Second Language Acquisition and Second ... - Stephen Krashen
Second Language Acquisition and Second ... - Stephen Krashen
Second Language Acquisition and Second ... - Stephen Krashen
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
second language acquisition in adult <strong>and</strong> one which could imply lowered<br />
expectancies on the part of both teachers <strong>and</strong> students.<br />
Since 1967, however, there have been some encouraging research reports. While<br />
there seems to be no question that puberty is an important turning point in language<br />
acquisition (see, for example, Seliger, <strong>Krashen</strong>, <strong>and</strong> Ladefoged, 1975), it is not at all<br />
clear that the development of cerebral dominance is directly related. <strong>Second</strong>,<br />
alternative explanations are available to explain child-adult differences,<br />
explanations that are far more encouraging than the biological one. We will first<br />
briefly review the "state of research" over the last decade on the question of the<br />
development of cerebral dominance, <strong>and</strong> then review one of these alternative<br />
explanations.<br />
Simply, it is no longer clear that the development of cerebral dominance is complete<br />
at puberty. There are now arguments supporting the position that lateralization is<br />
"firmly established" much earlier, at least by age 5, <strong>and</strong> that the preconditions for<br />
lateralization may be present even at birth. Below, we briefly summarize the<br />
experimental <strong>and</strong> clinical literature that has appeared on this topic in the last few<br />
years. As we shall see, most of the reports support "early" lateralization. There are,<br />
however, some apparent inconsistencies that we discuss below.<br />
1. Dichotic listening. Witelson (1977) has reviewed all known studies using dichotic<br />
listening with children <strong>and</strong> concludes that "... of 36 experiments, 30, or about 83 per<br />
cent, reported right-ear superiority for their youngest subgroups, <strong>and</strong> all found rightear<br />
superiority in at least older subgroups" (p. 230) (where "younger" indicates from<br />
about age 3 to about 7). Studies evaluating developmental trends usually report no<br />
increase in degree of lateralization over time (age), supporting the hypothesis that<br />
language lateralization is firmly established far earlier than puberty, A few studies,<br />
however, do in fact report an increasing right-ear advantage up to about puberty,<br />
consistent with Lenneberg's position. What is interesting about these studies (e.g.<br />
Satz, Bakker, Teunissen, Goebel, <strong>and</strong> Van der Vlugt, 1975) is that the stimuli used<br />
for dichotic presentation were slightly different from the stimuli used in studies that<br />
report no change in degree of lateralization with increasing age. In the "puberty"<br />
studies, the children were presented with two or three sets of digits at one time<br />
73