SecondLanguageLearningandCognitiveDevelopmentSeminalandRecentWritingintheField

JosephDicks

SecondLanguageResearchInstituteofCanada

UniversityofNewBrunswick

January2009

SecondLanguageLearningandCognitiveDevelopment 1

1

Therelationshipbetweencognitiveabilityandsecondlanguagelearningiscomplexandsubjecttoconsiderabledebateinthefield.In1976,thehighlyrespectedCanadiansecondlanguageeducator,Dr.HH.Stern,warnedagainstthedangerofsimplifyingtheissueofageandsecondlanguagelearning.Sternwrote:

Ondevelopmentalgrounds,eachageinlifeprobablyhasitspeculiaradvantagesanddisadvantagesforlanguagelearning…Inthesixtiesthemistakewasmadeofexpectingmiraclesmerelybystartingyoung.Themiracleshavenotcomeabout.Startinglateisnottheanswereither.

Thisbriefessaywillexaminethistopicthroughanexplorationoftheissueofageandsecondlanguageacquisition,particularlyasagerelatestocognitivematurity.Thequestionofwhetherthereisastartingageoridentifiableperiodduringwhichsecondlanguageacquisitionismoreefficientandeffectiveisreferredtoasa“sensitiveperiod”(Oyama,1979).Thisperiodisbasedonthebeliefthatthereisalanguage‐specificacquisitionprocessthatisseparatefromgeneralcognitivefunctioning.Generally,theargumentisthatthecloserthecommencementoflanguageacquisitionistotheonsetofthesensitiveperiod,themoreefficientlanguageacquisitionwillbe(Long,1990).Thisperiodisgenerallyconsideredtobeendaroundpuberty.Whetherthissensitiveperiodexists,however,isopentodebate.Essentiallytherearethreecamps:(1)thosewhoclaimevidenceexiststoshowchildrenoutperformadultlearners;(2)thosewhobelievethatthereisanadvantageforolderlearnersoverchildren;and(3)thosewhobelievethedataaremixedandambiguous.Infact,thereissometruthinallthreepositions.Therestofthisessaywillexaminethequestionofwhetherandtowhatextentageandmaturityimpedeoradvancethesecondlanguagelearningofyoungchildreninschoolsettings.In1988,CharlesWilliamTwyfordoperatedtheNationalClearinghouseforBilingualEducationandtheSpecialIssuesAnalysisCenterundercontracttotheU.S.DepartmentofEducation.Inanarticleentitled“Age‐RelatedFactorsinSecondLanguageAcquisition”,Twyfordarguedthat“middlechildhood”,definedasaround8‐12yearsofage,wasaparticularlygoodtimeforsecondlanguagedevelopment.Twyford’sthinkingisinlinewiththatofVirginiaCollierwhonotedthatduetothePiagetianshiftfrompreoperationaltoconcreteoperationalstage,aroundtheageof6or7,educatorshavegreatersuccessredirectingthelanguagebehaviorof8‐to12‐year‐oldsthan4to7‐year‐olds(Collier,1987).Collierprovidesevidencefromanumberofresearchstudiesthataround8yearsofagechildrendevelopaconsciousawarenessoflanguagethatallowsthemtothinkaboutit,judgeit,andmanipulateitmuchasadultsdo.Collier(1989,p.517)states:“olderchildren(ages8to12)whohavehadseveralyearsofL1schoolingarethemostefficientacquirersofL2schoollanguage,exceptforpronunciation.”

2

Twyfordconcludesthatbybeingalerttothecognitivevariablesactiveinthechildrenwhoenteranyclassroom,educatorscanbaseinstructiononwhattheindividuallearnersarereadytoaccomplish.In2002,RichardJohnstone,aprofessorattheUniversityofStirling,Scotland,preparedaguidefortheCouncilofEuropeforthedevelopmentoflanguageeducationpoliciesinEurope.Inthatguide,Johnstone(2002,p.13)notesthat,giventheappropriateconditions,youngerlearners(inthiscasedefinedasages6‐9)havethefollowingadvantages:

• theyarelikelytofinditeasiertoacquireagoodcommandofthesoundsystemofthelanguage,notonlythepronunciationofindividualsoundsbutalsopatternsofintonation;

• theyarelikelytobeless‘languageanxious’thanmanyolderlearnersandhence

maybemoreabletoabsorblanguageratherthanblockitout;• theyarelikelytohavemoretimeavailableoverall.Ifyoungbeginnersatage5

arecomparedwitholderbeginnersatage10thenafteroneyeartheoldergrouparelikelytobeahead.However,ifbothgroupsarecomparedat(say)age14,thentheyoungerbeginnersstandabetterchanceofbeingahead,inpartbecauseofthegreateramountoftimeavailableoverall;

• anearlierstartenablesproductivelinkstobemadebetweenfirstand

additionallanguages,whichcanhaveimportantbenefitsforachild’slanguageawarenessandliteracy;

• arangeofacquisitionalprocessescancomeintoplay,e.g.largelyintuitive

processesatanearlyage,complementedbymoreanalyticalprocesseslater.Thispotentiallyallowstheadditionallanguagetobecomemoredeeplyembeddedintheperson;

• therecanbeapositiveinfluenceonchildren’sgeneraleducationaldevelopment

(e.g.cognitive,emotional,cultural)andontheformationofamultilingualandinterculturalidentity.

Johnsonnotes,however,thatolderlearners(age10andabove)alsohavecertainadvantages:Aswellasthefollowingadvantagesforolderlearners:

• theymaybeabletoplottheirnewlanguageontoconceptsabouttheworldwhichtheyalreadypossessfromtheirfirstlanguage.Thiscanhelpgreatlyinvocabularyacquisition,c.f.Ausubel,1964…

• theymaybemoreexperiencedinhandlingthediscourseofconversationsand

otherlanguageactivities,andthusmaybemoreadeptatgainingfeedback

SecondLanguageLearningandCognitiveDevelopment 3

3

fromnativespeakersorteachersandinnegotiatingmeaning,e.g.ScarcellaandHiga,1982;

• theyarelikelytohaveacquiredawiderrangeofstrategiesforlearning,e.g.

note­taking,useofreferencematerials,searchingforunderlyingpattern.This,alliedtotheirestablishedliteracyintheirfirstlanguage,mayhelpthembecomemoreefficientlearners;

• theymayhaveaclearersenseofwhytheyarelearninganadditionallanguage

andmaythereforebeabletoworkpurposefullytowardsobjectivesoftheirownchoosing.

Johnstoneconcludesthat“Inprincipleitisnevertooearlytobegin,butequallyitisnevertoolatetobegin.”Thebigadvantageinstartingearlyisthatonecantapintochildren’sintuitivecapacitiesforsecondlanguageacquisition.Johnsonemphasizes,however,thatinsuchcasesitisimportanttoprovidesufficienttimetoallowforinputandinteractionandarangeofcross‐curricularactivitiesIn2008,RobertVanderplank,directoroftheLanguageCentreatOxfordUniversity,arguedinanarticlewrittenintheJournalAppliedLinguisticsthatmiddlechildhood,inthiscasedefinedastheperiodfromages5to9yearsofage,isinmanywaysmoreconducivetoschool‐basedlanguagelearningthatearlierorlaterperiods.Vander‐plankassertsthatbetweenages5and9childrenpossesscertainattributesthatenhancesecondlanguagelearning:

1) developingadultlikememory–theabilitytomemorizeconsciously,bothverballyandvisually,thenretainandrecallthisinaflexibleway(Wood,1998)

2) aninnervoiceandmind’seye:innervoiceorinnerspeech(Vygotsky,1986)developsduringtheperiodfrom5to9years–thisinnervoiceallowsonetouselanguageasatoolforthinking.The“mind’seye”allowschildrentolearnandrecallinrandomorder(theydonotneedtorelyonsongsandnurseryrhymesforsequencesandstringsofwords).

