'Critical' Age

[Bob Fitzke]

Reading thus stimulated a question, "Has anyone ever analyzed the evolution of
language from the perspective of evolutionary theory?"

Bob

"A. Vine" wrote:

> "Aaron E. Drews" wrote:
> >
> >
> > My question: is there a 'critical age' when we stop acquiring new forms
> > (mostly lexical items, since the critical age for other aspects of the
> > grammar are more or less established).  dInIs obviously stopped aquiring
> > new forms when he left high school.  I stopped around 18, too.
> >
> > One example in C&T lists 5 different age groups for Appalachian 'done':
> > 8-11; 12-14; 15-18; 20-40;  40+. These categories strongly suggest a
> > critical age of 18-ish and any new forms we acquire after 18 are flukes.
> >
> > It looks like I've answered my own question, but only based on three
> > examples, two of which are self-reports.  Has anyone ever said "after 18,
> > the use of innovative forms rapidly declines"?  Has anyone actually tried
> > tying in the critical period hypothesis to sociolinguistics? Or has it
> > only been hinted at as part of a bigger age-grading issue, as in C&T?
> >
>
> Well, I have a theory (which is mine and belongs to me - a-hem! The next thing I
> will type will be my theory - a-hem!), and that theory is:
>
> It seems that a lot of "young people's" vocabulary comes from a school/hanging
> out environment.  It seems that new language is more likely to develop when a
> group of folks are thrown into the same situation.  There is no more stable time
> than school to produce this sort of environment.  Once folks leave school, the
> only opportunity to be immersed in a large group experiencing something similar
> is work.  Workplaces produce jargon, but it tends to be specific to the type of
> work.  The reason young people's language is more universal is that their
> immersion experience is more universal.  School covers a wide range of topics,
> so it makes no sense to develop language around one of those topics.  Instead
> the language centers around their common activities, like attending school,
> going out with friends, buying things, sports and activites, etc.
>
> I notice no-one mentions college-speak, but it definitely exists.  It is a less
> universal experience, however.
>
> Now, I realize that this is probably not an original theory.  I'm sure there are
> studies somewhere which confirm this.  This is merely a theory based on
> observation.
> --
> Andrea Vine, avine at eng.sun.com, iPlanet i18n architect
> Guilty feet have got no rhythm.
> -- George Michael