And the violations of semantics and
meaning are much less sensitive to when a language is learned.
And, and we could ask a couple of questions of why that might be, and
if we think about the types of sentence that are used that are very
academic types of sentences, they're involving general knowledge.
Then we realize that these are things that can be
transferred more easily from one language to the other, right?
A dog is a dog.
A chair is a chair.
There are slight difference across different countries.
I'm not trying to say there aren't any differences, but in terms of
the standard academic types of concepts that are tested in these experiments,
those transfer quite easily and are adapted quite easily across languages.
But in terms of grammar, those don't seem to transfer quite easily.
Hence, they're quite sensitive to age of acquisition.
Now at this point, you might be wondering, well, so, so is it that I
have to be exposed to a language early in life to have native-like you know,
processing in my brain of, of a grammatical error?
And there's a lot of controversy about this, right,
studies are not all lined up in that direction that,
that seems to be a general trend that grammar is sensitive to age.
But there are other studies that have found that in fact at very high levels of
proficiency, when speakers are quite good, they begin to show more
native-like patterns, work done by Sonia Rossi and Angela Forizzi in Germany.