Can Iranian Adults Reach Same Level of Proficiency as Children? Essay

Exclusively available on IvyPanda Available only on IvyPanda
Updated: Dec 9th, 2023

Introduction

Foreign languages such as English are taught through a context restricted environment in Iran. In this situation, second language is acquired by classroom practices that restrict use of specific textbooks and defined teacher’s classroom work management. Outside this restricted learning context, learners do not get support from social contexts outside the classroom (Menashri, 2001, p. 45).

We will write a custom essay on your topic a custom Essay on Can Iranian Adults Reach Same Level of Proficiency as Children?
808 writers online

As a foreign language, English was formally taught in after the Islamic Revolution in Iran. It was taught to learners from the age of 10-11 (first grade of junior high schools) (Abrahamian, 1982, p. 43). The textbooks are compiled, developed and published by the Ministry of education and used in schools. The Ministry of Education also publishes teaching materials for both public and private schools throughout the country.

This paper explores the role age difference in determining whether adult Iranian learners reach same level of proficiency in pronunciation as children (Diesel. 2000, p. 131). The paper also reviews extensive literature to compares the levels of proficiency in pronunciation reached by children and adults.

Background to Second Language Learning among Iranian Learners

In Iran, proficiency in pronunciation in foreign languages such as English are taught through a context-restricted environment. In this environment proficiency in pronunciation is learnt by classroom practices that use specific textbooks and teachers’ classroom work management for children and adult learners. Learners in Iran do not experience support from social contexts outside the classroom.

Proficiency in foreign languages such as English was formally taught from the second grade of junior high school after Iranian Revolution. Presently, proficiency in English is taught from the first grade of junior high schools (at the age of 10-11).

All textbooks used are compiled, developed, and published by the Ministry of Education. The Ministry of Education also publishes teaching materials for public and private high schools nationwide (Hosseini, 2007, p. 11).

The rate of proficiency in pronunciation acquisition is favorable to adult learners than children learners when the amount of exposure to the language is controlled. However, the amount of exposure of foreign languages to Iranian adult learners is restricted, thus cannot reach high levels of proficiency on graduation.

1 hour!
The minimum time our certified writers need to deliver a 100% original paper

Most emphasis of proficiency in pronunciation learning in 1990s concentrated on reading skills to allow learners read and translate English texts more easily. Iranian general curriculum placed emphasis on developing learners’ grammatical knowledge in reading and translation.

It placed less focus on proficiency in pronunciation. Therefore, most techniques used by high school English teachers involved grammar translation to prepare learners for expectations of Iranian national curriculum. Thus, it is not easy for adult Iranian learners to reach high proficiency levels in pronunciation as children.

Proficiency in pronunciation of second language demands contact with native speakers. Tourism and travel is another factor to be taken into consideration to Iranian learners’ mastery of English as a second language. Few tourists visit Iran, and only visit historical cities like Isfahan and Shiraz, and only a few make visits to Tehran where majority of Iranian students are learning English (Menashri, 2001, p. 11).

Tourists make it possible to individuals to communicate in English even if the state restricts media for learners on religious grounds. Travelling also assist greatly in terms of practicing the language. Due to prohibitive bureaucracy, Iranians find it extremely difficult to travel abroad.

It is also difficult for Iranians to get visas to travel overseas, that is, to English speaking countries such as the UK and US. As a result of all these restrictions and difficulties, it is not easy for Iranian language learners to reach high levels of proficiency in second languages (Gass, 1997, p. 112).

Consequently, Iranian learners are denied contact with native speakers a factor that is crucial language mastery. This is only possible after learners have received formal instruction. The more formal education learners receive, the more benefits they get from contact with native speakers.

Having close relations and contact with native speakers in ones own country is more helpful in proficiency in pronunciation acquisition. This is a drawback to Iranian adult learners on proficiency in pronunciation (Hosseini, 2007, p. 14).