3) Makingconnections:forexample,theconceptofwordasdistinctfrommeaningdoesnotappeartobefullydevelopeduntilage6or7.

Vanderplankmaintainsthatagreatdealoflanguagedevelopmentoccursinmiddlechildhoodandthatthisiscloselylinkedtoschooling.Vanderplankwrites:“Astheysteadilydeveloptheknowledge,skillsandattributesdescribedabove,childrenarebecomingmorelikeadults,equippedwiththecognitiveandlinguistictoolsforundertakinglargelearningtasks,reflectingontheirknowledgeandexperience.”p.719

4

Vanderplankconcludesthat:Inthefivetonineperiod,childrenareintheprocessofgainingmasteryovertheirlanguage,learningthroughsocialinteraction,developinglanguageskillswithexplicitsupportfromteachers,parentsandothers,practicingtheseskillsagreatdealtothepointwheretheybecomeinternalizedandavailableforinstantuse.…Theimportanceofthe5to9periodisthatlanguagedevelopmentisnotjustamatterofnurture,althoughschoolingobviouslydominatesmostchildren’slives.Duringthisperiod…therearealsocriticaldevelopmentalmilestoneswhicharerecognizedintheL1literaturebutaremissingfromtheL2literature.Achievingthesemilestonesenableschildrentobecomeadultlanguagelearnerslateron.Thisbrieflookatseminalandrecentwritingsonage,cognitiveabilityandsecondlanguagelearningclearlyshowsthattheissueiscomplexanddeservescarefulconsideration.Thereare,clearly,asSternindicated,advantagesforsecondlanguagelearnersofdifferentages.Inparticular,evidencefromcognitivepsychologyandschoolsettingssupportsthepositionthatmiddlechildhoodisapropitiousperiodforschool‐basedsecondlanguagelearning.REFERENCES:Ausubel,D.(1964).Adultsversuschildreninsecond‐languagelearning:psychologicalconsiderations.TheModernLanguageJournal.,48.Collier,V.P.(1987).Ageandrateofacquisitionofsecondlanguageforacademicpurposes.TESOLQuarterly,21,617‐641.CollierV.P.(1989)HowLong?Asynthesisofresearchonacademicachievementinasecondlanguage.TESOLQuarterly23,3,509‐531Johnstone,R.2002.Addressing“TheAgeFactor”:SomeImplicationsforLanguagePolicy”CouncilofEurope.Strasbourg.Long,M.(1990).Maturationalconstraintsonlanguagedevelopment.StudiesonSecondLanguageAcquisition.12,251‐285.Oyama,S.(1979)Theconceptofthesensitiveperiodindevelopmentalstudies.Merrill­PalmerQuarterly,25,83‐103.ScarcellaR.&Higa,C.1982.Inputandagedifferencesinsecondlanguageacquisition.In:Krashen,S.,ScarcellaR.,Long,M.(Eds.)Child‐adultdifferencesinsecondlanguageacquisition.Rowley,Mass:NewburyHouse

SecondLanguageLearningandCognitiveDevelopment 5

5

Stern,H.H.1976.Optimumage:mythorreality?CanadianModernLanguageReview,32.Twyford,C.W.1988.AgeRelatedFactorsinSecondLanguageAcquisition.OccasionalPapersinBilingualEducation.TheNewFocus.No.2.NationalClearinghouseforBilingualEducationVanderplank,R.2008.TheSignificanceofFirstlanguageDevelopmentinFivetoNineYearOldChildrenforSecondandForeignLanguageLearning.AppliedLinguisticsVygotsky,L.1986.ThoughtandLanguage.Cambridge.MA.MITPress.Wood,D.1998.HowChildrenThinkandLearn.Oxford:Blackwell.