论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】Some critics have focused on studying preschool English language teaching from the perspective of critical period hypothesis. In this thesis， the author will first provide readers with a general introduction to critical period hypothesis and then an overview of the researches on studying preschool English language teaching from the perspective of critical period hypothesis over the past few years.
【Key words】Critical Period Hypothesis； Literature Review； Preschool； English Language Teaching
1. Critical Period Hypothesis
The critical period hypothesis is a very important theory in linguistics. It originated from research findings of biology and neurobiology， which regards the development of children’s linguistic competence as a naturally mature process dominated by speech organs and nerves in the brain.
The critical period hypothesis was first proposed by Montreal neurologist Wilder Penfield and co-author Lamar Roberts in 1959.They thought that there was a fixed span of years during which language learning can take place naturally and effortlessly and this period was called “The Optimum Age”. They proposed that “The Optimum Age” was before ten years old and human beings’ linguistic competence was closely related to the brain development. （Ellis， 484） However， the critical period hypothesis was popularized in 1967 by Eric Lenneberg who was a German linguist and neurologist living from 1921 to 1975. He was most famous for his publication Biological Foundations of Language， in which he advanced the critical period hypothesis.
2. Literature Review on Studying English Language Teaching in Preschool Education
Based on the critical period hypothesis and the research findings， Gui Xiang （2011， 38） proposes that it is feasible but not necessary to teach English in preschools. As far as China’s preschool education condition is concerned， if faculty condition and good language learning environment is guaranteed， kindergartens can seize the critical period and positively carry out English teaching activities centered on interest enlightenment； if not， preschool English classes should be avoided. Similarly， Yao Xiaoshu （2002， 35） also explains that foreign language study starts by no means is early better. English learning can start from any age， and learning achievements depend more on faculty condition， learning environment and individual endeavor. Age is just one of the influential factors. In many cases， in order to exert an influence on second language acquisition， age and other factors should cooperate with each other. Guan Wei （2011， 108） agrees with the above two critics and makes a more detailed conclusion. Age is no doubt one of the significant influential factors in foreign language learning， but individuals’ optimum age maybe quite different because of different intelligence factors， environment factors， social life and so on. The statement that the earlier one starts to learn foreign language， the better achievements he will obtain is by no means reasonable and appropriate. Foreign experiences also show that foreign language study starts by no means is early better. Age is no longer the determining factor for second language acquisition and people at different age have their own language acquisition advantages. Teenagers own better cognitive ability and they are better at comprehension， while adults are better at writing， syntax and morphology. While paying close attention to age， we should at the same time fully understand that critical period is not the determining factor which governs the second language acquisition. So we need to activate children’s own competent initiative and proceed from the reality not only value the critical period but also avoid exaggerating the function of it. 3. Conclusion
The author of this thesis reviewed the other ten theses on English language teaching in preschool education from the perspective of critical period hypothesis and find that the conclusions made by the rest critics are quite similar. All of them propose that it is feasible but not necessary to teach English in preschools， and we should take children’s own intelligence factors， the environment and the faculty into consideration.
References：
[1]Ellis，Rod.The Study of Second Language Acquisition.Shanghai： Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.1999.
[2]Guan.W.2011.Baby Study English and Critical Period Hypothesis.Theoretic Observation.pp.108-109.
[3]Gui.X.2011.Preschool English Education from the Perspective of Critical Period Hypothesis，Journal of Educational Development，pp.36-38.
[4]Yao.X.2009.On Baby Study English from Critical Period Hypothesis.Journal of Mudanjiang Normal University.pp.50-51.
[5]http：//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_period_hypothesis（last checked on 2012/01/01）.
【Key words】Critical Period Hypothesis； Literature Review； Preschool； English Language Teaching
1. Critical Period Hypothesis
The critical period hypothesis is a very important theory in linguistics. It originated from research findings of biology and neurobiology， which regards the development of children’s linguistic competence as a naturally mature process dominated by speech organs and nerves in the brain.
The critical period hypothesis was first proposed by Montreal neurologist Wilder Penfield and co-author Lamar Roberts in 1959.They thought that there was a fixed span of years during which language learning can take place naturally and effortlessly and this period was called “The Optimum Age”. They proposed that “The Optimum Age” was before ten years old and human beings’ linguistic competence was closely related to the brain development. （Ellis， 484） However， the critical period hypothesis was popularized in 1967 by Eric Lenneberg who was a German linguist and neurologist living from 1921 to 1975. He was most famous for his publication Biological Foundations of Language， in which he advanced the critical period hypothesis.
2. Literature Review on Studying English Language Teaching in Preschool Education
Based on the critical period hypothesis and the research findings， Gui Xiang （2011， 38） proposes that it is feasible but not necessary to teach English in preschools. As far as China’s preschool education condition is concerned， if faculty condition and good language learning environment is guaranteed， kindergartens can seize the critical period and positively carry out English teaching activities centered on interest enlightenment； if not， preschool English classes should be avoided. Similarly， Yao Xiaoshu （2002， 35） also explains that foreign language study starts by no means is early better. English learning can start from any age， and learning achievements depend more on faculty condition， learning environment and individual endeavor. Age is just one of the influential factors. In many cases， in order to exert an influence on second language acquisition， age and other factors should cooperate with each other. Guan Wei （2011， 108） agrees with the above two critics and makes a more detailed conclusion. Age is no doubt one of the significant influential factors in foreign language learning， but individuals’ optimum age maybe quite different because of different intelligence factors， environment factors， social life and so on. The statement that the earlier one starts to learn foreign language， the better achievements he will obtain is by no means reasonable and appropriate. Foreign experiences also show that foreign language study starts by no means is early better. Age is no longer the determining factor for second language acquisition and people at different age have their own language acquisition advantages. Teenagers own better cognitive ability and they are better at comprehension， while adults are better at writing， syntax and morphology. While paying close attention to age， we should at the same time fully understand that critical period is not the determining factor which governs the second language acquisition. So we need to activate children’s own competent initiative and proceed from the reality not only value the critical period but also avoid exaggerating the function of it. 3. Conclusion
The author of this thesis reviewed the other ten theses on English language teaching in preschool education from the perspective of critical period hypothesis and find that the conclusions made by the rest critics are quite similar. All of them propose that it is feasible but not necessary to teach English in preschools， and we should take children’s own intelligence factors， the environment and the faculty into consideration.
References：
[1]Ellis，Rod.The Study of Second Language Acquisition.Shanghai： Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.1999.
[2]Guan.W.2011.Baby Study English and Critical Period Hypothesis.Theoretic Observation.pp.108-109.
[3]Gui.X.2011.Preschool English Education from the Perspective of Critical Period Hypothesis，Journal of Educational Development，pp.36-38.
[4]Yao.X.2009.On Baby Study English from Critical Period Hypothesis.Journal of Mudanjiang Normal University.pp.50-51.
[5]http：//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_period_hypothesis（last checked on 2012/01/01）.