ARTICLE REVIEW

The importance of age influence on second language (L2) acquisition has been conceded
in the field of language education for a long time. Large amount of studies were conducted in
the second language contexts to examine the relationship between age constraints and L2
acquisition. With respect to this topic, this paper will give a review of the article “Age
Constraints on Second-Language Acquisition” in 1999 written by Flege, J.E. , Yeni-Komshian,
G.H., Liu, S. which firstly summarize the whole article, then give explanation and critique,
evaluation of the study, and last but not least, make connections to and impact on the my own
teaching practice.
This article aimed at evaluating critical period hypothesis and examining the age effect
on second language (L2) acquisition. In so doing, the authors surveyed 240 native speakers of
Korean who arrived in the United States (1 to 23 years) and were experienced in English (mean,
15 years) through three test methods mentioned below. Thereby, the native Korean
participants’ foreign accent ratings and grammaticality judgment test were taken as support for
evaluating their pronunciation of English and knowledge of English morphosyntax. The results
indicate that following the increase in “Age of arrival” (AOA) of native Korean participants, they
developed and improved their foreign accents stronger, in the meanwhile, the scores taken from
the grammaticality judgment test decreased steadily. Besides, the differences between
participants in learning L2based on age-related changing demonstrated that age constraints are
accounted for significantly more in the domain of phonology than morphology.
Obviously, many researchers have unforgettably concentrated on age effect while
studying the SLA. To examine the immigration populations, AOA is the most popular index in
L2 learning, which influences the L2 performance correlating with other variables. Fledge, Munro
& MacKay (1995) stated that AOA is considered as a marked determinant of how well the
foreign accent is and how accurate the learners pronoun L2 consonants and vowels. Some
researchers proposed that acquiring an L2 is somehow limited by a critical period. The critical
period hypothesis apparently assumed that maturational changes in developing the brain
structures used to acknowledge the language lead to the influence in L2 leaning relating to the
age-related changes. Through some observations, the critical period is considered the one which
limited the process of acquiring an L2 of adults –those are experienced in their L2. However,
according to Oyama (1979) and Flege (1987), the age effects on the L2 performance come from
differences between bilingual’s two language systems in terms of their nature and interaction.
It rests on the assumption that the L1 will influence the L2 to the extent of the development of
the L1’s system at the beginning of learning L2.
In the article, to evaluate the critical period hypothesis and AOA effect on SLA, three
methods were employed. The discontinuity test is the first method, in which participants tends
to performed in learning L2 before the critical period better than after the end of critical period.
That has been demonstrated in various studies, when AOA increases, Korean native speakers
make more writing mistakes in general English sentences and in grammaticality judgment test
and respond less precisely and more slowly to decision activities (Bott, 1993, Shim, 1995, Kim,
1996). The second method is the pre-postcorrelation test, which “involves computing the
correlation between AOA and L2 performance for groups of participants thought to have begun
learning their L2 before versus after the end of a critical period” (James Emil Flege, Grace H.
Yeni-Komshian, Serena Liu, 1998, p. 80). Johnson and Newport (1989) stated that there is
obviously an AOA–performance correlation surveyed for participants who began learning their
L2 before the end of the critical period due to increasingly performance decline as an individual
comes close to the end of the critical period.
Perusing this article gives readers a view of other variables confounded with AOA of
large groups of immigrants, such as chronological age, selfestimated use of English of the native
Korean, the number of years of residence in the United States, and how much of education they
received in the United States. From then on, to fully evaluate the critical period hypothesis, the
“matched subgroup” method was employed in respect of those confounds. 40 Korean
participants were divided into 2 subgroups, in which they were selected from different AOA but
same other variables above. The results suggest that the subgroup had arrived later in the
United States, their foreign accents was significantly stronger the earlier arriving subgroup. It
can be easily seen that the discontinuity test supported the critical period hypothesis, whereas
the pre/postcorrelation test failed to provide support for the critical period hypothesis. In
specific, the relation between AOA and degree of foreign accent was linear near the end of the
supposed critical period. However, AOA and scores had a significant correlation for those who
had experienced in learning English before as well as after of a critical period (the age of 12
years). This agrees with findings obtained by Johnson and Newport (1989), Patkowski (1990)
and in more recent researches by Birdsong (1992).
 The implication from this study suggests teachers, like me, focusing on age effects on L2
acquisition, such as the best appropriate time of age for leaning L2, the instructional strategies
to teach an L2 effectively, and more further, and the age constraints on SLA in different L2
learning contexts. These following questions might be raised as support for that concern: “What
is the best time for children to start to learn an L2? How should teachers effectively teach the L2
to students in different ages? How does age affect L2 learning in a foreign language learning
context versus a second language context?”
Admittedly, I found the article was exceptionally informative, interesting and helpful,
which gives me the general understanding of age constraints on Second Language Acquisition.
From then on, I could turn back the time and look at my own overall process of teaching and
learning. This helps me make more contributions in order to support classroom language which
provides effective, high quality, and age-appropriate instruction that is beneficial for students’ L2
learning.

REFERENCES

Birdsong, D. P. (1992). Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Language, 68, 706–
755.
Flege, J. E. (1987). A critical period for learning to pronounce foreign languages? Applied
Linguistics, 8, 162–177.
Flege, J. E., Munro, M. J., & MacKay, I. R. A. (1995b). The effect of age of second language
learning on the production of English consonants. Speech Communication, 16, 1–26.
Flege, J. E., Yeni-Komshian, G. Y., & Liu, S. (1999). Age Constraints on Second-Language
Accquisition. Journal Memory and Language, 41, 78-104.
Johnson, J., & Newport, E. (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.
Oyama, S. (1979). The concept of the sensitive period in developmental studies. Merrill-Palmer
Quarterly, 25, 83–102.
Patkowski, M. (1990). Age and accent in a second language: A reply to James Emil Flege.
Applied Linguistics, 11, 73–89.