Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T11:02:28.532Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

AGE OF ONSET AND NATIVELIKE L2 ULTIMATE ATTAINMENT OF MORPHOSYNTACTIC AND PHONETIC INTUITION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2012

Niclas Abrahamsson
Niclas Abrahamsson*
Affiliation:
Stockholm University
*
*Address correspondence to: Niclas Abrahamsson, Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University, SE 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden; e-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Research has consistently shown there is a negative correlation between age of onset (AO) of acquisition and ultimate attainment (UA) of either pronunciation or grammar in a second language (L2). A few studies have indeed reported nativelike behavior in some postpuberty learners with respect to either phonetics/phonology or morphosyntax, a result that has sometimes been taken as evidence against the critical period hypothesis (CPH). However, in the few studies that have employed a wide range of linguistic tests and tasks, adult learners have not exhibited nativelike L2 proficiency across the board of measures, which, according to some, suggests that the hypothesis still holds. The present study investigated the relationship between AO and UA and the incidence of nativelikeness when measures of phonetic and grammatical intuition are combined. An additional aim was to investigate whether children and adults develop the L2 through fundamentally different brain mechanisms—namely, whether children acquire the language (more) implicitly as an interdependent whole, whereas adults learn it (more) explicitly as independent parts of a whole.

Type
ARTICLES
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 34 , Special Issue 2: High-Level L2 Acquisition, Learning, and Use , June 2012 , pp. 187 - 214
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abrahamsson, N., & Hyltenstam, K. (2008). The robustness of aptitude effects in near-native second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 481–509.Google Scholar
Abrahamsson, N., & Hyltenstam, K. (2009). Age of onset and nativelikeness in a second language: Listener perception versus linguistic scrutiny. Language Learning, 59, 249–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abrahamsson, N., Stölten, K., & Hyltenstam, K. (in press). Effects of age on voice onset time: The production of voiceless stops by near-native L2 speakers. In Haberzettl, S. (Ed.), Processes and outcomes: Explaining achievement in language learning. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Abramson, A. S., & Lisker, L. (1973). Voice-timing perception in Spanish word-initial stops. Journal of Phonetics, 1, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asher, J., & García, G. (1969). The optimal age to learn a foreign language. Modern Language Journal, 38, 334–341.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., & Miller, B. (1999). The problem of age in second-language acquisition: Influences from language, structure, and task. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2, 127–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D. (1992). Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Language, 68, 706–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D. (1999). Introduction: Whys and why nots of the critical period hypothesis for second language acquisition. In Birdsong, D. (Ed.), Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis (pp. 1–22). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D., & Molis, M. (2001). On the evidence for maturational constraints in second-language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 235–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R. (1989). What is the logical problem of foreign language learning? In Gass, S. & Schachter, J. (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 41–68). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bongaerts, T. (1999). Ultimate attainment in L2 pronunciation: The case of very advanced late L2 learners. In Birdsong, D. (Ed.), Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis (pp. 133–159). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bongaerts, T., Mennen, S., & van der Slik, F. (2000). Authenticity of pronunciation in naturalistic second language acquisition: The case of very advanced late learners of Dutch as a second language. Studia Linguistica, 54, 298–308.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1973). Implications of aptitude test research and psycholinguistic theory for foreign language teaching. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 2, 5–14.Google Scholar
Coppieters, R. (1987). Competence differences between natives and near-native speakers. Language, 63, 544–573.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 499–533.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R., & Larson-Hall, J. (2005). What does the critical period really mean? In Kroll, J. F. & de Groot, A. M. (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 88–108). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E. (1991). Age of learning affects the authenticity of voice-onset time (VOT) in stop consonants produced in a second language. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 89, 395–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flege, J. E., Yeni-Komshian, G. H., & Liu, S. (1999). Age constraints on second language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 78–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. (1992). Non-native features of near-native speakers: On the ultimate attainment of childhood L2 learners. In Harris, R. J. (Ed.), Cognitive processing in bilinguals (pp. 351–368). