关键期假设
critical period hypothesis
biolinguistics hypothesis that claims a person can only achieve native-like fluency in a language before a certain age
关键期假设 是一个长期存在争论的假说,关于人是否存在一个语言学习的关键年龄段。 该假说一般认为,存在一个理想时期更容易受语言环境影响从而比其他时间更容易学习一门语言。关键期假设认为,生命的最初几年是关键时期,在足够的刺激下,人都能习得第一语言。如果超过这个时期,语言的学习将会非常困难,特别是在语法方面。然而事实上这种说法目前在学界仍然只是一种假说,各方学者对此仍有许多批评争议,未有定论。
摘自维基百科「關鍵期假說」,CC BY-SA 4.0
- 类型
- 假说
百科正文
英文维基百科补充中文条目比较短,下面是英文条目「Critical period hypothesis」的原文
The critical period hypothesis is a hypothesis within the field of linguistics and second language acquisition that claims a person can achieve native-like fluency in a language only before a certain age. It is the subject of a long-standing debate in linguistics and language acquisition over the extent to which the ability to acquire language is biologically linked to developmental stages of the brain. The critical period hypothesis was first proposed by Montreal neurologist Wilder Penfield and co-author Lamar Roberts in their 1959 book Speech and Brain Mechanisms, and was popularized by Eric Lenneberg in 1967 with Biological Foundations of Language.
The critical period hypothesis states that the first few years of life is the crucial time in which an individual can acquire a first language if presented with adequate stimuli, and that first-language acquisition relies on neuroplasticity of the brain. If language input does not occur until after this time, the individual will never achieve a full command of language. There is much debate over the timing of the critical period with respect to second-language acquisition (SLA), with estimates ranging between 2 and 13 years of age.
The critical period hypothesis is derived from the concept of a critical period in the biological sciences, which refers to a set period in which an organism must acquire a skill or ability, or said organism will not be able to acquire it later in life. Strictly speaking, the experimentally verified critical period relates to a time span during which damage to the development of the visual system can occur, for example if animals are deprived of the necessary binocular input for developing stereopsis.
Preliminary research into the critical period hypothesis investigated Lateralization of brain function as a possible neurological cause; however, this theoretical cause was largely discredited since lateralization does not necessarily increase with age, and no definitive link between language learning ability and lateralization was ever determined. A more general hypothesis holds that the critical period for language acquisition is linked to the interaction of the prolonged development of the human brain after birth and rearing in a socio-linguistic environment. Based on studies of the critical period for development of the visual system, this hypothesis holds that language-specific neural networks in the brain are constructed by the functional validation of synapses that are specifically activated by exposure to a linguistic environment early in life. Humans are uniquely capable of language due to the genetically determined size and complexity of the brain and the long period of postnatal development, during which the environment can select neuronal circuits that facilitate language.
Recently, it has been suggested that if a critical period does exist, it may be due at least partially to the delayed development of the prefrontal cortex in human children. Researchers have suggested that delayed development of the prefrontal cortex and an associated delay in the development of cognitive control may facilitate convention learning, allowing young children to learn language far more easily than cognitively mature adults and older children. This pattern of prefrontal development is unique to humans among similar mammalian (and primate) species, and may explain why humans—and not chimpanzees—are so adept at learning language.
以上节选摘自英文维基百科「Critical period hypothesis」,按 CC BY-SA 4.0 使用,去掉了参考文献、外部链接等尾部小节,公式改写成了纯文本。篇幅所限,较长的小节只摘了开头一部分,有的小节没有收;全文、配图和出处见原文。