Second language acquisition in the classroom

TEFLTEFLSECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

IN THE CLASSROOMElih Sutisna Yanto

ENGLISH EDUCATION PROGRAMME Unsika, West-Java, Indonesia

[email protected]

SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION IN THE CLASSROOM

Elih Sutisna Yanto ENGLISH EDUCATION PROGRAMME

Unsika, West-Java, [email protected]

2

Definitions of L1 & L2

• Definition of “first language” (L1):– The language(s) that an individual learns first.– Other terms for “first language”-

• Native language or mother tongue

• Definition of “second language” (L2):– Any language other than the first language learned (in a broader

sense).– A language learned after the first language in a context where the

language is used widely in the speech community (in a narrower sense). • e.g., For many people in Taiwan, their L1 is Taiwanese and L2 is

Mandarin.

3

Definitions of FL & TL

• Definition of “foreign language” (FL)– A second (or third, or fourth) language learned in a context where the

language is NOT widely used in the speech community. This is often contrasted with second language learning in a narrower sense.e.g., English or Japanese is a foreign language for people in Taiwan.

• Definition of “target language” (TL)– A language which is being learned, where it is the first language or a

second, third language.e.g., English is a target language for you now.

THEORIES OF SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNINGTHEORIES OF SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING

All learning, whether verbal or non-verbal takes place through the same underlying process, habit formation.

Learners receive linguistic input from speakers in their environment, and positive reinforcement for their correct repetitions and imitations.

As a result, habit are formed. Because language development is described as the

acquisition of a set of habits, it is assumed that a person learning a second language starts off with the habit associated with the first language.

All learning, whether verbal or non-verbal takes place through the same underlying process, habit formation.

Learners receive linguistic input from speakers in their environment, and positive reinforcement for their correct repetitions and imitations.

As a result, habit are formed. Because language development is described as the

acquisition of a set of habits, it is assumed that a person learning a second language starts off with the habit associated with the first language.

BEHAVIORISM: THE SECOND LANGUAGE VIEWBEHAVIORISM: THE SECOND LANGUAGE VIEW


For the behaviorist, errors are seen as first language habits interfering with the acquisition of second language habits. This psychological learning theory has often been linked to the contrastive analysis hypothesis (CAH).

The CAH predicts that where there are similarities between the two languages, the learner will acquire target language structure with ease; where there are differences, the learner will have difficulty.

Researchers have found that not all errors predicted by the CAH are actually made.

For the behaviorist, errors are seen as first language habits interfering with the acquisition of second language habits. This psychological learning theory has often been linked to the contrastive analysis hypothesis (CAH).

The CAH predicts that where there are similarities between the two languages, the learner will acquire target language structure with ease; where there are differences, the learner will have difficulty.

Researchers have found that not all errors predicted by the CAH are actually made.



For example:Adult beginners use simple structures in the target language just as children do: ‘ No understand’ or ‘ Yesterday I meet my teacher’..

For example:Adult beginners use simple structures in the target language just as children do: ‘ No understand’ or ‘ Yesterday I meet my teacher’..


Behaviorism

• Language development as habit formation;• A person learning an L2 starts with the habits

formed in L1 (transfer)• These habits interfere with the new ones

needed for the second language;• CAH


Cognitive psychologists tend to see second language acquisition as the building up of knowledge systems that can eventually be called on automatically for speaking and understanding.

At first, learners have to pay attention to any aspect of the language which they are trying to understand or produce. Gradually, through experience and practice, learners become able to use certain parts of the knowledge so quickly and automatically that they are not even aware that they are doing it.

This frees them to focus on other aspects of the language which, in turn, gradually become automatic (Mc Laughlin 1987)

Cognitive psychologists tend to see second language acquisition as the building up of knowledge systems that can eventually be called on automatically for speaking and understanding.

At first, learners have to pay attention to any aspect of the language which they are trying to understand or produce. Gradually, through experience and practice, learners become able to use certain parts of the knowledge so quickly and automatically that they are not even aware that they are doing it.

This frees them to focus on other aspects of the language which, in turn, gradually become automatic (Mc Laughlin 1987)

COGNITIVE THEORY: A NEW PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACHCOGNITIVE THEORY: A NEW PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH


Cognitive theory is a relative newcomer to SLA research, and has not yet been widely tested empirically.

Because the theory itself cannot easily predict what kinds of structures will be automatized through practice and what will be restructured, direct applications of this theory for classroom teaching are premature.

Cognitive theory is also not able to predict which first language structures will be transferred which will not.

This theory, which look at the learning process, is incomplete without a linguistic framework of some kind.

This had led some cognitive psychologists to seek collaboration with linguists so that the aspects of language which are studied will have clearer relevance to the complex phenomenon of second language acquisition.

Cognitive theory is a relative newcomer to SLA research, and has not yet been widely tested empirically.

Because the theory itself cannot easily predict what kinds of structures will be automatized through practice and what will be restructured, direct applications of this theory for classroom teaching are premature.

Cognitive theory is also not able to predict which first language structures will be transferred which will not.

This theory, which look at the learning process, is incomplete without a linguistic framework of some kind.

This had led some cognitive psychologists to seek collaboration with linguists so that the aspects of language which are studied will have clearer relevance to the complex phenomenon of second language acquisition.

