Evaluación docente 2
-
Upload
maria-soledad-urquillo -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
2
description
Transcript of Evaluación docente 2
![Page 1: Evaluación docente 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.es/reader035/viewer/2022073020/577cc05b1a28aba7118fcf06/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
CLL Session 8:Age effects in SLA
LAEL, Lancaster UniversityFlorencia Franceschina
![Page 2: Evaluación docente 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.es/reader035/viewer/2022073020/577cc05b1a28aba7118fcf06/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
1. Some observable facts
A. Older is better in the short term
B. Younger is better in the long term
C. Even very extensive exposure does not guarantee native-like attainment
![Page 3: Evaluación docente 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.es/reader035/viewer/2022073020/577cc05b1a28aba7118fcf06/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Older is better
Older learners have been observed to have an advantage in terms of rate of acquisition in the initial stages of SLA, both
– In naturalistic settings(e.g., Snow and Hoefnagel-Hoehle, 1978)
– In instructed settings(e.g., six studies in Garcia-Mayo and Garcia-Lecumberri, 2003)
![Page 4: Evaluación docente 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.es/reader035/viewer/2022073020/577cc05b1a28aba7118fcf06/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Snow and Hoefnagel-Hoehle (1978)
L1 English / L2 DutchImmersionTasks: Pronunciation, auditory discrimination, morphology, sentence
repetition, sentence translation, sentence judgement, story comprehension, Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test
Findings: After 3 months’ residence: adults and adolescents outperformed
children on tests After 10 months’ residence: the children caught up
![Page 5: Evaluación docente 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.es/reader035/viewer/2022073020/577cc05b1a28aba7118fcf06/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Garcia-Lecumberri and Gallardo (2003)
L1 Spanish/Basque / L2 EnglishInstructional settingStart age: 4, 8, 11Mean time-span of exposure: 6 years for allTasks: vowel/consonant discrimination, spoken production (measures of
intelligibility, degree of foreign accent, overall performance)Most results indicate an advantage for the late starters
![Page 6: Evaluación docente 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.es/reader035/viewer/2022073020/577cc05b1a28aba7118fcf06/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Younger is better
Immigrant studies have shown that there is a negative correlation between age of arrival (AoA) and level of L2 attainment
Examples:- Oyama (1976, 1978)- Patkowski (1980)- Johnson and Newport (1989)- Hyltenstam (1992)
![Page 7: Evaluación docente 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.es/reader035/viewer/2022073020/577cc05b1a28aba7118fcf06/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Long exposure does not guarantee success
Example:
Coppieters (1987) 21 L2 French nearnatives LoR in France: 5.5-37 years task: intuitions about grammar none of them was within the NS range
![Page 8: Evaluación docente 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.es/reader035/viewer/2022073020/577cc05b1a28aba7118fcf06/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Other differences between adult and child SLA
Younger and older learners make different types of mistakes in certain areas
Example: Lasagaster and Doiz (2003)
written production, L2 English11/15/17 year-olds - younger learners make more spelling mistakes- younger learners resort to codeswitching more often- older learners make more tense mistakes, but they use more complex language than the younger ones
![Page 9: Evaluación docente 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.es/reader035/viewer/2022073020/577cc05b1a28aba7118fcf06/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
2. Accounts of age effects
Critical period
vs.
General age factors
![Page 10: Evaluación docente 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.es/reader035/viewer/2022073020/577cc05b1a28aba7118fcf06/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH)
Lenneberg’s original formulation (1967)
Evidence: – Recovery from brain damage (Lenneberg, 1967)– Feral children (e.g., Genie - Curtiss, 1977)– Late FLA in deaf signers (Mayberry, 1993)
![Page 11: Evaluación docente 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.es/reader035/viewer/2022073020/577cc05b1a28aba7118fcf06/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Exercise: Who are these people? Which one is the odd
one out? Why?
Victor of Aveyron Kaspar Hauser Kamala and Amala Ivan Mishukov
![Page 12: Evaluación docente 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.es/reader035/viewer/2022073020/577cc05b1a28aba7118fcf06/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
General age factors
Example:
Bialystok (1997), Bialystok and Hakuta (1994)argue against a cut-off point, and for a continuous decline of language learning abilities
![Page 13: Evaluación docente 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.es/reader035/viewer/2022073020/577cc05b1a28aba7118fcf06/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
ReferencesBialystok, E. 1997: The structure of age: in search of barriers to SLA. Second Language Research 13, 2: 116-137.Bialystok, E. and K. Hakuta. 1994: In other words: the science and psychology of second language acquisition. New York:
Basic Books.Coppieters, R. 1987: Competence differences between native and near-native speakers. Language 63, 544-573.Curtiss, S. 1977: Genie: a psycholinguistic study of a modern-day "wild child". New York: Academic Press.Garcia Lecumberri, M. L. and F. Gallardo. 2003: English FL sounds in school learners of different ages, in M. D. P. Garcia
Mayo and M. L. Garcia Lecumberri, eds. Age and the acquisition of English as a foreign language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Pp. 115-135.
Garcia Mayo, M. D. P. and M. L. Garcia Lecumberri. (eds.) 2003: Age and the acquisition of English as a foreign language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Hyltenstam, K. 1992: Non-native features of near-native speakers. On the ultimate attainment of childhood L2 learners, in R. J. Harris, ed. Cognitive processing in bilinguals. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Pp. 351-368.
Johnson, J. and E. Newport. 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.
![Page 14: Evaluación docente 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.es/reader035/viewer/2022073020/577cc05b1a28aba7118fcf06/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
References
Lasagabaster, D. and A. Doiz. 2003: Maturational constraints on foreign language written production, in M. D. P. Garcia Mayo and M. L. Garcia Lecumberri, eds. Age and the acquisition of English as a foreign language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Pp. 136-160.
Lenneberg, E. H. 1967: Biological foundations of language. New York: John Wiley.Mayberry, R. I. 1993: First language acquisition after childhood differs from second language acquisition: the case of ASL.
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 36, 1258-1270.Oyama, S. 1976: A sensitive period for the acquisition of a non-native phonological system. Journal of Psycholinguistic
Research 5, 3: 261-283.Oyama, S. 1978: The sensitive period and comprehension of speech. Working Papers on Bilingualism 16, 1-17.Patkowski, M. 1980: The sensitive period for the acquisition of syntax in a second language. Language Learning 30, 449-
472.Snow, C. E. and M. Hoefnagel-Hoehle. 1978: The critical period for language acquisition: evidence from second language
learning. Child Development 49, 1114-1128.
![Page 15: Evaluación docente 2](https://reader035.fdocuments.es/reader035/viewer/2022073020/577cc05b1a28aba7118fcf06/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Reading
Singleton, D. 1995: Introduction: a critical look at the Critical Period Hypothesis in SLA research. In D. Singleton and Z. Lengyel (eds.): The age factor in second language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Pp. 1-29.