<p>It's theorized that there is a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_period#First_language_acquisition">Critical Period</a> of language development in children below the age of five (roughly, as age ranges always are in Developmental Psychology). </p>

<p>Probably the most significant and readily verifiable finding is that a <strong>critical period exists for the learning of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoneme">Phonemes</a></strong>. Research has suggested children readily differentiate phonemes from all human languages at very early ages; less than 5 years old. There is much debate in Linguistics on this matter and <a href="http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/content/8/2/162.abstract">many articles covering the discussion</a> .</p>

<p>After this Critical Period most children and adults can only accurately differentiate and produce phonemes present in their native languages and have difficulty producing and differentiating phonemes from other languages. This is why when learning a language late in life learners often struggle with pronunciation. </p>

<p>A classic example of this is the difficulty native Japanese speakers have with English L and R sounds. As L2, late-in-life second language learners they struggle differentiating the actual sounds and thus producing the different sounds.</p>

<p>There are some interesting theories in what can overcome this deficiency in learning "late" (L2) second languages, see <a href="http://www.ling.ohio-state.edu/~skang/371/DownloadablePapers/BongaertsEtAl97.pdf">Age and Ultimate Attainment in the Pronunciation of Foreign Languages</a> and <a href="http://rudar.ruc.dk/bitstream/1800/2844/1/Project%20incl%20frontpage.pdf">Teaching Second-Language Phonetics to Adults</a>.</p>

<p>In addition Noam Chomsky has some interesting interviews and publications about language development in children, such as his <a href="http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/1987----.htm">interview with Lillian R. Putnam</a>. </p>

<p>Note that Chomsky's opinions and theories are controversial, particularly his concept of a "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_acquisition_device">Language Acquisition Device</a>", which is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_nativism">Nativist</a> to an extreme. There is much material on Chomsky's <a href="http://academics.tjhsst.edu/psych/oldPsych/language/chomsky.html">Theories of Language Acquisition</a> but I would take his theories with a grain of salt.</p>

<p>The Critical Period has been found to apply even to children learning sign language. A good overview on this situation is <a href="http://idiom.ucsd.edu/~rmayberry/pubs/ACFOSmayberry.pdf">The critical period for language acquisition and the deaf child's language comprehension : a psycholinguistic approach</a> by Rachel I. Mayberry.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The critical period hypothesis for language acquisition (CP) proposes that the outcome of
  language acquisition is not uniform over the lifespan but rather is best during early childhood.
  The CP hypothesis was originally proposed for spoken language but recent research has shown
  that it applies equally to sign language</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-02-14T13:24:26.980Z
Chomsky's approach of language development is nativist, as you mentioned. I find it a little descriptive. It does not tell you why those critical periods exist that way. I think that it lacks explanation. My opnion is that this stage like behavior stays as a group of abstract rules, and weakens the theory.
Kemal Taskin
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-02-14T14:42:39.663Z
@KemalTaşkın Lots of Chomsky's ideas lack good explanation or supporting evidence, which is why I hesitate to bring him up in discussion.
Zelda
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-01-19T17:49:32.153Z
Is the critical period what defines children as "universal learners"? I have heard cognitive scientists use the term "Universal Lerner" and want to know if that's the same thing.
Josh
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-01-19T16:29:25.337Z
2012-02-14T04:20:58.977Z
2012-02-14T04:20:58.977Z
Zelda
<p>It's a well known fact that the earlier children are exposed to languages the better, as young children have a better ability to learn new languages than adults. </p>

<ul>
<li>Why is this? </li>
<li>At what age does a human's mind start to lose this ability? </li>
<li>What causes the change? </li>
<li>Does this phenomenon have a name?        </li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-04-23T05:15:25.187Z
This TED video answers some of your questions: [Patricia Kuhl: The linguistic genius of babies](http://www.ted.com/talks/patricia_kuhl_the_linguistic_genius_of_babies.html)
bfrs
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-01-19T15:23:55.787Z
The [Critical Period](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_period#First_language_acquisition) is a large part of what you're talking about but at the moment I don't have the time for a full answer
Zelda
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-02-08T19:02:09.773Z
Been meaning to post an answer involving plasticity for a while now. Basically, neuroplasticity decreases with age, and is a big advantage for learning while it lasts.
Nick Stauner
<cognitive-psychology><developmental-psychology><language>
How is a young child able to learn language so easily?
Josh
# How is a young child able to learn language so easily?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2012-01-19)

It's a well known fact that the earlier children are exposed to languages the better, as young children have a better ability to learn new languages than adults.

