当前位置:
X-MOL 学术
›
Lang. Learn.
›
论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Critical Period Claim Revisited: Reanalysis of Hartshorne, Tenenbaum, and Pinker (2018) Suggests Steady Decline and Learner-Type Differences
Language Learning ( IF 5.240 ) Pub Date : 2021-09-07 , DOI: 10.1111/lang.12470 Frans Slik 1, 2 , Job Schepens 3 , Theo Bongaerts 1 , Roeland Hout 1
Language Learning ( IF 5.240 ) Pub Date : 2021-09-07 , DOI: 10.1111/lang.12470 Frans Slik 1, 2 , Job Schepens 3 , Theo Bongaerts 1 , Roeland Hout 1
Affiliation
A reanalysis of data drawn by Hartshorne, Tenenbaum, and Pinker (2018) from two-thirds of a million English speakers showed that their overall conclusion of one sharply defined critical age at 17.4 for all language learners is based on artificial results. We show that instead of a discontinuous exponential learning with sigmoidal decay (ELSD) model, a continuous ELSD model had a better fit when applied separately to monolinguals, bilinguals, and early immersion learners. Only for nonimmersion learners and later immersion learners did a discontinuous ELSD model have a better fit, with a critical age of 18.6 and 19.0 years of age, respectively. These age effects can be interpreted as schooling effects. We suggest that personal and societal factors, including differences in living circumstances and socialization, may bring about age-specific discontinuity patterns in language learning and in language learning rate. The implication is that they are not the outcome of cognition-driven developmental factors leading to one or more critical periods.
中文翻译:
重新审视关键期索赔:对 Hartshorne、Tenenbaum 和 Pinker (2018) 的重新分析表明稳步下降和学习者类型差异
Hartshorne、Tenenbaum 和 Pinker(2018 年)从 100 万英语使用者中的三分之二中提取的数据重新分析表明,他们对所有语言学习者在 17.4 岁这一明确定义的临界年龄的总体结论是基于人为的结果。我们表明,与使用 sigmoidal 衰减 (ELSD) 模型的不连续指数学习不同,连续 ELSD 模型在分别应用于单语、双语和早期沉浸式学习者时具有更好的拟合度。只有对于非沉浸式学习者和后来的沉浸式学习者,不连续的 ELSD 模型具有更好的拟合度,临界年龄分别为 18.6 岁和 19.0 岁。这些年龄效应可以解释为学校教育效应。我们认为个人和社会因素,包括生活环境和社会化的差异,可能会导致语言学习和语言学习率的年龄特异性不连续模式。这意味着它们不是导致一个或多个关键时期的认知驱动的发展因素的结果。
更新日期:2021-09-07
中文翻译:
重新审视关键期索赔:对 Hartshorne、Tenenbaum 和 Pinker (2018) 的重新分析表明稳步下降和学习者类型差异
Hartshorne、Tenenbaum 和 Pinker(2018 年)从 100 万英语使用者中的三分之二中提取的数据重新分析表明,他们对所有语言学习者在 17.4 岁这一明确定义的临界年龄的总体结论是基于人为的结果。我们表明,与使用 sigmoidal 衰减 (ELSD) 模型的不连续指数学习不同,连续 ELSD 模型在分别应用于单语、双语和早期沉浸式学习者时具有更好的拟合度。只有对于非沉浸式学习者和后来的沉浸式学习者,不连续的 ELSD 模型具有更好的拟合度,临界年龄分别为 18.6 岁和 19.0 岁。这些年龄效应可以解释为学校教育效应。我们认为个人和社会因素,包括生活环境和社会化的差异,可能会导致语言学习和语言学习率的年龄特异性不连续模式。这意味着它们不是导致一个或多个关键时期的认知驱动的发展因素的结果。