LSD Project
LSD Project
SCIENCES (AIPS)
Language Development
A child’s vocabulary expands between the ages of two to six from about 200 words
to over 10,000 words through a process called fast-mapping. Words are easily
learned by making connections between new words and concepts already
known. The parts of speech that are learned depend on the language and what is
emphasized. Children speaking verb-friendly languages such as Chinese and
Japanese tend to learn verbs more readily, but those learning less verb-friendly
languages such as English seem to need assistance in grammar to master the use of
verbs (Imai, et als, 2008). Children are also very creative in creating their own
words to use as labels such as a “take-care-of” when referring to John, the
character on the cartoon Garfield, who takes care of the cat.
1) Health
Healthy children learn faster than children who do not speak well, because
motivation is stronger for being a member of social groups and communicating
with others. If the first two years of age, children experience constant pain,
children consider experience slowness or difficulty in the development of their
discussion.
2) Intelligence
Children who have high intelligence to learn, speak more quickly and demonstrate
mastery of the language than children who’s in low level of intelligence.
4) Family Relations
Healthy relationships between parents and children will be an opportunity for the
development of children's language, whereas an unhealthy relationship will result
in the children to experience difficulties or delays in language development.
5) Family Size
Single child or children from small families usually speak earlier and better than
children from large families. Because parents can set aside more time to teach their
children to speak.
RESEARCH….
The Critical Period Hypothesis in Second Language Acquisition: A
Statistical Critique and a Reanalysis
According to the critical period hypothesis (CPH), there is a non-linear relationship
between learners' age and their ability to learn a second language. This paper
addresses the lack of clarity in the literature about the scope and predictions of this
hypothesis. Even when its scope is clearly defined and its predictions are spelt out.
Typically, empirical studies use analytical (statistical) tools that are not relevant to
their predictions. This paper addresses common statistical flaws in CPH research
and presents an alternative analytical method (piecewise regression) through a
reanalysis of two datasets from a 2010 paper that claimed to find crosslinguistic
evidence in favor of the CPH.
This reanalysis shows that the CPH's predicted age patterns are not robust across
languages. According to the principle of parsimony, age patterns in second
language acquisition do not follow a critical period. This paper emphasises the
importance of confirmation bias in scientific research and encourages second
language acquisition researchers to re-analyze their old datasets using the methods
presented. Supplementary materials include the reanalyzed data and R commands.
Conclusion
For first language acquisition, the critical period is generally recognized to be in
early childhood, with some researchers suggesting that the window may begin to
close around puberty. During this time, the brain is thought to be particularly
plastic or adaptable to language learning. Second language acquisition also seems
to be influenced by a critical period, though the specifics can vary. Some
researchers propose that there is a sensitive period for acquiring a second language
that extends into adolescence, while others argue that the critical period may
continue into early adulthood. It's important to note that the critical period
hypothesis is a theoretical concept and not an absolute rule. There are individuals
who can successfully learn languages outside of these proposed critical periods.
Factors such as motivation, exposure, and individual differences also play
significant roles in language acquisition.