Reflection #4

Why do you think that it is so difficult for researchers to agree on the CPH (Critical Period Hypothesis). Give explicit examples from the readings. Also give examples from your own experience.

The CPH claims that there is a biological timetable for acquiring a language. It was first annoted towards first language acquistion but later considered into 2nd language learning. It states that there is a biologically determined period of life when language can be acquired more easily and beond which time language is increasingly difficult to acquire. Researchers have found it difficult to agree on the CPH because there has been casese that question the theory. In the reading it states that after 12 or 13 you are considered "over the hill" to be successful in second language learning. This would make me question the theory because I have seen many cases among my friends and family who have been older and have been successful in learning a second language. What is considered successful? They have succeded in learning the language however they have not lost their accent. The chapter puts an emphasis on accent as having a role as a component of success. Accent to me is the least importance as a mean of success as long as it does not affect communication. There was a discussion on accents and how everyone has an accent and how we adjust our accents accordingly to our environments. I personally feel that it is easier to acquire a language when you are at an infant stage because you are free to explore the language and play with it before actually learning the academic structure but that does not mean that you will not be able to learn a new language after a certain age. There are many factors that come into play. Motiviation, necessity, willingness, etc. can also be considered when learning a language. I would be more motivated to learn Italian because I would want to go to Spain and because Spanish is related to Italian than learning another foreign language.