The concept of a "native speaker" status is often idealized and can be misleading. While it's certainly possible for a non-native speaker to achieve a very high level of proficiency in a language, it's important to understand that there's no definitive point at which they can be considered "native."

Here are some reasons why:

We may say that a native speaker has no accent, an adult learner has an accent despite his full mastery of a given language. Usually, we consider 5 year old the critical age after which you will be no longer a "native speaker", because you will learn a second language by making effort, while newborns acquire their first language effortlessly and somewhat uncosciously. Yet, I agree with the previous reply about the excessive "idealization" of what a native speaker is : borders between categories are relative.

An example : pharyngealized fricative consonants in Arabic, such as ħ and ʕ are very difficult for adult learners having Italian as mother tongue (because Italian has no pharyngealized consonants). For this reason the Italian adult has difficult to perceive and to spell those sounds ( he will unvoluntarily misperceive those sounds as being close to similar consonants in his native language). Viceversa, an Arabic speaker learning Italian will face difficulties in saying "Andrea" because "e" is not an Arabic vowel (he will likely pronounce "Andria"). A bilingual baby speaking both languages at home since his birth will master all the specific consonants and vowels of both languages and will not have difficulties in perceiving and spelling such sounds.

In few words, a native language act as a filter on a second language : the older you are, the stronger this filter is. Language courses and daily practice can reduce the biases caused by this filter to an important extent

That's a somewhat tricky question. You seem to convey an idealized vision of NS. From that perspective I'd say early childhood.

Taking a broader view of language learning I'd say that for a large majority of people being taken for a NS is not necessary nor achievable. Furthermore, if you take accent into consideration or idiomatic expressions, for example, you'll find that NS of any given language also show different levels of proficiency. Just a couple of weeks ago I witnessed a Scottish-Australian interaction and the fellows were struggling to understand each other!!!

Take care.

Form the perspective of Cognitive Linguistics foundational premises of what language is, the question has no clear answer. First of all, if language (meaning and grammar) is embodied then at the level of image schemas, as skeletal elements in cognitive structure, there should not be obvious constraints as regard acquiring the native speaker's competence in a foreign language. However, because first language acquisition incorporates acquiring of culture specific aspects, the cultural imprints in lexicon may constitute a challenge, for, to truly understand requires deep understanding / knowledge of the cultural context the language encodes and transmits onto subsequent generations.

It appears that the description of my enquiry was overlooked somewhat. The concept of a 'native speaker' is a reality that exists. About that there is no doubt.

My question is with respect to what the parameters of that status are, not limited to any one particular aspect of language development (such as phonetic proficiency). I want to know what the broad range of ingredients are that make up this entity referred to as a native speaker, then – based on that – determine at which point (if any) that status becomes unattainable via second language acquisition.

Any perspective that anyone has is welcome, but please do not assume that I intend a specific angle from my question such that you make that the focus of attention.

Also, any recommendations for related essays would also be greatly appreciated.

عذراء مهدي العذاري

Can you provide more insight or recommend further reading on all of the aspects you've referred to in your response?

First of all, acquisition of language is tricky because it implies mechanical process. it's better to talk about learning how to mean ( because language is a meaning -making system) as Halliday extensively explained in many of his works. The term 'native speaker', as used in this comment, is broad. There are different types of that 'native speaker, so to say. For example, The highly versed against the common one and so on.

Agree that language is a meaning making process, which brings us to the definition of meaning. The very term meaning is so intuitively obvious that its vagueness is overlooked. Still, if language is a meaning making process then the nature of the process demands adequately precise definition. Suppose, the meaning making process consists in articulation of conventional phonetic signals, (phones) in conventional sequences which are transmitted to the ear of our interlocutor whose cognitive auditory faculty recognizes the input to the extent it agrees with the conventions, the speaker and the addressee share the convention. With respect to the question of NS, this aspect of language implies that the NS like phonetic fluency might decide whether someone has achieved the competence of a native speaker. That, of course, is not the case, because the phonetic sequences are language if the recognition of the language at phonetic level is inseparable from reconstruction the meaning in the mind of the addressee, which brings us to the heart of what language is about, the meaning making process is based on symbolic relation between phonetic conventional sequences and meaning structures/ semantic structure conventionally activated by the sequences in the mind via neural transmission of the input and activation of respective areas in the brain. In view os such understanding of language as a meaning making process, which follows from Langacker's conception of language, the NS fluency would be determined at the conceptual / cognitive level . Should there be some sense in my argumentation, NS fluency would require native like understanding of the socio - cultural / ethnic context of the language involved. Is it possible for speakers whose foreign / second language acquisition has not been integrated with the acculturation process?

Fortunately, this question has been empirically addressed and answered by Steven Pinker and colleagues in a study with 2/3 million speakers. That is, for English and with the assumption that an L2-speaker should perform identical to an L1-speaker. This assumption can of course be questioned.

https://stevenpinker.com/files/pinker/files/hartshorne_tenenbaum_pinker_a_critical_period_for_second_language_acquisition.pdf

Don't get tantalized by these thoughts! "Enjoy the ride", that is, enjoying moving between two or more different languages, and get the best out of it!

If you need more information, search for the interrelationship between neuroscience and bilingualism and/or multilingualism.

One final comment: As there is NO 1:1 equivalence between English and another language, so there is NO 1:1 equivalence between L1 and L2 speaker. And this relies on and shows the UNIQUENESS of human NOUS (a Greek word) - that is the synergy of human brain and human mind.

The zone of cognition is problematic (a lot of theorizing and philosophizing). The question is simple, its interpretation, however, is open-ended. Language as a social semiotic process is affiliated with the nature of language, so to speak. Languaging about language, as a prominent medieval Arab thinker argued, is not easy because language falls back on its subject.

Please, don't tantalize yourself. As long as you can communicate both orally and in writing in another language and you are understood, the concept of 'native speaker's ability' carries a linguistic bias and specific ideology, where only 'native speakers' are the best of a given language ... and this is WRONG in a globalized (scientific) world where everyone tries to communicate his/her ideas and research.

The main objective of any communication is for it to be understood by the audience. The ideology of a "native speaker" promotes language surbordination which has been identified as a problem in the educational system in America and all over the world.

Actually, it started with the British. The US have helped the situation because they have been a World Economic Power, and thus, English has become "lingua franca" (i.e. common language of communication) all over the world, carrying all the cultural elements and hidden agendas of English native-speakers.

Perhaps you think too low of your level.

I month ago I just had this meeting with different teachers from NYC, and you will not believe it, but they all agreed the level of their graduates was actually A2-B1.

So the real question is what is to speak like a native?

Native is definitely not academic, so I believe you will have a hard time trying to achieve native levels by following academic studies, ergo if native English is your focus, then aim specifically at what niche you want to belong to and listen to their radios, and music, and read their news.

I have met several students from other countries (and This might be you) who consider Native speakers have a C2 level. Nothing further from the truth!

I hope I understood your question correctly, and this helped you out.

Actually, an international student should have C2 and above level, that is, English for Academic Purposes (EAP), in order to respond to an undergraduate level of studies in an English-speaking country (e.g. UK, USA, Canada).

This question mediates between the Early Age Hypothesis and the Critical Age Hypothesis, there are some scholarly judgments based on different research and hypotheses that believe a native-like second language competence can be achieved before the pre-adolescent age, and afterwards, native-like second language acquisition can, or may not be attained. The Critical Age Hypothesis also emphasizes the challenges some adults face in gaining a fluent or a close to native-like competence, in second language learning.

In my purview, these judgements are biased. In Nigeria, for instance, it is expedient, that every child must learn to communicate in English, and even learn to write with comprehension in English, yet a larger ratio shows that no children or adult has gained the mastery of an English native, most Nigerians have nativized English due to some interference from their native language(L1), what we now have is a mutually intelligible language, which is normally tagged as "Nigerian English" and another form which is also known as "Nigerian Pidgin or Naija". This a clear-cut evidence that a second language speaker may not attain the level of competence of the native speaker. Also, there are no age limits to language learning, and setting age limits for a second language acquisition, is not valid, people can still gain a B2 - A1 competence in languages with no barrier to age, but the duration of learning a second language and gaining a fluent or bilingual proficiency may differ according to an individual's capability.

Perhaps the conversation with David Crystal on "The myth of the native speaker" (YouTube Channel Canguro English) can provide some helpful guidance: David Crystal refers to the different varieties of Standard English and categorizes "native speaker" English as history and a myth. He sets "intelligibility" as the criterion for a successful learner of the language. A local accent should not interfere with intelligibility. To Crystal, the "identity" that is supported by a local accent is a factor we shouldn't disdain. Our way of speaking may give the listener clues about our background and thereby provide valuable information as to our identity besides sounding delightful.

Half art, half instinct.

According to Darwin.

It is possible.

Where there's a will, there's a way.

Or,

are you talking about motivating students?

The different lies in the fact that a 'native speaker' can understand cultural implications and differences in the use, when Second Language user may miss them.