Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-hp6zs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-17T14:06:13.240Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE ROBUSTNESS OF APTITUDE EFFECTS IN NEAR-NATIVE SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2008

Niclas Abrahamsson  and
Kenneth Hyltenstam
Niclas Abrahamsson*
Affiliation:
Stockholm University
Kenneth Hyltenstam
Affiliation:
Stockholm University
*
Niclas Abrahamsson, Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden; e-mail: niclas.abrahamsson@biling.su.se
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Results from a number of recent studies suggest that nativelike adult second language (L2) learners possess a high degree of language learning aptitude, the positive effects of which may have compensated for the negative effects of a critical period in these learners. According to the same studies, child learners seem to attain a nativelike command of the L2 regardless of high or low aptitude, which has led researchers to conclude that this factor plays no role in early acquisition. The present study investigates the L2 proficiency and language aptitude of 42 near-native L2 speakers of Swedish (i.e., individuals whom actual mother-tongue speakers of Swedish believe are native speakers). The results confirm previous research suggesting that a high degree of language aptitude is required if adult learners are to reach a L2 proficiency that is indistinguishable from that of native speakers. However, in contrast to previous studies, the present results also identify small yet significant aptitude effects in child SLA. Our findings lead us to the conclusions that the rare nativelike adult learners sometimes observed would all turn out to be exceptionally talented language learners with an unusual ability to compensate for maturational effects and, consequently, that their nativelikeness per se does not constitute a reason to reject the critical period hypothesis.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 30 , Issue 4 , December 2008 , pp. 481 - 509
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Abrahamsson, N. & Hyltenstam, K., (in press). Age of acquisition and nativelikeness in a second language: Listener perception vs. linguistic scrutiny. Language Learning.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1997). The structure of age: In search of barriers of second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 13, 116–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. (2002). On the reliability of robustness: A reply to DeKeyser. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 481–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. & Hakuta, K. (1999). Confounded age: Linguistic and cognitive factors in age differences for second language acquisition. In Birdsong, D. (Ed.), Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis (pp. 161–181). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (1992). Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Language, 68, 706–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D. (1999). Introduction: Whys and why nots of the critical period hypothesis for second language acquisition. In Birdsong, D. (Ed.), Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis (pp. 1–22). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2005a). Interpreting age effects in second language acquisition. In Kroll, J. & De Groot, A. (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic perspectives (pp. 109–127). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2005b). Nativelikeness and non-nativelikeness in L2A research. IRAL, 43, 319–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2006). Age and second language acquisition and processing: A selective overview. Language Learning, 56, 9–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2007). Nativelike pronunciation among late learners of French as a second language. In Bohn, O.-S. & Munro, M. J. (Eds.), Language experience in second language speech learning: In honor of James Emil Flege (pp. 99–116). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. & Molis, M. (2001). On the evidence for maturational constraints in second-language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 235–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R. (1988). The fundamental character of foreign language learning. In Rutherford, W. & Smith, M. Sharwood (Eds.), Grammar and second language teaching: A book of readings (pp. 133–159). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R. (1989). What is the logical problem of foreign language learning? In Gass, S. M. & Schachter, J. (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 41–68). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bongaerts, T. (1999). Ultimate attainment in L2 pronunciation: The case of very advanced late L2 learners. In Birdsong, D. (Ed.), Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis (pp. 133–159). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bongaerts, T., van Summeren, C., Planken, B., & Schils, E. (1997). Age and ultimate attainment in the pronunciation of a foreign language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 447–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, Y.G. (2000). The age effect in second language acquisition: Is it too late to acquire native-level competence in a second language after the age of seven? In Oshima-Takane, Y., Shirai, Y., & Sirai, H. (Eds.), Studies in language sciences (Vol. 1, pp. 159–169). Tokyo: The Japanese Society for Language Sciences.Google Scholar
Carroll, J.B. (1973). Implications of aptitude test research and psycholinguistic theory for foreign-language teaching. International Journal of Psycholingistics, 2, 5–14.Google Scholar
