A Critical Examination of the Beliefs about Learning a Foreign Language at Primary School

would allow the child to switch from one language to another without 'confusion,
without translation, without a mother tongue accent'.

The concept of a critical period for language learning was further developed by
Lenneberg (1967) in his 'critical period hypothesis' (CPH). In his studies on
cerebral injuries and the Iateralisation of brain functions he found that unlike
children, adults could not transfer language functions between the two brain
hemispheres. Lenneberg linked the completion of brain Iateralisation to the
onset of puberty which marked the end of the 'critical period' for language
learning. Like Penfield's work, Lenneberg¹S work was also carried out in the
context offirst language acquisition and like Penfield, he subsequently claimed
a 'biological clock' and a critical period for the learning of a second language:

"... automatic acquisition from mere exposure to a given language seems to
disappear after this age, and foreign languages have to be taught and learned
through a conscious and labored effort." (Lenneberg, 1967: 176).

Although he recognised that 'most individuals of average intelligence are able to
Ieam a second language after the beginning Oftheirsecond decade', he argued
that:

"...the incidence of "language learning blocks" rapid у increases after puberty
and foreign accents cannot easily be over∞me." (Lenneberg, 1967: 176).

In other words, while language acquisition outside the critical period might not
be entirely impossible, it would be qualitatively different, less natural and less

63

<<   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   >>

More intriguing information