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyltenstam, K., & Abrahamsson, N. (2003a). Age of onset and ultimate attainment in near-native speakers of Swedish as a second language. In Fraurud, K. & Hyltenstam, K. (Eds.), Multilingualism in global and local perspectives (pp. 319–340). Sweden: Centre for Research on Bilingualism and Rinkeby Institute of Multilingual Research, Stockholm University.Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, K., & Abrahamsson, N. (2003b). Maturational constraints in SLA. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. H. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 539–588). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ioup, G., Boustagui, E., El Tigi, M., & Moselle, M. (1994). Reexamining the critical period hypothesis: A case study in a naturalistic environment. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 73–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, J. S., & Newport, E. L. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krashen, S. (1973). Lateralization, language learning, and the critical period: Some new evidence. Language Learning, 23, 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krashen, S. D., Long, M. A., & Scarcella, R. C. (1979). Age, rate, and eventual attainment in second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 13, 573–582.Google Scholar
Lenneberg, E. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Lisker, L., & Abramson, A. S. (1964). A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements. Word, 20, 384–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (1990). Maturational constraints on language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 251–285.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (2005). Problems with supposed counter-evidence to the critical period hypothesis. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43, 287–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 16–41). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacKay, I. R. A., Flege, J. E., & Imai, S. (2006). Evaluating the effects of chronological age and sentence duration on degree of perceived foreign accent. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 157–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, J. L. (2006). Beyond the critical period: Processing-based explanation for poor grammaticality judgment performance by late second language learners. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 381–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S., & Slabakova, R. (2003). Competence similarities between native and near-native speakers: An investigation of the preterite-imperfect contrast in Spanish. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 351–398.Google Scholar
Moyer, A. (1999). Ultimate attainment in L2 phonology: The critical factors of age, motivation and instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 81–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munro, M., & Mann, V. (2005). Age of immersion as a predictor of foreign accent. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26, 311–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, M. (2004). A neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Paradis, M. (2009). Declarative and procedural determinants of second languages. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Patkowski, M. (1980). The sensitive period for the acquisition of syntax in a second language. Language Learning, 30, 449–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pulvermüller, F., & Schumann, J. H. (1994). Neurobiological mechanisms of language acquisition. Language Learning, 44, 681–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002a). E-Prime reference guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools, Inc.Google Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002b). E-Prime user’s guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools, Inc.Google Scholar
Snow, C., & Hoefnagel-Höhle, M. (1977). Age differences in the pronunciation of foreign sounds. Language and Speech, 20, 357–365.Google Scholar
Snow, C., & Hoefnagel-Höhle, M. (1978). The critical age for language acquisition: Evidence from second language learning. Child Development, 49, 1114–1128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, G. (2006). The age-length-onset problem in research on second language acquisition among immigrants. Language Learning, 56, 671–692.Google Scholar
Stölten, K. (2005). Effects of age of learning on VOT in voiceless stops produced by near-native L2 speakers. In Eriksson, A. & Lindh, J. (Eds.), Proceedings FONETIK 2005: The XVIII Swedish phonetics conference (pp. 91–94). Gothenburg, Sweden: Department of Linguistics, Göteborg University.Google Scholar
Stölten, K. (2006). Effects of age on VOT: Categorical perception of Swedish stops by near-native L2 speakers. In Ambrazaitis, G. & Schötz, S. (Eds.), Proceedings FONETIK 2006 (pp. 125–128). Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University.Google Scholar
Stölten, K., Abrahamsson, N., & Hyltenstam, K. (2012). Effects of age of learning on voice onset time: Categorical perception of Swedish stops by near-native L2 speakers. Unpublished manuscript, Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University.Google Scholar
van Boxtel, S., Bongaerts, T., & Coppen, P.-A. (2005). Native-like attainment of dummy subjects in Dutch and the role of the L1. IRAL, 43, 355–380.Google Scholar
van Wuijtswinkel, K. (1994). Critical period effects in the acquisition of grammatical competence in a second language. The Netherlands: University of Nijmegen.Google Scholar
White, L., & Genesee, F. (1996). How native is near-native? The issue of ultimate attainment in adult second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 12, 233–265.Google Scholar
Williams, L. (1980). Phonetic variation as a function of second-language learning. In Yeni-Komshian, G., Kavanagh, J., & Ferguson, C. (Eds.), Child phonology: Vol. 2. Perception (pp. 185–215). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar