.

 • It is a “maturational time period during which some crucial experience will have its peak effect on
development or learning, resulting in normal behavior attuned to the particular environment to which
the organism has been exposed.”

3. • “Biologically determined period of life when language can be acquired more easily and beyond
which time language is increasingly difficult to acquire.”

[ ] If language input does not occur until after this time, the individual will never achieve a full command
of language especially grammatical systems.

[ ] Lenneberg: there are maturational constraints on the time a first language can be acquired. If
language acquisition does not occur by puberty, some aspects of language can be learnt but full mastery
cannot be achieved.

4. Eric Lenneberg “First language acquisition relies on brain plasticity and can no longer be accomplished
once hemispheric development is complete. If language acquisition does not occur by puberty, some
aspects of language can be learnt but full mastery cannot be achieved.” “Brain lateralization at puberty
is the mechanism which closes down the brain’s ability to acquire language.”

5. •brain plasticity / neuroplasticity: refers to changes in neural pathways and synapses which are due
to changes in behavior, environment and neural processes, as well as changes resulting from bodily
injury

6. • brain laterization:The longitudinal fissure separates the human brain into two distinct cerebral
hemispheres, connected by the corpus callosum. The hemispheres exhibit strong, but not complete,
billateral symmetry in both structure and function

[ ] 15. Critical Period Hypothesis Neurobiological Considerations

[ ] 16. Hemispheric Lateralization  As the brain matures, certain functions are assigned to either left or
right hemisphere

[ ] Explanation

Although the hemispheres are not structurally identical at birth, they are functionally identical. In this
contention, initially, each hemisphere is equally capable of supporting language development. For
instance, if an injury occurs in the left hemisphere then it is possible for the right hemisphere to become
specialized for language function. However, the right hemisphere’s capability to control language
remains intact until a certain stage or a critical period, which ends after lateralization of the brain
functions. Lenneberg assumed that as the brain matures, (that is, around the 2 years) the hemispheres
began to become functionally specialized and each controls different areas of human activity. This
process of lateralization is completed by puberty. After lateralization, a hemispheric dominance ensues:
in normal persons, the left hemisphere begins to control the functions of language and the right
hemisphere ceases its involvement in language. Therefore, in the post-critical period language
acquisition becomes difficult, ultimately less successful, or even impossible.

7. • Lenneberg hypothesized in his book Biological Foundations of Language (1967) that: *

8. His hypothesis was based on three groups of people: • People who had brain damage through
accidents or diseases before puberty • Children with Down’s syndrome • “Wild children”

12. SUPPORTIVE STUDIES

13. Genie was a 13-year-old victim of lifelong child abuse. She had been kept strapped to a potty chair
and wearing diapers. She appeared to be entirely without language when she was found at her age of
13. Her father had judged her retarded at birth and had chosen to isolate her, and so she had remained
until her discovery.

14. Isabelle, a girl who was incarcerated with her deaf-mute mother until the age of six and a half (pre-
pubescent). She also had no language skill, but unlike Genie, she quickly acquired normal language
abilities through systematic specialist training.

What is Maturation Theory?

The theory of maturation is based on Lennebergs view which explains the language learning process
from a different perspective. It is a rationalist theory. According to this theory, children's development
of speech is correlated with age and has a biological and neurological basis. That is without motor
development one cannot achieve the ability to speak. So language development is dependent upon new
muscular maturity. This theory views as a crucial factor and it is on lateralization of a human brain.

Maturation theory is compatible with Chomsky's theory. Like Chomsky, he says that the beginning of
language or the onset of language is similar in all culture. They believe that socioeconomic factors affect
the acquisition of language though it may have a result of the difference in style. Unlike the
Behaviourists, Chomsky and Lennebergs do not believe that practice is important and crucial in language
acquisition. Again the Behaviourists believe that language acquisition is possible for the pressure of
need. But the maturatiolist believe that language learning is not the result of pressure. Lennebergs
viewpoint on language acquisition seems a sensible one. According to him, language appears to be
dependent on a series of maturational states of readiness within the child, with the one proviso that an
environment must be presented giving a certain minimum level of stimulation. Lennebergs, however,
developed his theory of maturation with two points.

Critical period hypothesis and lateralization of the Brain.

Critical period hypothesis

The Critical period is the claim for a biological basis of language acquisition capacity. The period raises
from eight months to fourteen years. Within this period language acquisition advances normally but
beyond it, language acquisition is different if not impossible.

Lenneberg believes that there is a lower limit of two years and an upper limit fourteen years of age in
language acquisition. He reports that children born with normal hearing but who deaf before the age of
Two can't acquire language whereas those who go deaf after two can acquire language. But the example
of Helen Keller who became blind and deaf at the age of One, and mastered the language by the speech.
She had heard before her illness shows that the lower is maturation.

Lightbown and Spada say that learning a foreign language is both harder and follows a different learning
pattern after puberty than before.

Lenneberg observed that the ability to develop normal behaviour and knowledge does not continue
indefinitely and that children have never learned language can't return to normal speaking if these
deprivation go on for too long. Lenneberg argued that language acquisition Device called LAD. Like other
biological functions works successfully only when it's stimulated at the right time. A time which is
referred to as the critical period. The notion that there is a specific and limited time as a critical period
hypothesis.

There are two versions of CPH. The strong version is that children must acquire their first language or by
puberty or they will never be able to learn from subsequent exposure. The weak version is that language
learning will be more difficult and incomplete after puberty. we may give example in favour of the
critical period from the studies of the wolf children A "wolf children" Isabella was discovered at six and a
half with no language but was normal by eight and a half. But Genie was discovered at fourteen and
thereafter acquired language only very slowly.

Maturation Theory Criticism

In some cases Lenneberg's view defines modification. These are as follows- First of all, the phrase
sensitive is prefer to "critical period" since some language learning and does take outside this period.
Hoefnagle Hole found that adults and 12 and 15 years of children made the fastest of progress. So
Lenneberg view of the critical period is not always accurate. Curtis's found that a girl to learn her first
language after puberty made some progress. She used her right hemisphere for language and the course
of development was different in any way. From that of children acquiring language under normal
conditions. So Lenneberg's views of the critical period and left hemisphere that is responsible for
language learning are not always correct.

Lenneberg's views of brain damage are also modified. Dennis and Whitaker found there is more likely to
be language impairment even in the pre-verbal infants following brain damage to the left hemisphere
than to the right hemisphere. Again damage to the right hemisphere has a worse effect on language in
the case of infants. Then it does in the case of adults. Lenneberg's idea of language development during
the critical period which has fixed characteristic irrespective of the conditions of acquisition is too
simple. Because mentally retarded children show a variety of patterns of language acquisition. Thus
Lenneberg's proposal of a critical period for language acquisition needs modification. A certain degree of
functional specialized of the brain takes place before the onset of language. So brain damage during this
period affects later language development. Acquisition of a second language after the critical period may
be quite efficient and acquisition of the first language may still be possible. The partner of development
may depend critically on the information process skills available to the child. So this theory is not
always correct.