Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!iuvax!merrill
From: merrill@iuvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Language Learning (anecdotes)
Message-ID: <12400012@iuvax>
Date: Tue, 17-Nov-87 08:43:00 EST
Article-I.D.: iuvax.12400012
Posted: Tue Nov 17 08:43:00 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 19-Nov-87 06:20:47 EST
References: <1117@uhccux.UUCP>
Organization: Indiana University CSCI, Bloomington
Lines: 42
Nf-ID: #R:uhccux.UUCP:-111700:iuvax:12400012:000:2071
Nf-From: iuvax.cs.indiana.edu!merrill    Nov 17 08:43:00 1987


marty@houdi.UUCP (M. B. Brilliant) writes:

> Do we recall why I menioned identity crisis, and why another
> contributor mentioned having less time as you grow older?  Because
> somebody suggested that if language learning becomes harder at puberty,
> it must be because of a crystallization process.  If other plausible
> reasons exist, we can't immediately conclude that there is a
> crystallization.

Until now, I've not said anything about the syntactic issue here, but
I think I'll put in my two-cents-worth.  The second of these arguments
doesn't hold water, since some adults transplanted into a foreign
culture...and, therefore, speaking the language constantly...don't
acquire normal linguistic facility.  Certainly practice is essential
in language learning, but it doesn't seem to suffice to explain the
data.

On the other hand, evidence can be offered in support of the identity
crisis theory.  One of the best indicators for whether or not a new
immigrant will learn the language of his or her new home is whether or
not that immigrant believes that s/he is a part of the community.  If
so, then s/he will learn the language; if not, s/he won't.  That's an
oversimplification, of course, but it's largely true.  In other words,
if an adult identifies with a community, then that adult will very
probably be willing to adopt that community's language.

Of course, the situation is not entirely parallel to the identity
crisis of adolescence, but it's similar.  

> If you want to prove crystallization, either you need positive evidence
> of crystallization, or you have to disprove all possible alternatives.
> At any rate, it looks as though if there is a crystallization, it
> probably affects only pronunciation learning, not grammar or vocabulary.

I agree with the first sentence; I'm still not convinced about the
second---but I'm coming around.  What about the acquistion of
colloquial speech?  The usual folk-myth is that non-native speakers
acquire standard vocabulary without acquiring idioms.  Is there any
research about that?

--- John Merrill