Talk:Critical period hypothesis

message: >"A more general problem is that, as Pinker (1995) notes, almost every sentence anybody voices is an original combination of words, never previously uttered..."
How could Pinker, or anyone else for that matter, know whether that be the case or not?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.255.174.106 (talk) 21:48, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: How is this possible to know?

message: The article on second language acquisition is becoming rather long, and although this (fundamental) aspect of linguistics is covered in some detail on the SLA page, at critical period and language acquisition, there was no dedicated page.
The introductory paragraph is the only section new to this article. Everything else is ripped straight from other pages. It's currently one hell of a mess, so I hope others will step in! Jsteph 11:26, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Further to this, I have ripped out the section on Krashen's Monitor Theory and set up a new article for it; I couldn't see how it was directly relevant to the CPH. Jsteph 05:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Creation of page

message: The article is very informative, but reads more like an article from a scientific lexicon than like a general lexicon article. Several literature that is claimed to be representative is discussed. While I am not completely unfamiliar with this topic as a general linguist and could confirm some parts of the article, without further looking up literature I cannot tell whether it is representative. It would be good to have this confirmed by an expert from the respective area of research, that is, cognitive linguistics. 
It would probably be advisable not to start with the literature, but with several theories existing, and to mention scientists if necessary and works only if absolutely necessary. A clean-up between the main and the history section might be good. Maybe a whole restructuring of the article might be advisable.
Anyway, there are no actual serious problems with any of the content, and the article is clearly much more useful than most within WP languages. Structure is bad, but that doesn't impede the interested reader from acquiring the knowledge provided. Rated as C Class. G Purevdorj (talk) 09:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Rating

message: I noticed that the section, "Experimental and Observational Studies" of the article was too long and technical to have been written specifically for Wikipedia, and sure enough, when I googled it, this article came up. It is licensed under the GNU free documentation license, so I don't think that it is permited to be used on Wikipedia, which is licensed under the Creative Commons. I'm no expert, so someone should probably reconcile this. Rhinocerous Ranger (talk) 02:34, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's pretty likely that the PDF file is just copied from Wikipedia. If you look at the original edit, it is different from the PDF link you provided in several places. I haven't checked the history to see if I can find the exact version that PDF is taken from, so I can't be sure, but it looks like it's not just a simple cut and paste job. This doesn't guarantee the original source though, of course - I think it might be a good idea to check it up.  — GypsyJiver (drop me a line) 15:39, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

text: Also see the comments from the page creator above. The original article here was a cut and paste job from several different Wikipedia articles. The only one that looked suspicious was second language acquisition, but actually it seems to be legit. See the original SLA article contribution and User talk:Visviva#SLA for comments on its ownership.  — GypsyJiver (drop me a line) 21:25, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Licensing 

message: There was still lots of info about the critical period hypothesis over at second language acquisition that was just too long for it to be there. I've cut and pasted it into this article for now. Unfortunately, that means this article will need lots of cleaning up... I plan to come back here and do that when I'm finished getting the SLA article more stable, but it might take a while!  — GypsyJiver (drop me a line) 21:30, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cut and paste from second language acquisition 

message: I'll remove some of the citation tags (based on google scholar, PubMed etc).
Please check I'm getting the correct refs. Starting placeholder.
*
::Some of them might be buried in the history of the Second language acquisition article. I've been going through the history and adding the sources back in for that article too. This applies particularly to the "Other directions of research" section which I moved here from that article. I spotted Tarone, Bigelow and Hansen there - there may be others. See this version for example. It looks like this still won't get the majority of the sources though.  — GypsyJiver (drop me a line) 23:16, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: I went through the particular version that I linked, and I couldn't find any more sources. I'm not sure if there are any more in other versions.  — GypsyJiver (drop me a line) 23:32, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

text: I've added the Scherag et. al (2004) reference to the article and removed the broken citation templates. — GypsyJiver (drop me a line) 12:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Citations 

message: Because statistics can often be confusing and misleading, I'd like clarification on this line.
*five percent of adult bilinguals master a second language even though they begin learning it when they are well into adulthood
Is this 5% out of all adult bilinguals or only of adult bilinguals who have mastered a second language? In other words, there are:
#Adult bilinguals who began learning their 2nd language in adulthood and were still able to master it.
#Adult bilinguals who began learning their 2nd language in adulthood and were not able to master it.
#Adult bilinguals who began learning their 2nd language in childhood and were able to master it.
#Adult bilinguals who began learning their 2nd language in childhood and were still not able to master it.
This group (#1) is 5% out of all adult bilinguals (1-4) or are they 5% out of only the adult biliguals who have mastered their 2nd language (1 & 3 only). For An Angel (talk) 20:25, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification needed 

message: I would like to expand this section. My main additions would be: 
:- Acknowledging the debate over the timing of the critical period with respect to SLA. 
:- The theory that only pronunciation is influenced by the critical period, and not the processes of learning new morphemes, vocabulary, or syntax. 
:- CPH theories explaining the loss of memory plasticity with age (specifically a decrease in use of procedural memory and increased reliance on declarative memory). Plasticity theories often go down one of two roads: "use it then lose it" or "use it or lose it." 
:- The level of automaticity when an L2-user speaks their L2 versus their L1. 
:- Critics of the CPH-SLA and why they doubt the hypothesis. The usual reason is that there are other, more important factors influencing L2-proficiency such as time and effort put in to learning, or willingness to assimilate with the language's culture. 
I have already begun to write most of these additions in my sandbox. As long as I keep the language simple and clear, is there a possibility of having too much detail? 
Bibliography: 
Birdsong, David, ed. (1999). Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesis. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ISBN: 0-8058-3084-7.
Li, Ping (2013). "Chapter 7: Successive Language Acquisition. " In Grosjean, Francois; Li, Ping. The Psycholinguistics of Bilingualism. West Sussex: Blackwell Publishing. ISBN: 978-1-4443-3279-7.
Loewen, Shawn; Reinders, Hayo (2011). Key Concepts in Second Language Acquisition. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 46. ISBN: 978-0-230-23018-7.
Meisel, Jurgen M (2010). "Chapter 12: Age of onset in successive acquisition of bilingualism: Effects on grammatical development." In Kail, Michele; Hickmann, Maya, eds. Language Acquisition across Linguistic and Cognitive Systems. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. ISBN: 978-90-272-5314-9.
Paradis, Michel (2004). "Chapter 2: Implicit and explicit language processes." In Paradis, Michel. A Neurolinguistic Theory of Bilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. ISBN: 90-272-4127-9. 
Thank you, CRHeck (talk) 14:53, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  CPH - Second-language acquisition 

message: If nobody is against it, I'll merge this article into the article linked above in some days. Llaanngg (talk) 23:11, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal: [[Critical period]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Critical period hypothesis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130721011639/http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~lds/pdfs/dehaene1999.pdf to http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~lds/pdfs/dehaene1999.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160312230505/http://feralchildren.com/en/pager.php?df=jones1995&pg=1 to http://www.feralchildren.com/en/pager.php?df=jones1995&pg=1
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:31, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: — Assignment last updated by Serenity D-B (talk) 22:26, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Human Cognition SP23

message: — Assignment last updated by Kieramalley (talk) 00:22, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: EDFN 508 Introduction to Research