This response to a paper concerning age-related effects and their relationship to universal grammar (UG) in second language (L2) acquisition looks first at both the paper in question and research on UG and L2 acquisition in general. After these observations, discussion focuses on the following four topics in relation to the paper: (1) the notions of a "critical period" and "age-dependents effects" in language acquisitions; (2) the notion of success in UG/L2 theory; (3) evidence from speech and speech perception; and (4) evidence from judgments of grammaticality. It is concluded that while the study suggests that linguistic theory offers promising avenues of inquiry into the course of age-related differences, it also lacks clarity, rigor, and finesse. (MSE)