* Why is this?
* At what age does a human's mind start to lose this ability?
* What causes the change?
* Does this phenomenon have a name?

**Tags:** cognitive-psychology, developmental-psychology, language

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: The [Critical Period](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_period#First_language_acquisition) is a large part of what you're talking about but at the moment I don't have the time for a full answer  
> **username_1**: This TED video answers some of your questions: [Patricia Kuhl: The linguistic genius of babies](http://www.ted.com/talks/patricia_kuhl_the_linguistic_genius_of_babies.html)  
> **username_3**: Been meaning to post an answer involving plasticity for a while now. Basically, neuroplasticity decreases with age, and is a big advantage for learning while it lasts.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2012-01-19. Score: 21 | Accepted answer

It's theorized that there is a [Critical Period](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_period#First_language_acquisition) of language development in children below the age of five (roughly, as age ranges always are in Developmental Psychology).

Probably the most significant and readily verifiable finding is that a **critical period exists for the learning of [Phonemes](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoneme)**. Research has suggested children readily differentiate phonemes from all human languages at very early ages; less than 5 years old. There is much debate in Linguistics on this matter and [many articles covering the discussion](http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/content/8/2/162.abstract) .

After this Critical Period most children and adults can only accurately differentiate and produce phonemes present in their native languages and have difficulty producing and differentiating phonemes from other languages. This is why when learning a language late in life learners often struggle with pronunciation.

A classic example of this is the difficulty native Japanese speakers have with English L and R sounds. As L2, late-in-life second language learners they struggle differentiating the actual sounds and thus producing the different sounds.

There are some interesting theories in what can overcome this deficiency in learning "late" (L2) second languages, see [Age and Ultimate Attainment in the Pronunciation of Foreign Languages](http://www.ling.ohio-state.edu/~skang/371/DownloadablePapers/BongaertsEtAl97.pdf) and [Teaching Second-Language Phonetics to Adults](http://rudar.ruc.dk/bitstream/1800/2844/1/Project%20incl%20frontpage.pdf).

In addition Noam Chomsky has some interesting interviews and publications about language development in children, such as his [interview with Lillian R. Putnam](http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/1987----.htm).

Note that Chomsky's opinions and theories are controversial, particularly his concept of a "[Language Acquisition Device](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_acquisition_device)", which is [Nativist](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_nativism) to an extreme. There is much material on Chomsky's [Theories of Language Acquisition](http://academics.tjhsst.edu/psych/oldPsych/language/chomsky.html) but I would take his theories with a grain of salt.

The Critical Period has been found to apply even to children learning sign language. A good overview on this situation is [The critical period for language acquisition and the deaf child's language comprehension : a psycholinguistic approach](http://idiom.ucsd.edu/~rmayberry/pubs/ACFOSmayberry.pdf) by Rachel I. Mayberry.

> The critical period hypothesis for language acquisition (CP) proposes that the outcome of
> language acquisition is not uniform over the lifespan but rather is best during early childhood.
> The CP hypothesis was originally proposed for spoken language but recent research has shown
> that it applies equally to sign language

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Is the critical period what defines children as "universal learners"? I have heard cognitive scientists use the term "Universal Lerner" and want to know if that's the same thing.  
> **username_4**: Chomsky's approach of language development is nativist, as you mentioned. I find it a little descriptive. It does not tell you why those critical periods exist that way. I think that it lacks explanation. My opnion is that this stage like behavior stays as a group of abstract rules, and weakens the theory.  
> **username_2**: @KemalTaşkın Lots of Chomsky's ideas lack good explanation or supporting evidence, which is why I hesitate to bring him up in discussion.  

---

