The last decade has produced an explosion in neuroscience research examining young childrens

early processing of language that has implications for education. Noninvasive, safe functional

brain measurements have now been proven feasible for use with children starting at birth. In the

arena of language, the neural signatures of learning can be documented at a remarkably early

point in development, and these early measures predict performance in childrens language and

pre-reading abilities in the second, third, and fifth year of life, a finding with theoretical and

educational import.

Developmental studies suggest that children learn more and learn earlier than previously thought.

Behavioral and brain studies on developing children indicate that childrens skills, measured

very early in infancy, predict their later performance and learning. For example, measures of

phonetic learning in the first year of life predict language skills between 18 and 30 months of

age, and also predict language abilities and pre-literacy skills at the age of 5 years. Moreover, by

the age of 5, prior to formal schooling, our studies show that brain activation in brain areas

related to language and literacy are strongly correlated with the socio-economic status (SES) of

the childrens families. The implication of these findings is that childrens learning trajectories

regarding language are influenced by their experiences well before the start of school.

Recent advances in functional neuroimaging technology have allowed for a better understanding

of how language acquisition is manifested physically in the brain. Language acquisition almost

always occurs in children during a period of rapid increase in brain volume. At this point in

development, a child has many more neural connections than he or she will have as an adult,

allowing for the child to be more able to learn new things than he or she would be as an adult.(

Nadia, Steve. "KID'S BRAIN POWER"

Language acquisition has been studied from the perspective of developmental psychology and

neuroscience,[52] which looks at learning to use and understand language parallel to a child's

brain development. It has been determined, through empirical research on developmentally

normal children, as well as through some extreme cases of language deprivation, that there is a

"sensitive period" of language acquisition in which human infants have the ability to learn any

language. Several findings have observed that from birth until the age of six months, infants can

discriminate the phonetic contrasts of all languages. Researchers believe that this gives infants

the ability to acquire the language spoken around them. After such an age, the child is able to

perceive only the phonemes specific to the language learned. The reduced phonemic sensitivity

enables children to build phonemic categories and recognize stress patterns and sound

combinations specific to the language they are acquiring.[53] As Wilder Penfield noted, "Before

the child begins to speak and to perceive, the uncommitted cortex is a blank slate on which

nothing has been written. In the ensuing years much is written, and the writing is normally never

erased. After the age of ten or twelve, the general functional connections have been established

and fixed for the speech cortex." According to the sensitive or critical period models, the age at

which a child acquires the ability to use language is a predictor of how well he or she is

ultimately able to use language.[54] However, there may be an age at which becoming a fluent

and natural user of a language is no longer possible.[citation needed] Our brains may be automatically

wired to learn languages,[citation needed] but the ability does not last into adulthood in the same way

that it exists during development.[citation needed] By the onset of puberty (around age 12), language

acquisition has typically been solidified and it becomes more difficult to learn a language in the

same way a native speaker would.[citation needed] Just like children who speak vocally, deaf children

go through the same critical period. Deaf children who acquire their first language later in life
show lower performance in complex aspects of grammar.[55] At this point, it is usually a second

language that a person is trying to acquire and not a first.[12]

Assuming that children are exposed to language during the critical period,[56] it is almost never

missed by cognitively normal childrenhumans are so well prepared to learn language that it

becomes almost impossible not to. Researchers are unable to experimentally test the effects of

the sensitive period of development on language acquisition, because it would be unethical to

deprive children of language until this period is over. However, case studies on abused, language

deprived children show that they were extremely limited in their language skills, even after

instruction.[57]

At a very young age, children can already distinguish between different sounds but cannot

produce them yet. However, during infancy, children begin to babble. Deaf babies babble in the

same order when hearing sounds as non-deaf babies do, thus showing that babbling is not caused

by babies simply imitating certain sounds, but is actually a natural part of the process of

language development. However, deaf babies do often babble less than non-deaf babies and they

begin to babble later on in infancy (begin babbling at 11 months as compared to 6 months) when

compared to non-deaf babies.[58]

According to several linguists, neurocognitive research has confirmed many standards of

language learning, such as: "learning engages the entire person (cognitive, affective, and

psychomotor domains), the human brain seeks patterns in its searching for meaning, emotions

affect all aspects of learning, retention and recall, past experience always affects new learning,

the brain's working memory has a limited capacity, lecture usually results in the lowest degree of

retention, rehearsal is essential for retention, practice [alone] does not make perfect, and each
brain is unique" (Sousa, 2006, p. 274). In terms of genetics, the gene ROBO1 has been

associated with phonological buffer integrity or length.[80]

Although it is difficult to determine without invasive measures which exact parts of the brain

become most active and important for language acquisition, fMRI and PET technology has

allowed for some conclusions to be made about where language may be centered. Kuniyoshi

Sakai proposed, based on several neuroimaging studies, that there may be a "grammar center",

where language is primarily processed in the left lateral premotor cortex (located near the pre

central sulcus and the inferior frontal sulcus). Additionally, these studies proposed that first

language and second-language acquisition may be represented differently in the cortex.[12] In a

study conducted by Newman et al., the relationship between cognitive neuroscience and

language acquisition was compared through a standardized test procedure involving native

speakers of English and native Spanish speakers who have all had a similar amount of exposure

to the English language(averaging about 26 years). Even the amount of times an examinee

blinked was taken into account during the examination process. It was concluded that the brain

does in fact process languages differently, but instead of it being directly related to proficiency

levels ,it is more so about how the brain processes language itself.[81]

During early infancy, language processing seems to occur over many areas in the brain.

However, over time, it gradually becomes concentrated into two areas Broca's area and

Wernicke's area. Broca's area is in the left frontal cortex and is primarily involved in the

production of the patterns in vocal and sign language. Wernicke's area is in the left temporal

cortex and is primarily involved in language comprehension. The specialization of these

language centers is so extensive that damage to them results in a critical condition known as

aphasia.[82]

White, EJ.; Hutka, SA.; Williams, LJ.; Moreno, S. (2013). "Learning, neural plasticity and
sensitive periods: implications for language acquisition, music training and transfer across the
lifespan.". Front Syst Neurosci. 7: 90. doi:10.3389/fnsys.2013.00090. PMC 3834520 .
PMID 24312022.
Kuhl P, Stevens E, Hayashi A, Deguchi T, Kiritani S, Iverson P; Stevens; Hayashi;
Deguchi; Kiritani; Iverson (February 2006). "Infants show a facilitation effect for native
language phonetic perception between 6 and 12 months". Developmental Science. 9 (2): F13
F21. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2006.00468.x. PMID 16472309.
Pallier, Cristophe. "Critical periods in language acquisition and language attrition" (PDF).
Newport, Elissa (1990). "Maturational constraints on language learning". Cognitive
Science. 14: 1128. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1401_2.
Purves, Dale; Augustine, George J.; Fitzpatrick, David; Katz, Lawrence C.; LaMantia,
Anthony-Samuel; McNamara, James O.; Williams, S. Mark (2001-01-01). "The Development of
Language: A Critical Period in Humans".
Curtiss, Susan (1977). Genie: a psycholinguistic study of a modern-day "wild child".
Boston: Academic Press. ISBN 0-12-196350-0. OCLC 3073433.

Schacter, Daniel L.; Gilbert, Daniel T.; Wegner, Daniel M. (2011) [2009]. "9". Psychology
[Second Edition] (Second ed.). United States of America: Worth Publishers. pp. 351352.

Bates, TC.; Luciano, M.; Medland, SE.; Montgomery, GW.; Wright, MJ.; Martin, NG. (Jan
2011). "Genetic variance in a component of the language acquisition device: ROBO1
polymorphisms associated with phonological buffer deficits". Behav Genet. 41 (1): 507.
doi:10.1007/s10519-010-9402-9. PMID 20949370.
Newman, A. J.; Tremblay, A.; Nichols, E. S.; Neville, H. J.; Ullman, M. T. (2012). "The
influence of language proficiency on lexical semantic processing in native and late learners of
english". Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 24 (5): 12051223. doi:10.1162/jocn_a_00143.

Schacter, Daniel L.; Gilbert, Daniel Todd.; Wegner, Daniel M. (2011). Psycholog. New York,
NY: Worth Publishers. p. 357. ISBN 978-1-4292-3719-2. OCLC 696604625.