THEORIES OF SECOND LANGUAGE

ACQUISITION

Second language acquisition (SLA) is not unlike first language acquisition, is a subset of general human learning, involves cognitive variations, is closely related to ones personality type, is interwoven with second culture learning and involves interference, the creation of new linguistics systems and the learning of discourse and communicative functions of language. We will examine a number of current generalizations, hypotheses and models of SLA. That self-constructed system of variables is ones theory of SLA.

BUILDING A THEORY OF SLA

Second language learning is a complex process. There are so many separate but interrelated factors within one intricate entity. We will consider some domains and generalizations that describe the skeletal structure of a theory.

DOMAINS AND GENERALIZATIONS

 

Different domains of inquiry must be included in a theory of SLA: 1. A theory of SLA includes an understanding of what language is, what learning is, and for classrooms contexts, what teaching is. 2. Knowledge of childrens learning of their first language. 3. A number of differences betweeen adult and children learning and between first and second language acquisition. 4. Second language learning is a part of and adheres to general principles of human learning and intelligence. 5. There is a variation across learners in cognitive style and within a learner in strategy choice.

6. Personality will affect both the quantity and quality of second language learning. 7. Learning a second culture is often interwined with learning a second language. 8. The linguistic contrasts between the native and target language form one source of difficulty in learning a second language. 9. Communicative competence is the ultimate goal of learners as they deal with function, discourse, register and nonverbal aspects of human interaction and linguistic negotiation.

These nine statements are the framework for a theory of SLA. Determining the source of a second language learners error involves consideration of cognitive strategies and styles, group diynamics and even the validity of data gathering procedures.

HYPOTHESIS AND CLAIMS

 

 

A theory of SLA is really an interrelated set of hypothesis and/or claims about how people become proficient in a second language. These are the Lighthbown (1985) claims: 1. Adults and adolescents can acquire a second language. 2. The learner creates a systematic interlanguage characterized by the same systematic errors as the child learning the same language as the first language. 3. There are predictable sequences in acquisition, certain structures have to be acquired before others. 4. Practice does not make perfect. 5. Knowing a language rules does not mean one will be able to use it in communicative interaction. 6. Isolated explicit error correction is usually ineffective in changing language behavior.

7. For most adult learners, acquisition stops (fossilizes) before the learner has achieved nativelike mastery of the target language. 8. One cannot achieve nativelike (or near-nativelike) command of a second language in one hour a day. 9. The learners task is enormous because language is enormously complex. 10. A learners ability to understand language in a meaningful context exceeds his or her ability to comprehend decontextualized language and to produce language of comparable complexity and accuracy.

SOME MYTHS ABOUT SLA ACCORDING TO

LIGHTBOWN AND SPADA (1993)
1) 2)

3) 4)

5)

6)

Languages are learned mainly through imitation. Parents usually correct young children when they make errors. People with high IQs are good language learners. The earlier a second language is introduced in school programs, the greater the likelihood of success in learning. Most of the mistakes that second language learners make are due to interference from their first language. Learners errors should be corrected as soon as they are made in order to prevent the formation of bad habit. NOTE: All these claims are the beginning of theory building, we should examine them, add others and get tenable hypothesis to build a theory.

AN INNATIST MODEL: KRASHENS INPUT

HYPOTHESIS
1.

a)

b)

Some Krashen terms are the Monitor Model, the AcquisitionLearning Hypothesis and the Input Hypothesis. The Input Hypothesis are: The acquisition learning hypothesis. Adult second language learners have two means for internalizing the target language: The first acquisition is a subconscious and intuitive process of constructing the system of a language. The second means is a conscious learning process, the learner attend to form, figure out rules and are aware of their process. According to Krashen: fluency in second language performance is due to what we have acquired not what we have learned. Krashen said that our conscious learning process and our subconscious acquisition processes are mutually exclusive. This is the base to recommend large doses of acquisiton activity in the classroom, with a minor role assigned to learning.

2. The monitor hypothesis. This monitor is involved in learning. It is a device to watch ones output, for editing and making corrections when they are perceived. 3. The natural order hypothesis. Krashen says that we acquire language rules in a predictable or naturalorder. 4. The input hypothesis. The acquirer understand, through reading or hearing, input language that contains structure a bit beyond his/her current level of competence. The language that learners are exposed to should be a little bit more than their current competence: (i+1). In this way, they recommend speaking not to be taught directly or very early in the language classroom. 5. The affective filter hypothesis. The best acquisition will occur in enviroments where anxiety is low and defensiveness absent.

SOME CRITICS TO KRASHEN HYPOTHESIS

MacLaughlin (1978), a psychologist, criticized Krashens terms: my critique of Krashens distinction between learning and acquisition-a distinction that assumes that it it possible to differentiate what is conscious from what is unconscious. There is no interface between acquisition and learning, according to Gregg (1984). Second language learning is a process in which varying degrees of learning and of acquisition can both be beneficial, depending upon the learners own styles and strategies. It is important to distinguish between input and intake. We can get input through reading a book, listening to a conversation or watching a movie. Intake is when we take it with us over a period of time and can later remember.

 1.

2.

According to Seliger (1983), the role of input gives learners more credit for eventual success. High Input Generators (HIGs) are people who are good in interaction or generating input from teachers, fellow learners and others. Low Input Generators (LIGs) are more passive learners. Seliger found that learners who maintained high levels of interaction (HIGs) in the second language, both in the classroom and outside, progressed at a faster rate than learners who interacted little (LIGs) in the classroom. Krashen maintained that in the classroom output is too scarce to make any important impact on language development. Lapkin (1995) offered convincing evidence that their Output Hypothesis was at least as significant as input. because it generates highly specific input the cognitive system needs to build up a coherent set of knowledge.

Brown, Douglas. 2000. Principles of language learning and teaching. 4th ed. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.