experienced in English (mean length of residence 15 years). The native Korean participants’
pronunciation of English was evaluated by having listeners rate their sentences for overall degree of foreign
accent; knowledge of English morphosyntax was evaluated using a 144-item grammaticality judgment test. As
AOA increased, the foreign accents grew stronger, and the grammaticality judgment test scores decreased
steadily. However, unlike the case for the foreign accent ratings, the effect of AOA on the grammaticality
judgment test scores became nonsignificant when variables confounded with AOA were controlled. This
suggested that the observed decrease in morphosyntax scores was not the result of passing a maturationally
defined critical period.
Additional analyses showed that the score for sentences testing knowledge of rule
based, generalizable aspects of English morphosyntax varied as a function of how much education the Korean
participants had received in the United States. The scores for sentences testing lexically based aspects of English
morphosyntax, on the other hand, depended on how much the Koreans used English.


If we want to talk about the data for a critical period we should look at all the data, not the first study, and ignore
the non-replications that follow. That's not how science works.


If we read the abstract quoted, it says exactly what I have been arguing. Note that the researchers confirm the
role of age of arrival in the retention of foreign accent. As for grammar and vocabulary, we see that the results
vary according to how much education the Korean participants received in the United states and how much the
Koreans used English. Is this surprising? Just like the language progress of the graduate students in emk's
example above, it's all a question of age and learning conditions.
1 person has voted this message useful



patrickwilken
Senior Member
Germany
radiant-flux.net
Joined 4319 days ago

1546 posts - 3200 votes 
Studies: German

 
 Message 31 of 81
04 February 2014 at 8:42pm | IP Logged 
s_allard wrote:

Isn't this what I've been saying? Start young, at least relatively, in complete immersion and, I surmise, strong
motivation and plenty of interaction with natives. It will work.

At the same time, how many HTLALers can claim to have learned to speak like like a native at an adult age?


But you seem to keep shifting the goal posts. At one point you say people have to be <15-years-old to acquire native skills, then you agree with EMK that adults (postdocs are >15 years-old generally) can learn a language if immersed, and now are are again suggesting that adults (>18 years old) can't learn to speak like a native.

I am sorry if I am misunderstanding you, but I am bit confused as to the exact claim.
3 persons have voted this message useful



patrickwilken
Senior Member
Germany
radiant-flux.net
Joined 4319 days ago

1546 posts - 3200 votes 
Studies: German

 
 Message 32 of 81
04 February 2014 at 8:43pm | IP Logged 
s_allard wrote:


If we read the abstract quoted, it says exactly what I have been arguing. Note that the researchers confirm the
role of age of arrival in the retention of foreign accent. As for grammar and vocabulary, we see that the results
vary according to how much education the Korean participants received in the United states and how much the
Koreans used English. Is this surprising? Just like the language progress of the graduate students in emk's
example above, it's all a question of age and learning conditions.


The abstract says that it's not a matter of age for anything other than accent. Only accent. Nothing else. Learning conditions are all that matter for everything else, not age.

If you can agree that the only advantage for starting a language young, is a possible advantage with acquiring a native accent, I am happy to agree with you.

Edited by patrickwilken on 04 February 2014 at 8:45pm



3 persons have voted this message useful



This discussion contains 81 messages over 11 pages: << Prev 1 2 35 6 7 8 9 10 11  Next >>


Post ReplyPost New Topic Printable version Printable version

You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page was generated in 0.3438 seconds.


DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved
No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization.