When Are You Too Old to Learn a New Language?

No problemo...

https://lifehacker.com/word-lens-the-real-time-translation-app-is-now-free-1579220195

That's really neat.

Whether it's neat or not depends on what you use it for...

The word is problema, not problemo.

Similarly, "the other direction" should be translated "la otra dirección", not "el otro dirección", as shown on the illustration.

I began learning Spanish at age 25, and have continued to learn it for over half a century since... I'm still learning new words, both in English and Spanish.

There is a great side effect of learning a second language: it gives one a better understanding of the first language.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_problemo

Another Latin 'flunky' here...but, even in retirement, I still continue to TRY to learn more than "et tu Brutus?"

veni vidi vici...

According to this, you can still learn another language well enough to communicate, but probably not well enough to pass as a native speaker, (in case you want to become a spy).

https://lifehacker.com/you-can-still-become-fluent-in-another-language-as-an-a-1826143526

At 9 you learn better and at 8 you learn even better. And at 5 you grasp it even better.
I have been a teacher all my life and I can tell if a student came to Australia at 5 or 12 or 16.

When are you too old to learn a new language? When you are on your deathbed.

When are you too old to learn to speak or think a new language and follow all the rules of grammar properly? MIT has answered that question.

For most of us, a new language would be a very definite 2nd language; our dialect would easily distinguish us from native speakers, our grammar skills and vocabulary even more so.

What does this study mean to most of us? Nothing. It is like learning to play piano if we never practiced proficiently as children. We could learn to read the music, to make our fingers find the right octaves and actually get good at many songs - but we would likely screw up new songs that we sight read first time we played them - variable tempo, melody flowing in fits and starts, but would we say we could not play the instrument because of poor play attempting to sight read a new song?

Conversational language skills and proficiency are not mutually exclusive, but the MIT study defines learning a language as becoming fluent in grammar, vocabulary, and speech. I grew up in an Italian immigrant community where the grandparents of my friends were "off the boat" prior to WWI and they could communicate in English fairly well. At church they knew their Latin and rarely switched to Italian with others of their generation. In their homes they spoke Italian to their grandchildren (my friends) who would translate for me. Their English was too thick with Italian pronunciation for me to easily understand as a child. By MIT standards, they were not proficient in English, and though they ran their own businesses or worked in trades speaking conversational English - this study says these immigrants were not proficient.

Again, what use is this study? It confirms that to sound like a native speaker, we should learn a language - and probably via immersion - in order to gain proficiency in grammar, vocabulary, & delivery - ALL BEFORE THE AGE OF 17. Who would have thought this could be true?

Almost everyone?

Glad they devoted time to this study!

After re-reading the original article and many comments, I must clarify - this study by MIT has concluded that 17 is the age where a normal person can no longer learn a language with proficiency....superhuman maybe, but not a normal human. So for those of us learning our 2nd or 3rd language in High School - if we had really studied hard and possibly even lived in country (immersion), we might have become proficient in those languages.

And then there are those of us in the tails of the bell curve. I can read Spanish and play piano, but I do not consider myself proficient in speaking Spanish or in piano performance.

Good to know it was a wash at 17 - now I know why I struggle when I travel to Mexico. It is thrilling, I can read the local papers (they are getting smaller there too), but thank goodness for English/Spanish pocket dictionaries. Not only did I devote little energy beyond my examination scores in High School Spanish, but my age of learning (16-18) was limiting my potential. MIT has given me the proof I need to justify my lack of spoken proficiency!

You are too old to do something when you give up trying that thing, because you think you are too old to do it.

- me

Learning something depends on 3 things:
Your capability . . .
Your age . . .
and if money (reward) is involved.

"Learning something depends on 3 things:
Your capability . . .
Your age . . .
and if money (reward) is involved."

What about desire?

At the local library they have online program of learning languages....I tried a numerous times on learning German... but I never kept up with it... so, if I need to... I’d probably buy this.

I believe the main reason for not being to learn a language, at any age is because we are surrounded by people who are speaking the native tongue, in this case English. My wife speaks Spanish fluently and our 2 children grew up bi-lingual. I tried to learn Spanish, but I live in an English speaking world and have no real reason to learn another language. If learning another language is necessary for your job, then it is fairly easy to learn. If you reside in a country where no one speaks your language, you are forced to learn in order to survive. I studied Latin and French in school, but never got proficient in it.

to a certain degree,... for myself, there are (2) reasons...

1. I had worked with German Engineered drawings, and thought this would benefit.
2. And equally, I always like to do something that's out of my comfort zone, that different.

So, I guess everyone has a reason of their own.

While it is EASIER to learn a new language when you are younger, you're never "too old" to learn.

Learning new languages generally required decent "neuroplasticity," your mind needs to be "limber" enough for the new connections to form. Fortunately, that is a trait you can regain after it degrades. The trick is to keep trying new things; new puzzles, new games, a new hobby, sometimes you'll find it in the most unexpected places, like a videogame.

Most videogames, especially arcade-style ones, give you a few basic control sequences, and then don't throw anything really "new" at you after the early stages have taught you the "visual language⁽¹⁾" of the game. (The red enemies have power ups; if an enemy flashes when hit but does not die, it takes more hits from that weapon; the boss's weak point will be a unique color in its pallette, or the weak point will blink to identify itself), but some will challenge you by changing the control scheme, sometimes without even telling you, but doing it in a way where you can quickly get used to the new scheme. One good example of the latter is a "Walking Simulator⁽²⁾" game called What Remains of Edith Finch. In the first scenario, you change controls from a girl walking in a room, to a cat prowling along a tree, to an owl soaring through the sky, to -[SPOILERS REDACTED], and the controls change with each character, but each change feels intuitive, walking, to walking and jumping, to flight control stick, to [REDACTED]. Only in hindsight do you realize you were changing your control scheme on the fly.

Notes:

1. We deal with more "languages" than we realize, it is just the "interpersonal verbal/written communication" languages we think of when the term comes up.
2. Also known as a "Story Game," The main gameplay is "walk from point A to point B, then look at something, then walk to point C..." No enemies to fight or dodge, no tricky platforming, just ... walking⁽³⁾.
3. Except when it isn't. Walking Simulator games, like a Bob Fosse Musical, is likely to be a "hidden mind-f**k".