Carroll, J.B. (1981). Twenty-five years of research in foreign language aptitude. In Diller, K. C. (Ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude (pp. 83–118). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Carroll, J.B. & Sapon, S. (1959). Modern Language Aptitude Test: Form A. New York: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Colantoni, L. & Steele, J. (2006). Native-like attainment in the L2 acquisition of Spanish stop-liquid clusters. In Klee, C. A. & Face, T. L. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 7th Conference on the Acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese as First and Second Languages (pp. 59–73). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Cranshaw, A. (1997). A study of Anglophone native and near-native linguistic and metalinguistic performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R.M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 499–533.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. & Skehan, P. (2003). Individual differences in second language learning. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. H. (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 612–630). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ekberg, L. (1998). Regeltillämpning kontra lexikonkunskap i svenskan hos invandrarbarn i Malmö [Rule application versus lexical knowledge in the Swedish of immigrant children in Malmoe]. In Møller, J., Quist, P., Holmen, A., & Jørgensen, J. N. (Eds.), Nordiske sprog som andetsprog (pp. 99–116). Copenhagen: Institut for humanistiske fag, Danmarks Lærerhøjskole.Google Scholar
Ekberg, L. (2004). Grammatik och lexikon i svenska som andraspråk på nästan infödd nivå [Grammar and lexicon in Swedish as a second language at the near-native level]. In Hyltenstam, K. & Lindberg, I. (Eds.), Svenska som andraspråk: I forskning, undervisning och samhälle (pp. 221–258). Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
Felix, S. (1985). More evidence on competing cognitive systems. Second Language Research, 1, 47–72.Google Scholar
Flege, J.E., Yeni-Komshian, G.H., & Liu, S. (1999). Age constraints on second-language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 78–104.Google Scholar
Geschwind, N. & Galaburda, A.M. (1985). Cerebral lateralization: Biological mechanisms, associations, and pathology, I–III. A hypothesis and a program for research. Archives of Neurology, 42, 428–459, 521–552, 634–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilleece, L.F. (2006). An empirical investigation of the association between musical aptitude and foreign language aptitude. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Dublin, Trinity College.Google Scholar
Gregg, K.R. (1996). The logical and developmental problems of second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. C. & Bhatia, T. K. (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 49–81). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Grigorenko, E.L., Sternberg, R.J., & Ehrman, M.E. (2000). A theory-based approach to the measurement of foreign language learning ability: The Canal-F theory and test. Modern Language Journal, 84, 390–405.Google Scholar
Harley, B. & Hart, D. (1997). Language aptitude and second language proficiency in classroom learners of different starting ages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 379–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harley, B. & Hart, D. (2002). Age, aptitude, and second language learning on a bilingual exchange. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 302–330). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hene, B. (1993). Utlandsadopterade barns och svenska barns ordförståelse: En jämförelse mellan barn i åldern 10–12 år [Internationally adopted children's and Swedish children's word comprehension: A comparison of children aged 10–12 years]. SPRINS-gruppen 41. Göteborg, Sweden: Göteborgs Universitet.Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. (1992). Non-native features of near-native speakers: On the ultimate attainment of childhood L2 learners. In Harris, R. J. (Ed.), Cognitive processing in bilinguals (pp. 351–368). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. & Abrahamsson, N. (2000). Who can become native-like in a second language? All, some, or none? On the maturational constraints controversy in second language acquisition. Studia Linguistica, 54, 150–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. & Abrahamsson, N. (2001). Age and L2 learning: The hazards of matching practical “implications” with theoretical “facts.” TESOL Quarterly, 35, 151–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. & Abrahamsson, N. (2003a). Age of onset and ultimate attainment in near-native speakers of Swedish. In Fraurud, K. & Hyltenstam, K. (Eds.), Multilingualism in global and local perspectives: Selected papers from the 8th Nordic Conference on Bilingualism, November 1–3, 2001, Stockholm Rinkeby (pp. 319–340). Stockholm: Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University, and Rinkeby Institute of Multilingual Research.Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. & Abrahamsson, N. (2003b). Maturational constraints in SLA. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. H. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 539–588). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ioup, G. (1989). Immigrant children who have failed to acquire native English. In Gass, S. M., Madden, C., Preston, D., & Selinker, L. (Eds.), Variation in second language acquisition: Vol. 2. Psycholinguistic issues (pp. 160–175). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Ioup, G., Boustagui, E., El Tigi, M., & Moselle, M. (1994). Reexamining the critical period hypothesis: A case study of successful adult SLA in a naturalistic environment. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 73–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, J.S. & Newport, E.L. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krashen, S.D. (1977). The monitor model of adult second language performance. In Burt, M., Dulay, H., & Finocchiaro, M. (Eds.), Viewpoints on English as a second language (pp. 152–161). New York: Regents.Google Scholar
Krashen, S.D. (1981). Aptitude and attitude in relation to second language acquisition and learning. In Diller, K. C. (Ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude (pp. 155–175). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Lenneberg, E. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Long, M.H. (1990). Maturational constraints on language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 251–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M.H. (1993). Second language acquisition as a function of age: Research findings and methodological issues. In Hyltenstam, K. & Viberg, Å. (Eds.), Progression and regression in language (pp. 196–221). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Long, M.H. (2005). Problems with supposed counter-evidence to the critical period hypothesis. IRAL, 43, 287–317.Google Scholar