Remember! This is just a sample
You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers

Effects of Age on Proficiency in Pronunciation

Substantial variability in achievement of proficiency in pronunciation among learners exists. A number of factors underlie this variability in proficiency among learners of which age difference being one of the factors. In order for an individual to achieve high proficiency in pronunciation, one has to begin being exposed to new language at an early age.

The impact of age on proficiency in pronunciation is a factor widely used in explaining individual differences in language acquisition. There are substantial studies that support the assumption that children are more efficient in L2 learning compared to adults. We may wonder whether one needs to begin new language before attaining a certain age in order to achieve proficiency in pronunciation.

In studying the influence of age on proficiency in pronunciation, one needs to separately consider its impact on the route of acquisition, rate of acquisition, and achievement of proficiency or fluency in pronunciation. The age factor does not have much effect on proficiency in pronunciation as regards to the route of acquisition.

Krashen (1979, p. 221) showed using bilingual syntax measure, that adults acquired grammatical morphemes in a manner similar to L2 learning children. However, age effect is essential in the case of pronunciation.

In normal adaptive settings, children learners’ achieve more proficiency in pronunciation than teenagers or adult. The scenario is different In formal learning environments due to the amount of exposure required for the age advantage of young learners to emerge is not enough.

The success of Second language acquisition (SLA) in any learning environment relies on second language acquisition approaches (Ellis, 2000, p. 3). Learners need to understand what is to be learnt, how to learn it, and why it should be learnt. However, the process of second language acquisition is complex and involves a number of interrelated factors (Ellis, 2000, p 4).

These perspectives discuss how SLA is clearly influenced by individual differences (Brown, 2009, p. 329). Although these approaches have resulted to success in learning second language, it remains that some individuals attain proficiency faster than others. Studies in this area have looked at learner variables and other individual differences in one’s capacity to learn second language.

Period of Second Language Exposure to Iranian Learners

Iran has a very conservative society. Considering the development of global relations with other countries, and the growing interest of new technology and science globally, Iranians find proficiency in L2 necessary (Hosseini, 2007, p. 11). There is increasing interest of parents to allow their children to be proficient in pronunciation especially of English.

We will write
a custom essay
specifically for you
Get your first paper with
15% OFF

Cognizant with the fact that these children achieve proficiency faster and naturally than adults, Iranian parents allow their children to learn English at an early age of six years. According to Sadighi (2000, p. 40) majority of Iranian adult learners do not attain proficiency in pronunciation levels after graduation.

They are usually faced with inability to communicate and handle foreign languages such as English after graduation (Sadighi, 2000, p. 40). Iranian adolescents and adult learners have restricted opportunities to apply functionally and are not motivated to learn it. This is in sharp contrast to Iranian children who are exposed to foreign language at an early age.

Iranian public schools do not seem to enhance proficiency in pronunciation among adult learners. For these reason, many Iranian learners join English private institutions to study English as an extra curricula activity after school hours. Private English institutions in Iran have three levels; children, juniors, and adults. Learning materials for children differ from those of juniors and adults.

All learners under the age of 7 who do not know how to read and write are placed in children level. Materials children learn at this level are simple and mostly with pictures. These materials get more advanced as they progress to other levels and more reading and writing added.

At children level, a learner begins from first level where children are taught picture naming, simple sentences, and classroom language. Junior and Adult levels as well, consist of several levels starting from the easiest one to the most difficult.

In the words of Federico Fellini, “A different language is a different vision of life.” Although there is much truth to this quote, it does not touch on another truth about learning a different language; that it is a complex process that many people may not ever fully achieve.

This is due to the fact that there are many factors that can affect one’s ability to reach second language proficiency. Some of these factors include: gender, socioeconomic status, the amount of exposure to the language, the amount of exposure to the culture, and also age. Age is the most common factor that affects second language acquisition.

A significant amount of this research has been focused on determining the ages of a “critical period” during which language abilities peak, and after which they level off and language proficiency becomes more difficult to achieve. Ellis (2000, p. 6) has suggested that this period ends at puberty, which makes learning a second language past the age of twelve a more difficult task.

As a result, the age at which one begins learning a second language influences the rate of acquisition and ultimate proficiency in various aspects of that language. This applies perfectly with Iranian SLA as well.

For Iranian learners, motivation is one of the complex variables applied to explain individual differences in achieving proficiency in pronunciation (Sadighi, 2000, p. 42). Many studies on SLA in Iran explore learners’ integrative and instrumental motivation in achieving proficiency in pronunciation. This approach has two types of motivation; integrative and instrumental among different levels of learners.

Integrative L2 learners in Iran show interest in learning about Iranian culture and people of the intended language. Instrumentally motivated Iranian learners’ on the other hand, have pragmatic considerations in their minds regarding second language acquisition. For instance, acquiring language for employment, or earning more pay (Sadighi, 2000, p. 10).

Adult learning of proficiency in pronunciation among Iranians is not easy. Sadighi (2000, p. 11) cites research carried out at Azad University to determine the effects of both integrative and instrumental motivation on senior students proficiency in English. The outcomes of investigation indicated marked difference between the means of English proficiency grades of integrative motivated learners and instrumentally motivated learners.

The study deduced association between students’ English in English with integrated and instrumental motivation. In addition, learners’ motivation in achieving English proficiency was also affected by factors which were of personal, social and educational.

A Review of Related Literature on Effects of Age on Second Language Acquisition

Normal developing children become proficient in pronunciation at the same rate world over. This occurs despite the fact that there are differences in patterns of interaction between parents and children. Children tend to learn in a specific pattern that is systematic inherently.

As an individual difference, age plays an important role in enhancing proficiency in pronunciation of second language. Ellis (2009, p. 329) believes that children are more successful in being fluent in SLA compared to adult. There is a relationship between age of learning and attainment in some aspects of second language with age being strongest predictor of success.

This is backed by Critical Path Hypothesis approach. In this hypothesis, Lenneberg (1967, p. 240), posits that proficiency in language must occur before puberty for the learner to achieve native like proficiency.

Age as a factor of individual differences affects achievement of proficiency in pronunciation of second language.. According to Ellis (2000, p. 32), it is not easy to arrive at a coherent picture of individual differences. He categorizes the variables involved in individual differences into three main classes: learner’s belief about language learning was classified as the main type.

Learners under this category have pre-conceived ideas about matters such as significance of language aptitude, nature of learning new language, and strategies that work well; secondly, Ellis (2000, p. 5) recognizes affective states as the second main type of variable that affects proficiency in pronunciation of second language.

He cites fear of beginning to learn the second language by some learners, and over confidences by others as reason. For Iranians fear of embracing Western values compounds this fear. Other learners develop anxiety due to competitive natures and how they perceive whether or not they are progressing (Coppieters, 1997, p.545).

The Critical Path Hypothesis explains the effect of age on acquisition of second language (Lenneberg, 1967, p.112). This hypothesis has been tested by a number of studies by comparing findings on adults and children in the area of pronunciation. Collier (1988, P. 334) in her publication the “Effect of Age on Acquisition of a Second Language”, dismisses studies that are concentrate on pronunciation specifically (Ellis, 2000, p. 12).

After evaluation of learners” acquisition of proficiency in pronunciation after exposure to a second language, these studies reveal that younger learners attained proficiency in pronunciation that was accent free compared to adults just past puberty (Ellis, p. 15).

Collier (1988, p. 330) dismisses these studies as the import to test the hypothesis concentrates more on the pronunciation domain of language proficiency, more o, to the dichotomy of child and adult. Collier is of the opinion that researchers and educators should do more than just pronunciation.

For this reason, she came up with a comprehensive analysis of the critical period needed to attain proficiency in numerous content areas. She discovered that within four and five years, children of age 8-12 years attained set norms first. Children of the ages of 5-7 attained the set norms in a period approximated to be about 5-8 years.

The older group aged 12-15 years had the greatest challenges attaining age and grade norms. Positively, Collier discovered that age effect diminishes over a period of time as the learner becomes more proficient in the new language (Collier, 1988, 333).

Piaget (1956, p. 1112) in his research “The Language and Thought of the Child” differentiated egocentric and socialized talk and discovered other aspects of speech that were fascinating in children.

His studies opened the floodgates to numerous studies about the important area of language development in childhood (Piaget, 1926, 1114). Observations made by Piaget (1926, p.1112) and Lenneberg’s (1967, p. 110) hypothesis, explain that the important changes of a child’s brain occurs during the ages of between two and twelve (Prabhu, 1987, p. 232).

There is a common say that describes a child’s brain as being like a sponge. Seemingly, this is brought upon by young children’s innate ability to grasp on things rather faster compared to adults. Among other interesting things, these include language. In this interest, De Houwer (2006, p. 229) cites a specific study done to weigh lexical grasp in child bilinguals.

The study deduced that children as young as thirteen months can be considered bilingual because they have ability at this tentative age comprehend translation equivalents (De Houwer, 2006, 330). Translation equivalents describe words from two or more languages that have the same adult meaning.

In addition, the study points out comprehension as a central characteristic of bilingual learning process, and this begins to happen actively as early as infancy (De Houwer, 2006, 331).

Szuber (2006, p. 125) posits that most studies on language tend concentrate on early childhood compared to adulthood. In this regard, adolescence as an interesting period is commonly ignored. World over, majority of adolescents are either born in a foreign country or speak a language other than their native languages (Szuber, 2006, p. 121).

Acquisition of second language in this group is first rising and more attention must be accorded by researchers and educators alike (Szuber, 2006, P.126). It is fact that young children acquire language in more natural setting, whereas adult acquire it in a structured setting such as classroom.

There is no mention of adolescents who fall in between young children and adults. These adolescents have the advantage and drawback of changing liberally from one environment to the next, and thus control amount of language they are exposed to.

This can be a disadvantage in that when adolescents feel uncomfortable, there is possibility of hiding behind their native language and thus receiving limited exposure to second language (Ruiz de Zarobe, 2005, p. 106).

This happens among Iranian learners as well. Compared to younger immigrants in the US who are immersed in English, and adult learners who in most cases learn by comparing second language with their first, adolescents face variety of alternatives concerning amount of interaction in either language both in and outside classroom.

In essence, they may communicate either language while at school, with parents and siblings at home, their peers in neighborhoods, and others (Szuber, 2006, P.136).

Szuber (2006, p. 126) cites a study conducted in Chicago on about sixty Polish immigrants which indicated that majority of adolescents speak least English with their parents, with their siblings, and English more with peers and teachers at school.

The Critical Period Hypothesis, on the other hand, depicts the time frame these adolescents learn new language as past the period they can easily learn second language (Birdsong, 1992, p. 123).. Adolescents need to be very conscious and put more effort to learn the new language. However, they will most likely not achieve proficiency as native speakers.

Szuber (2006, P. 127) explains other reasons that may it difficult for immigrants to acquire a second language during puberty. Adolescents confront anxiety from having to adjust to a new environment; and also face traumas related to typical pubescent. These include; problems of self image, low levels of self esteem, self consciousness and others.

This explains why adolescents who feel anxious normally retreat to their native language and shy or are timid of speaking the second language at that period in their lives. Hence, biological and environmental factors combined greatly influences adults second language learning (Gass, 1998, p. 300)..

Clearly, adults are disadvantaged in trying to learn and speak second language proficiently. Lenneberg (1967, 334) cites arguments that support two different positions on this matter, such as; nativist approach which includes contributions from Chomsky.

Lenneberg (1967, p. 335) notes approaches developed by Chomsky in language learning. First, he notes Chomsky’s claims that humans have a Language Acquisition Device in their brains from birth. Unknowingly, humans apply this mechanism to learn their first language.

Secondly, Chomsky devised Universal Grammar idea which consisted of basic rules of grammar found in all human languages they acquire from birth. The Critical Period Approach by Lenneberg (1967, p. 337) also explains the loss of inborn language potentials in adults. Despite the fact that adult learners tend to indicate initial quick progress, proficiency in most cases is not achieved as it tends to level out.

Learning Style approaches that Influence on Second Language Acquisition

The notion of learning as postulated by Pask (1972, P. 217) is viewed as deriving from the psychological behaviors of learners. Psychological behaviors as envisaged are necessary as they are seen as indicators on how second language learners’ associate with, view, and respond to the learning environment (Schleppegrell, 2003, P. 231).

This argument was fully backed by Willing (1987) that the style of learning shows “the totality of psychological functioning”. A number of distinctions in terms of learning styles have been made in cognitive psychology domain. For example, Bruner et al (1959, P. 641) differentiates focuses and scanners. Learning styles that confront a problem by putting emphasis on one feature at a time are known.

Scanners on the other hand are those learning styles that tackle several features at a time. Pask (1972, p. 222) differentiates serialists and holists in terms of whether learners perform with hypotheses that are either simple or complex.

Other differences are pegged on learners’ personality in as much as differences in learning styles. Such differences involve both; impulsive and reflective thinkers, divergent and convergent thinkers and others (Reid, 1987, p. 87).

Concerning second language acquisition, attention has been centered in field dependence and field independence. Field independent variables included; adolescents and adults, males, object oriented jobs, urban, technological societies, free social structures, and individualistic people.

Field dependent variables included; children, females, people oriented jobs, rural, agrarian societies, rigid social structures, and group centered people (Reid, 1987, p. 87).

Asher (1971, P. 541) posits that field independent peoples mode of perception is to a larger extent dominated by the complete organization of the surrounding field. On the other hand, in field dependence people’s perception modes, sections of the field are experienced, as distinct from organized ground.

Richards (1986, p. 27) highlights studies that examined the relationship that exist between Field Independent variables/Field Dependent variables and second language learning. Together with such factors as; sex of learners’ social environment, personality, social structure, and social environment, the age of learners’ is also involved in Field Independent/Field Dependent differences.

This implies that adults and adolescents are Field Independent learners and children are Field Dependent variables. One hypothesis of the features involving field independent learners is that they display a better performance in a formal second language learning environment. Field Independent learners on the hand, perform better in an informal environment.

This hypothesis interestingly relates to the evidence in the age factor which indicates that in an environment such as classroom where formal language instruction is issued, adult learners do better than children (Asher, 1967, P.331). Contrastingly, children perform better than adults and adolescents in a natural language learning environment (Asher, 1967, p. 332).

Doubts were however, registered in the analysis between Field Independence/Field Dependence and second language results. D’Anglejan (1985, P. 19) for instance, discovered a number of overlaps between Field independence/Field Dependence and verbal intelligence. It also reported that Field Independent variables only explained less than one percent variance in tests of four language skills.

The investigation of FI/FD difference caused little outcome on the relationship between cognitive style and second language acquisition (D’Anglejan, 1985, p. 20). Despite the fact that adults and children are classified as Field Independent and Field Dependent respectively, it is not well known how age differences affect the learning of the second language.

In addition, fewer studies have been done on the relationship between FI/FD and age, especially to find out whether children being field dependent and adults/adolescents being field independent applies to learning both first and second languages (Asher, 1967, p. 332)..

The influence of Age on Second Language Acquisition Rate

When discussing the influence of age on second language acquisition, many studies tend to differentiate the rate of language acquisition and achievement. For example, Krashen (1979, P. 43) suggest that the rate of second language at an early stage and long term achievement should be treated separately.

Incase such distinctions are made, it can be deduced that older learners, including adolescents are much faster than children at an early stage, and children are superior that adult learners in long term achievement. This means that children may not be fast learners, but they may be higher achievers in the long run.

Adults including adolescents on the other hand, do not achieve such high proficiency. Furthermore, studies by Krashen (1979, P. 42) argue that adolescents learn more quickly than younger children at initial stage of second language.

Additional studies by Snow (1978, P. 1114) support their findings of adolescents being superior at initial stage of second language learning. As concerns morphology, and syntax, adolescents did best, followed by adults, with children coming last.

Small differences were however discovered on pronunciation and grammar. Olsen (1973, 263) experiment deduced adults performing better significantly than children in the German language pronunciation.

In circumstances where fluency is concerned, adults are shown by many studies to progress slowly compared to children. A good example is a study by Cochrane (1980, 28) which examined the ability of Japanese children and adults to distinguish English I and r sounds. The two control groups were naturalistically exposed to the sounds. Children were found to out perform adults.

Both groups were subsequently subjected to another experiment, where they were both given same amount of formal instruction on phonemic differences of sounds before they were tested. Adults outperformed children in this case.

This evidence from Cochrane (1980, p, 29) studies seems to be more applicable to grammar than pronunciation among Iranian learners. This is because children seem to learn faster than adults, although in the case of formal learning circumstances, adults do better even in the area of learning.

In sum, when time and exposure to second language is controlled, adults and adolescents make quick initial progress than children (Cochrane, 1980, 32).

Again, older children progress faster than younger children specifically in learning morphological, and lexical aspects of the second language, and acquiring phonological aspects as well. This has been happening especially when the exposure takes place in a formal environment such as classroom.

Conclusions

In summery, Iranian adult learners cannot reach same level of proficiency in pronunciation as children. Children can learn any language well, even several languages at once, by the time they are six years old without any formal instruction just by being raised in an environment where the language is spoken. However, this is no longer an option when one attains the age of six and over.

Linguists’ postulate that, physical changes occur in human brain at this age. Lenneberg (1967, p. 221) cites known cases of children who were raised in complete isolation who were discovered after the age of six show that they were never able to learn a human language later in life.

Lenneberg further postulates that SLA is a process that is innate and dependent on biology of the brain (Lenneberg, 1967, p. 111). Certain biological factors restrict the brain to a “critical period” for language acquisition from age two to adolescence.

Lenneberg believed that after the complete lateralization of the brain, it no longer had the ability to “reopen” the part of the brain that deals with learning language. When brain lateralization occurs, it loses plasticity making it more difficult to acquire a second language past puberty (Lenneberg, 1967, p. 112).

However, this does mean that adult Iranian learners never learn any new languages after the age of six. Rather, it is suggestive that they cannot learn them by the same methods with which they learn their first language as children. An adult needs structure, grammatical structure as well as discipline, in order to assimilate the dizzying array of sounds and phrases that make up the language they are trying to learn (Ellis, 2002, p. 143).

If you have a savant for languages, or if this is your third or fourth foreign language, you may get by with a good instructional book instead of a flesh-and-blood instructor. However, even accomplished polyglots will benefit from actual classroom experience. Everyone else should not do without it.

In children, second language acquisition is similar to first language acquisition because they do not need to ponder about it. The critical period of language acquisition comes to a halt as children reach puberty. During adolescence, individuals attempt hard to acquire the new language while tackling the common challenges they face.

In learning the second language, adults have a daunting task a head of them. However, if the techniques applied to teach adults second languages continue to be enhanced, adults may attain second language proficiency.

References List

Abrahamian, E. 1982. Iran Between Two Revolutions. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

Asher, Price B., 1967. The Learning Strategy of the Total Physical Response: Some Age Differences. Child Development, 38, 1219-1227.

Birdsong, D., 1992. Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesis. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Brown, H. D.,.2000. Principles of Language Learning & Teaching… New York: Pearson Education.

Bruner, Goodnow, J. & Austin, G., 1959. A Study of Thinking. New York: Wiley & Sons.

Cochrane, R, M., 1980. The Acquisition of /r/ and /i/ by Japanese Children and Adults Learning English as A Second Language. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 1, 331-360.

Collier, V.P., 1988. The effect of age on acquisition of a second language. New York: Wiley & Sons.

Coppieters, R., 1987. Competence Differences Between Native and Fluent Non-Native Speakers. Language, 63, 41 (4), 544-73.

D’Anglejan, Renaud D, C., 1985. Learner Characteristics and Second Language Acquisition. Language Learning, 35, 1-19.

De Houwer, A., 2006. Early Understanding of Two Words for the same Thing: A CDI Study of Lexical Comprehension in Infant Bilinguals. International Journal of Bilingualism, 10 (3), 331-333.

Diessel, H., & Tomassello, M., 2000. The Development of Relative Clauses in Spontaneous Child Speech. Cognitive Linguistics 11 (1/2), 131-152.

Ellis, N., 2002. Frequency effects in language processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24:143–188.

Ellis, N. & Collins, L.,2009. Input and Second Language Acquisition: The Roles of Frequency, Form, and Function Introduction to the Special Issue. Modern Language Journal , 93, 329-335.

Ellis, R., 2003. The Study of Language Acquisition. New York: Oxford University Press.

Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A., 1998. The Role of Input and Interaction in Second Language Acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 82, 299.

Gass, S. M., 1997. Input, Interaction and the Second LanguageLlearner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Hosseini, S., 2007. ELT in higher education in Iran and India: A critical view. Language in India, 7, 1-11. Web.

Krashen, S. Scarcella, R & Long, M., 1979. Child-Adult Differences in Second Language Acquisition. New York: Newbury House.

Lenneberg, E. H.,1967. Biological Foundations of Language. New York, NY: Wiley.

Menashri, D., 2001. Post-Revolutionary Politics in Iran. London: Frank Cass.

Olsen, Samuels S., 1973. The Relationship between Age and Accuracy of Foreign Language Pronunciation. Journal of Educational Research, 66, 263-67.

Pask, Scott B., 1972. Learning Strategies and Individual Competence. International Journal of Man Machine Studies, 4, 217-53.

Piaget, J.,1926. The Language and Thought of the Child. New York: Harcourt Brace.

Prabhu, N.S., 1987. Second language pedagogy. Oxford University Press.

Reid, J., 1987. The Learning Style References of ESL Students. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 87-111.

Richards, J.C. & Rogers, T.S., 1986. Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Ruiz de Zarobe, Y., 2005. Age and third language Production: A longitudinal study. International Journal of Multilinguism, 2(2), 105-111.

Sadighi, F., & Maghsudi, N.,.2000.. The Relationship between Motivation and English proficiency among Iranian EFL Learners. Indian journal of Applied Linguistics, 26, 39-52.

Schleppegrell, M., 2003. The older language learner. Web.

Snow, Hoefnagel M., 1978. The Critical age of Language Acquisition. Child Development, 49, 1114-1128.

Szuber, A., 2007. Native Polish-speaking adolescent immigrants’ exposure to and use of English. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilinguism, 10 (1), 26-56.

Willing, K., 1987. Learning Style and Adult Migrant Education. Adelaide: National curriculum Resource Center.

Print
Need an custom research paper on Can Iranian Adults Reach Same Level of Proficiency as Children? written from scratch by a professional specifically for you?
808 writers online
Cite This paper
Select a referencing style:

Reference

IvyPanda. (2023, December 9). Can Iranian Adults Reach Same Level of Proficiency as Children? https://ivypanda.com/essays/can-iranian-adults-reach-same-level-of-proficiency-as-children-essay/

Work Cited

"Can Iranian Adults Reach Same Level of Proficiency as Children?" IvyPanda, 9 Dec. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/can-iranian-adults-reach-same-level-of-proficiency-as-children-essay/.

References

IvyPanda. (2023) 'Can Iranian Adults Reach Same Level of Proficiency as Children'. 9 December.

References

IvyPanda. 2023. "Can Iranian Adults Reach Same Level of Proficiency as Children?" December 9, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/can-iranian-adults-reach-same-level-of-proficiency-as-children-essay/.

1. IvyPanda. "Can Iranian Adults Reach Same Level of Proficiency as Children?" December 9, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/can-iranian-adults-reach-same-level-of-proficiency-as-children-essay/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "Can Iranian Adults Reach Same Level of Proficiency as Children?" December 9, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/can-iranian-adults-reach-same-level-of-proficiency-as-children-essay/.

Powered by CiteTotal, online essay citation maker
If you are the copyright owner of this paper and no longer wish to have your work published on IvyPanda. Request the removal
More related papers
Cite
Print
1 / 1