Age and Second Language Acquisition

The second language acquisition competences among adults seem to differ significantly from
the way children acquire their first language. This has prompted researchers to on the trail of studying
the development of the Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH).This hypothesis (CPH) is defined by
Brown(2007) as “a biologically determined period of life during which language can be acquired more
easily and beyond which time language becomes increasingly difficult to acquire.”He claims that the
“critical point for second language acquisition occurs around puberty, after which people appear to be
relatively incapable of acquiring a second language”.This has also caused concern among many who
believed that once you reach a certain age level (12-13), you are too old for successful second language
acquisition.

It is essential to understand whether L2 learning capacity declines over time. There have been
relatively few studies that thoroughly investigate SLA achievement in old and young language
learners.According to David Singleton(2004), Seright(1985) points out that only a few studies that deal
with success and age-related issues between young and old learners show that younger learners
outperform adult L2 learners.She also cites d'Anglejan et al1981.'s study of Canadian immigrants
learning French in an intensive language course, which shows how young learners outperformed older
learners, implying that success decreases with age.

On the other hand, there is evidence to support the hypothesis that "the older the better"in
terms of second language acquisition.Singleton, on the other hand, points out that the majority of those
investigations were the result of practical experience.Singleton discusses involving children as at least
one comparison element.Singleton shows that some immigrant studies suggest that L2 learning
improves with age, citing and referring to a 1974 study conducted by Ervin-Tripp of 31 young English-
speaking children who had been exposed to French for nine months.

Studies on older beginners who reach a high degree of L2 proficiency have been published since
the early 1990s.Furthermore, Singleton mentions a study by Bongaerts et al.(1995) on Dutch learners
who began learning English in a classroom setting after the age of twelve.This study found that students
in the classroom were able to achieve native-speaker-like English pronunciation scores. Surprisingly,
even though L2 acquisition started at the age of 12 and in a classroom environment, those students
were still able to achieve a native-like accent.As stated previously, there is evidence that “the younger
the better” is the case, as well as research that show older students will outperform younger
students.Another theory suggests that younger learners are highly effective at developing a native-like
accent in a foreign language.It must be remembered that in order for this to occur, the exposure must
be sufficient.
It's also worth debating whether studying L2 at a young age is safer in the long run.Krashen et al. (1979)
explore this subject further and show the short-term and long-term results in L2 acquisition. They claim
that:

(1) Adults proceed through early stages of syntactic and morphological development faster than children
(where time and exposure are held constant).

(2) Older children acquire faster than younger children (again, in early stages of syntactic and
morphological development where time and exposure are held constant).

(3) Acquirers who begin natural exposure to second languages during childhood generally achieve higher
second language proficiency than those beginning as adults

There seems to be no conclusive proof.In the long term, children learning a second language would
outperform older language learners.Singleton’s conclusion and summary regarding this matter is that it
is not possible to conclude, based on current studies that younger l2 learners are more efficient and
successful language learners than the older ones (Singleton 2004).Studies conducted in a classroom
environment, on the other hand, contradict this hypothesis. As a result, it's difficult to make a long-term
comparison between classroom teaching and natural L2 acquisition outside of a classroom.

Does age really matter in SLA?

The question when is the best age for Second language acquisition seems to be connected with the
amount input or exposure to the target language.Scholars are also trying to find out how age influences
a language learner's ability to communicate when exposure to the target language is inadequate.
Munoz (2010) argues that the amount and the quality of the language input is extremely important to
young learners at the early stages of second language learning. She contrasts the language outcomes of
younger and older language learners, concluding that younger language learners consistently
outperform adults who begin SLA later in life.Similarly, she argues that the findings back up the Critical
Period Hypothesis (CPH) and validate what has previously been reported about the presence of a critical
period of language acquisition and incomplete language acquisition.To expand on this, the clear
evidence supporting the argument that children gain significantly more from participation in the cultural
context, where they are naturally exposed to language input, rather than beginning at a young age in
the classroom environment, shows that children are exposed to higher quality natural input of the
target language.
 According to Larson-Hall (2008), most studies on the critical period seem to favour the theory
that “the younger, the better”.Such studies, on the other hand, were carried out while learners were
active participants and culturally engaged in the target country. The learners were introduced to the
target language on a regular basis and had a lot of opportunities to practice it outside of the
classroom.Researchers agree on the importance of the amount of exposure regarding the critical age of
SLA because there is no guarantee of “the younger the better” when the exposure is minimal. As
discussed by Larson-Hall, children and adults learn language through different strategies and have
different learning abilities. She talks about how young learners learn in an implicit way, which makes
minimal exposure to the target language not enough to form morphological, syntactic or phonological
system. This statement is confirmed when older results are analysed and show that there is no linguistic
advantage of SLA, having in mind “the younger the better” when the exposure is minimal (LarsonHall
2008). However, more recent research into “the earlier, the better” is still inconclusive, and the
emphasis has prompted scholars to look into language exposure and motivational factors further.

To explore further the motivation and attitudes towards learning a second language, Larson-
Hall’s investigation from 2008 suggests that young learners have more positive attitude towards
studying a foreign language (Larson-Hall 2008). In conclusion, the study made by her focused on if there
was any correlation between starting early and high scores in environment that provided minimal input
of exposure to the second language as the debate has often been about how age plays a significant role
in a natural or immersion environments. According to her, this is not always true as she argues that “age
does seem to play a non-negligible role in improving second language acquisition, given that language
learners receive enough input“.Furthermore, while age does play a role in second language acquisition,
it is critical to provide students with adequate exposure to the target language during their learning
process.