Long, M.H. & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In Doughty, C. J. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 16–41). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marinova-Todd, S.H. (2003). Comprehensive analysis of ultimate attainment in adult second language acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Marinova-Todd, S.H., Marshall, D.B., & Snow, C.E. (2000). Three misconceptions about age and L2 learning. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 9–34.Google Scholar
McDonald, J.L. (2000). Grammaticality judgments in a second language: Influences of age of acquisition and native language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21, 395–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, J.L. (2006). Beyond the critical period: Processing-based explanation for poor grammaticality judgment performance by late second language learners. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 381–401.Google Scholar
Meara, P. (2005a). LLAMA language aptitude tests. Swansea, UK: Lognostics.Google Scholar
Meara, P. (2005b). LLAMA language aptitude tests: The manual. Swansea, UK: Lognostics.Google Scholar
Meara, P., Milton, J., & Lorenzo-Dus, N. (2003). Swansea language aptitude tests (LAT) v2.0. Swansea, UK: Lognostics.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. & Slabakova, R. (2003). Competence similarities between native and near-native speakers: An investigation of the preterite-imperfect contrast in Spanish. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 351–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moyer, A. (1999). Ultimate attainment in L2 phonology: The critical factors of age, motivation, and instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 81–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neville, H.J. & Bavelier, D. (1998). Neural organization and plasticity of language. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 8, 254–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Novoa, L.K., Fein, D., & Obler, L. (1988). Talent in foreign languages: A case study. In Obler, L. K. & Fein, D. (Eds.), The exceptional brain: Neuropsychology of talent and special abilities (pp. 294–302). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Obler, L.K. (1989). Exceptional second language learners. In Gass, S. M., Madden, C., Preston, D., & Selinker, L. (Eds.), Variation in second language acquisition (pp. 141–149). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Ottó, I. (1996). Hungarian language aptitude test: Words in sentences. Unpublished manuscript, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary.Google Scholar
Parry, T.S. & Child, J.R. (1990). Preliminary investigation of the relationship between VORD, MLAT and language proficiency. In Parry, T. S. & Stansfield, C. W. (Eds.), Language aptitude reconsidered (pp. 30–66). Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Patkowski, M. (1980). The sensitive period for the acquisition of syntax in a second language. Language Learning, 30, 449–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, C. & Al-Haik, A. (1976). The development of the Defence Language Aptitude Battery. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 36, 369–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimsleur, P. (1966). The Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovic.Google Scholar
Pulvermüller, F. & Schumann, J.H. (1994). Neurobiological mechanisms of language acquisition. Language Learning, 44, 681–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P. (1997). Individual differences and the fundamental similarity of implicit and explicit adult second language learning. Language Learning, 47, 45–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, S., Yoshinaga, N., & Sasaki, M. (2002). Aptitude-exposure interaction effects on wh-movement violation detection by pre- and post-critical period Japanese bilinguals. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 267–299). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sasaki, M. (1996). Second language proficiency, foreign language aptitude, and intelligence: Quantitative and qualitative analyses. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002a). E-Prime reference guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.Google Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002b). E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.Google Scholar
Schneiderman, E.I. & Desmarais, C. (1988). The talented language learner: Some preliminary findings. Second Language Research, 4, 91–109.Google Scholar
Seliger, H.W. (1978). Implications of a multiple critical periods hypothesis for second language learning. In Ritchie, W. C. (Ed.), Second language acquisition research: Issues and implications (pp. 11–19). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Seliger, H.W., Krashen, S., & Ladefoged, P. (1975). Maturational constraints in the acquisition of a native-like accent in second language learning. Language Sciences, 36, 20–22.Google Scholar
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL, 10, 209–231.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in second language learning. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2002). Theorizing and updating aptitude. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 69–93). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. & Robertson, D. (2001). Measuring development and ultimate attainment in non-native grammars. In Elder, C., Brown, A., Grove, E., Hill, K., Iwashita, N., Lumley, T., & al., et (Eds.), Experimenting with uncertainty: Essays in honour of Alan Davies (pp. 264–274). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Uylings, H.B.M. (2006). Development of the human cortex and the concept of “critical” or “sensitive” periods. Language Learning, 56 (1yes), 59–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Boxtel, S., Bongaerts, T., & Coppen, P.-A. (2005). Native-like attainment of dummy subjects in Dutch and the role of the L1. IRAL, 43, 355–380.Google Scholar
Van Wuijtswinkel, K. (1994). Critical period effects in the acquisition of grammatical competence in a second language. Unpublished B.A. thesis, University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
White, L. & Genesee, F. (1996). How native is near-native? The issue of ultimate attainment in adult second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 12, 233–265.Google Scholar