THE PSYCHOLOGY OF SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION :

LANGUAGE AND THE BRAIN

INGGY YULIANI PRIBADY

INTRODUCTION

The brain, the most powerful learning tool that a student brings to the classroom is highly
complex and something of a mystery. In recent years, scientists have made unprecedented
progress toward unlocking the secrets of how our brains learn.

Language is a function of the peculiar structure of the human brain. Several areas of the
brain have been identified with linguistic skills, such as producing and understanding
speech. Furthermore, people with brain damage in specific areas have difficulties with very
specific aspects of language, implying that it is a highly compartmentalized process.
Furthermore, human brains are functionally asymmetrical, concentrating many areas
essential for speech production in one hemisphere.

THE BRAIN’S FUNCTION

There are two major areas of the human brain that are responsible for language: Broca's
area, which is though to be partially responsible for language production (putting together
sentences, using proper syntax, etc.) and Wernicke's area, which is thought to be partially
responsible for language processing (untangling others' sentences and analyzing them for
syntax, inflection, etc.). In general, the areas that control language would be adjacent to
one another if the human brain was laid out as a flat sheet.

Speaking the written word

1
 To speak a word that is read,
information must first get to the primary visual cortex. From the primary visual cortex,
information is transmitted to the posterior speech area, including Wernicke's area. From
Wernicke's area, information travels to Broca's area, then to the Primary Motor Cortex.

Speaking the heard word

To speak a word that is heard,

information must first get to the primary auditory cortex. From the primary auditory cortex,
information is transmitted to the posterior speech area, including Wernicke's area. From
Wernicke's area, information travels to Broca's area, then to the Primary Motor Cortex.
(http://faculty.washington.edu , accessed 24th December 2009)

How Independent are the languages of multilingual speakers?

2
There are individual variations among the speakers and also very complex factors which
must be taken into account to determine how independent the languages of multilingual
speakers are. It can be concluded that multiple language system are neither completely
separate nor completely fused. (Saville – Troike ,2006:71)

Ervin and Osgood (1954) suggested a three way possibility for how languages relate in an
individual’s mind, which are called coordinate, compound, and subordinate bilingualism.
According to these authors, bilinguals can develop their languages differently depending
upon the mode of acquisition. Some bilinguals are able to develop and maintain two more
or less independent linguistic schemes or “coordinate linguistic organization,” while others
develop a closer interaction between their languages than is the case in coordinate
bilingualism which refers as “compound linguistic organization.”And “subordinate linguistic
organization “which develop to access through another.
According to Ervin and Osgood as cited in Skutnabb & Kangas (1981:98) speakers are
compound bilinguals if they have either learnt one language by means of the other or both
language in the same environment, for example at home. Coordinate or real bilingual are
those who have learnt two languages in different context for example at home and the
other at school or at work.
The distinction among those three linguistics organization can be explained further, as we
can see from the explanation below.
 For compound bilinguals, words and phrases in different languages are the same
concepts. That means that 'chien' and 'dog' are two words for the same concept for
a French-English speaker of this type. These speakers are usually fluent in both
languages.

 For coordinate bilinguals, words and phrases in the speaker's mind are all related to
their own unique concepts. Thus a bilingual speaker of this type has different
associations for 'chien' and for 'dog'. In these individuals, one language, usually the
first language, is more dominant than the other, and the first language may be used
to think through the second language. These speakers are known to use very
different intonation and pronunciation features, and sometimes to assert the feeling
of having different personalities attached to each of their languages.

3
  A sub-group of the latter is the subordinate bilingual, which is typical of beginning
second language learners. (http://en.wikipedia.org ,accessed 24th December 2009)

Morever, Bourque (1995) argues that (1) Compound bilinguals, who acquired both
languages in early childhood and speak both with high proficiency; and (2) Subordinate
bilinguals, who started speaking their second language during or after adolescence and have
reduced L2 proficiency (http://digitool.library.mcgill.ca, accessed 24th December 2009)

The organization of the brain and the age of acquisition

The age of acquisition influences brain organization for many second language learners.
Valid (2003) as cited in Seville – Troke (2006:71) concludes that individuals who acquire L2
later in life show more right hemisphere involvement. It is supported by, Wuilemin and
Richards (1994) report more right – hemisphere involvement for individuals who acquire L2
between ages nine and twelve than those who acquire L2 before age 4.

It is supported further by other researcher which pointed out that age of acquisition has
been found to influence hemispheric representation, with earlier –acquired languages
being more left-lateralized and later- acquired languages being more bilaterally
represented. (Albert and Obler, 1978; Neville et al., 1997; Vaid and Hall, 1991; Vaid and
Hull, 2002) as cited in Bhatia and Ritchie (2004:75)

David Singleton (1995) states that in learning a second language, "younger = better in the
long run," but points out that there are many exceptions, noting that five percent of adult
bilinguals master a second language even though they begin learning it when they are well
into adulthood — long after any critical period has presumably come to a close. Evidence is
controversial the Second Language Acquisition involves a critical period, nevertheless, it is
generally agreed that Younger people learning a second language typically achieve fluency
more often than older learners. Older learners may be able to speak the language but will
lack the native fluidity of younger learners. (http://en.wikipedia.org , accessed 24th
December 2009)

4
Children can learn languages faster than adults; the immigrant children translate for their
parents who have not learned the language; and that child learners speak without a foreign
accent, whereas this is impossible for adult learners.
The argument is that children are superior to adults in learning second languages because
their brains are more flexible (Lenneberg, 1967; Penfield & Roberts, 1959).
They can learn languages easily because their cortex is more plastic than that of older
learners. (http://lists.becta.org.uk , accessed 24th December2009)
The brain damage and the language recovery
Aphasia is a disorder that results from damage to portions of the brain that are responsible
for language. For most people, these are areas on the left side (hemisphere) of the brain.
Aphasia usually occurs suddenly, often as the result of a stroke or head injury, but it may
also develop slowly, as in the case of a brain tumor, an infection, or dementia. The disorder
impairs the expression and understanding of language as well as reading and writing.
Aphasia may co-occur with speech disorders such as dysarthria or apraxia of speech, which
also result from brain damage.

There are two broad categories of aphasia: fluent and non-fluent.

Damage to the temporal lobe of the brain may result in a fluent aphasia called Wernicke’s
aphasia . In most people, the damage occurs in the left temporal lobe, although it can result
from damage to the right lobe as well. People with Wernicke’s aphasia may speak in long
sentences that have no meaning, add unnecessary words, and even create made-up words.
People with Wernicke’s aphasia usually have great difficulty understanding speech, and they
are often unaware of their mistakes. These individuals usually have no body weakness
because their brain injury is not near the parts of the brain that control movement.

A type of non-fluent aphasia is Broca’s aphasia. People with Broca’s aphasia have damage to
the frontal lobe of the brain. They frequently speak in short phrases that make sense but are
produced with great effort. They often omit small words such as ”is,” ”and,” and ”the.” For
example, a person with Broca’s aphasia may say, ”Walk dog,” meaning, ”I will take the dog
for a walk,” or ”book book two table,” for ”There are two books on the table.” People with
Broca’s aphasia typically understand the speech of others fairly well. Because of this, they
are often aware of their difficulties and can become easily frustrated. People with Broca’s
5
aphasia often have right-sided weakness or paralysis of the arm and leg because the frontal
lobe is also important for motor movements.

Another type of non-fluent aphasia, global aphasia, results from damage to extensive
portions of the language areas of the brain. Individuals with global aphasia have severe
communication difficulties and may be extremely limited in their ability to speak or
comprehend language.

There are other types of aphasia, each of which results from damage to different language
areas in the brain. Some people may have difficulty repeating words and sentences even
though they can speak and they understand the meaning of the word or sentence. Others
may have difficulty naming objects even though they know what the object is and what it
may be used for. (http://www.nidcd.nih.gov , accessed 24th December 2009)

The brain damage results in the similar patterns of loss and recovery for both both/all of
most multilingual person’s languages, but many exceptions have been reported. Obler and
Gjerlow (1999) conclude rather than a significant factor in initial recovery is which language
was used in the years prior to the incident which caused the damage, whether this is L1 or
L2. (Saville-Troike, 2006:72)

Alber and Obler (1978) as cited in Bhatia and Ritchie (2004:74) pointed out that in most
cases bilingual aphasia, the two (or more) languages recover proportionally to their pre –
morbid proficiency. In those instances where differential recovery was evidenced, however,
the language most frequently used at the time of the patient’s lesion was the most likely to
be the first recovered.

Conclusion

Language is one of the pillars of the human intellect. It is the principal means whereby individuals
formulate thoughts and convey them to others. It plays a role in analyzing the world, in reasoning,
solving problems, and planning actions. It allows us to convey memories of the past and beliefs
6
about the future, to engage others about events that have not taken place, and to express the
relations between events.

Scientists have tried for over a century to understand how the brain learns, stores, and processes
language. The task is difficult because there are no animals which have symbol systems as rich as
language. Therefore, for a long time, information about how the brain processed language could
only come from the study of the effects on language of neurological disease in humans.

Aphasi- ologists observe the great variety of communication disorders that can arise as a
consequence of damage to the language areas of the brain by strokes, tumours or traumatic injury.
Linguists formulated their theories of human language independently of any serious considerations
of language loss in aphasia. The study of aphasia make us understand the brain organization for
language functions.

References

Becta.2009.Optimum Age for Language Learning. Available at http://lists.becta.org.uk

Bhatia, Tej K.,and Richie,Wiliam C. 2004. The Handbook of Bilingalism.Blackwell Publishing,

USA.
Borque,Michelle A.1995. Bilingual lexical organization in compound vs. subordinate normal
subjects : an examination of the processing of cognates vs. noncognates. Available at
http://digitool.library.mcgill.ca
Chudler, Eric H.2009.The Brain and Language. Available at http://faculty.washington.edu
National Institute on Deafness and other Communication Disorders.2009. Aphasia. Available
at http://www.nidcd.nih.gov
Skutnabb – Kargas,T.1981. Billingualism or not :The Education of Minorities. Multilingual
Matters.Ltd, England.
Troike –Saville, M.2006. Introducing Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge University
Press,USA.
Wikipedia.2009. Multilingualism.Available at http://en.wikipedia.org

7
8