1989
DOI: 10.1016/0010-0285(89)90003-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

100
1,674
20
60

Year Published

1997
1997
2008
2008

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2,146 publications
(1,854 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
100
1,674
20
60
Order By: Relevance
“…Second, it will be important to repeat these experiments with children, to determine if they apply the same learning algorithms as adults for these variables, given precisely the same input. There are a number of ways in which children and adults have been shown to differ as language learners, though they do behave similarly in many ways as well (Johnson & Newport, 1989;Newport, 1990). One way in which the behavior of our adult participants differs from that reported in the developmental literature is that our learners generalize in all of the three language behaviors tested.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 67%
“…Second, it will be important to repeat these experiments with children, to determine if they apply the same learning algorithms as adults for these variables, given precisely the same input. There are a number of ways in which children and adults have been shown to differ as language learners, though they do behave similarly in many ways as well (Johnson & Newport, 1989;Newport, 1990). One way in which the behavior of our adult participants differs from that reported in the developmental literature is that our learners generalize in all of the three language behaviors tested.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 67%
“…However, a major problem for the interpretation of these results is that no formal assessment of language proficiency was conducted. Since there is a general negative correlation between age of acquisition and proficiency (Johnson and Newport, 1989), these two variables are confounded in this experiment. Kim et al's conclusion was that age of acquisition is a major factor in the cortical organization of second language processing.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As for the first factor, a large literature suggests that linguistic abilities are sensitive to the age of exposure to language. People who learn a language later, particularly after late infancy or puberty, do not generally achieve the same level of proficiency as young learners (Birdsong, 1999;Johnson and Newport, 1989). The causes of these age effects on language performance are controversial, with explanations ranging from the postulation of a biologically based "critical period" for language acquisition, to an emphasis on differences between infant and adult learning contexts (Lenneberg, 1967).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Participants were screened for proficiency with a picture naming/translation task (Snodgrass & Vanderwart, 1980, normed for L2 by Sholl, Sankaranarayanan & Kroll, 1995) and a sentence grammaticality judgment task (Johnson & Newport, 1989). In the picture-naming task, participants saw 80 pictures on the computer screen and gave the English name for what appeared in the line drawing.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%