Download - Search

104 GARY M. JONESregard to short-term attainment, the picture is more confused. Hobvcvcr, the Iialanceof evidence docs sccm to indicate an initial advantage for oldcr learners at least as faras grammatical dcvclopmcnt is conccrncd.(Singleton, 1989: 122)Dcspite his extensive research on the sulijcct, Singleton remains undecided about thebenefits of one approach over thr other:(1) The a\ailablc e\ idcncc doc5 not consistcntl: \upport the hJpothcsis that youngcrsecond language learner? arc gloliall~ more cfhcicnt and ruccc5sful than oldcrlearners.(2) Nor 15 it possililc to conclude from the (x\itlcnce that oldcr second languagelearners arc glol)all! more cfhc lent and 5ucccssfuI than Joungcr learners(Singleton, 1989: 138)Although Singleton docs not favour cithcr an carl! or late start, he does suggest thatCuinmins’s RICS/CALI’ distinction rcconcilcs contradictions in the cviclcncc aliout agerelateddifferences among second language learners, citing Cummins’s o\vn proposals:the older learners, \vhosc‘ CALP is Iwttcr tlcvelopcd, \voultl acquire cognitive/academic I .2 skills more rapidly than youngcr learners; however, this \vould notnecessarily he the case for those aspccts of L2 proficicncp unrclatccl to CAI,P(i.c. L2 BICS).(Cummins, 1979. In Singleton, 1989: 1 1 3)This lcntls support to the type of sul3jcct division rccommcndctl earlier for Brunei,with the study of cognitivcly untlcmantling, cont~~xt-crnl~c~l~lc‘tl suhjccts precedingcognitively demanding, context-rcduccd subjects.The majority of Bruncians u.ho voluntccrcd a reply to the question’ Are there anj.comments thatyou udd like to make ahout Dri,ihuhusci!’ in a national attitude questionnaire that\\-as concluded rccrntly suggested that more English should h c introduced at an earlier age.It \voultl lie \cry cas! to dismiss such suggestions as Iicing uninformed and subjective, butI think that this \vould bc \\rang and a misjudgcnicnt of‘ the rcspontlcnts.Rruncians havc hcen exposed to a varicty 01’ school tcms.’l‘hcrr can bc little doubt,ho\vevcr, that the Bruneians who arc most at case \vith the English language arc those whoattcndcd English-medium mission schools at an earl! age. Some of thcsc pcoplc continuedtheir education in the mission schools ivhilc others \vent on to government schools. In eithercase, an advantage seems to have Iiccn tlcrivctl from early cxposurc- to English. Of course,an ability with English \voultl also he tlcpcndent upon factors outsidr school, especiallylanguages iisetl in the home, and it can I>c assumed that many parents \vho sent their childrento English-medium mission schools \z oultl themselves very prohalily usc English at home.But this would not havc been the case for all familics. The English language abilitj ofgraduates from such schools is takcn as cvitlcncc Iiy Bt-uncians that early exposure to Englishresults in ticttcr acquisition of the 1anguagc.This conclusion ma! bc subjective, hut in Bruneiit is accepted as self-evident and is the most commonly cited reason given 1iy Rruncianparents \vho can afford it for sending their chiltlren to English-mctlium kindergartens.Although research \voultl obviously haw to lie undertaken to provc the point, my ownimprrssion fi-om oliscrvations in Brunei is that as \vcll as phonological atlvantagcs, earlyexposure to English also appears to result in a greater cor$dencc among learners in actually