This article discusses the Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH) as it relates to the naturalistic acquisition of foreign-language (L2) pronunciation by adults and children. An examination of the existing empirical and theoretical literature leads to the conclusion that there is no conclusive support for the existence of a critical period for human speech learning, and that assuming a critical period does exist may inhibit the search for testable hypotheses concerning the basis for observed adult-child differences in L2 pronunciation. These conclusions are based on the existence of direct counter-evidence, as well as on the observation that apparent adult-child performance differences may arise from many different confounding factors other than adult-child differences in neurological maturation or organization that cannot be adequately controlled in behavioral research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
James Emil Flege (1987) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: