Is there a critical period for second language acquisition, and can adults overcome its limitations? This study examines the Fundamental Difference Hypothesis, which posits that children learn language implicitly, while adults rely on problem-solving capacities and analytical reflection. The hypothesis suggests that high verbal analytical ability will enable some adults to achieve near-native competence, but that this ability will not significantly predict success for child learners. The study evaluated 57 Hungarian-speaking immigrants, and revealed that very few adults achieved scores comparable to child arrivals on a grammaticality judgment test. The adults who did achieve high scores also exhibited high levels of verbal analytical ability. These findings suggest that the few adults who performed well demonstrated a high level of verbal analytical ability, whereas this ability was not a key predictor for childhood arrivals. This discovery bolsters the conclusions of Johnson and Newport (1989) and offers an interpretation for the seeming inconsistencies in their findings. The results suggest that the critical period hypothesis, when limited to implicit learning mechanisms, may hold without exceptions. By focusing on implicit learning, this study offers a nuanced understanding of age effects in second language acquisition.
Published in Studies in Second Language Acquisition, this research is directly relevant to the journal's core focus on the processes involved in acquiring a second language. The study's investigation of the critical period hypothesis and the role of analytical abilities contributes to the understanding of fundamental aspects of second language learning.