COGNITIVE THEORY: A NEW PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACHCOGNITIVE THEORY: A NEW PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH


It is , in some respects, similar to Chomsky’s ideas on first language learning.

Learners are thought to ‘construct’ internal representations of the language being learned.

One may think of these internal representations as ‘mental pictures’ of the target language.

The learners need not actually speak or write in order to acquire language.

Acquisition takes place internally as learners read and hear samples of the language that they understand.

It is , in some respects, similar to Chomsky’s ideas on first language learning.

Learners are thought to ‘construct’ internal representations of the language being learned.

One may think of these internal representations as ‘mental pictures’ of the target language.

The learners need not actually speak or write in order to acquire language.

Acquisition takes place internally as learners read and hear samples of the language that they understand.

CREATIVE CONSTRUCTION THEORYCREATIVE CONSTRUCTION THEORY


The speech and writing which the learner eventually produces is seen as an outcome of the learning process rather than as the cause of learning or even as a necessary step in learning.

Learners’ oral or written production is useful only in so far as it allows the learner to participate in communicative situations.

The creative construction theory which has had the most influence on second language teaching practice is the one proposed by Stephen Krashen (1982).













A psychologist named Stephen Krashen transformed language teaching. He had been developing his ideas over a number of years, but several books he published in the 1980s received widespread acceptance.

• Much has been made of Krashen's theory of second language acquisition, which consists of five main hypotheses:

• The acquisition learning hypothesis• the monitor hypothesis,• the natural order hypothesis, • the input hypothesis, and • the affective filter hypothesis.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiTsduRreug&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiTsduRreug&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiTsduRreug&feature=related

• According to Krashen’s acquisition-learning hypothesis, there are two independent ways to develop our linguistic skills: acquisition and learning.

• This theory is at the core of modern language acquisition theory, and is perhaps the most fundamental of Krashen's theories on second acquisition.

• AcquisitionSubconscious process where individual is not aware. One is unaware of the process as it is happening and when the new knowledge is acquired, the acquirer generally does not realize that he or she possesses any new knowledge.

• According to Krashen, both adults and children can subconsciously acquire language, and either written or oral language can be acquired. This process is similar to the process that children undergo when learning their native language.

• Acquisition requires meaningful interaction in the target language, during which the acquirer is focused on meaning rather than form.

Summary• Language acquisition is a process similar, if not

identical, to the way children develop ability in their first language.

• Language acquisition is a subconscious process; language acquirers are not usually aware of the fact that they are acquiring language, but are only aware of the fact that they are using the language for communication.

Summary• We are generally not consciously aware of the

rules of the languages we have acquired. Instead, we have a “feel” for correctness. Grammatical sentences “sound” right, or “feel” right, and errors feel wrong.

• Other ways of describing acquisition include implicit learning, informal learning, and natural learning. In non-technical language, acquisition is “picking-up” a language.

• Learning

Learning a language, on the other hand, is a conscious process, much like what one experiences in school. New knowledge or language forms are represented consciously in the learner's mind, frequently in the form of language "rules" and "grammar" and the process often involves error correction. Language learning involves formal instruction, and according to Krashen, is less effective than acquisition.

• We use the term “learning” to refer to conscious knowledge of a second language, knowing the rules, being aware of them, and being able to talk about them.

• In non-technical terms, learning is “knowing about” a language, known to most people as “grammar”, or “rules”.

• Some synonyms include formal knowledge of a language, or explicit learning.”

• For Krashen, acquisition is by far the more important process.

• He asserts that it is only acquired language which readily available for natural, fluent communication.

• Further , he asserts that learning cannot turn into acquisition, citing as evidence for this that many speakers are quite competent without ever having learned rules, while other speakers may ‘know’ rules but continue to break them when they focusing their attention on meaningful interaction rather than on the application of grammatical rules for accurate performance

• Error correction has little or no effect on subconscious acquisition, but is thought to be useful for conscious learning.

• Error correction supposedly helps the learner to induce or “figure out” the right form of a rule. If, for example, a student of English as a second language says “ I goes to school every day” and the teacher corrects him or her by repeating the utterance correctly, the learner is supposed to realize that the /s/ ending goes with the third person and not the first person, and alter his or her conscious mental representation of the rule.

• Some second language theorists have assumed that children acquire, while adults can only learn.

• The acquisition-learning hypothesis claims, however, that adults also acquire, that the ability to “pick-up” language does not disappear at puberty.

• This does mean that adults will always be able to achieve native-like levels in a second language. It does not mean that adults can access the same natural “language acquisition device” that children use.

• Evidence from child language acquisition confirms that error correction does not influence acquisition to any great extent.

• Brown and his colleagues have shown that parents actually correct only a small portion of the child’s language (occasional pronunciation problems, certain verbs, and dirty words!)

• They conclude from their research that parents attend far more to the truth value of what the child is saying rather than to the form. For example, Brown, Cazden, and Bellugi (1973) report that a sentence such as:

Her curl my hair‘was approved, because the mother was, in fact, curling Eve’s hair” (p.330). On the other hand,Walt Disney comes on on Tuesday.was corrected, despite its syntactic correctness, since Walt Disney actually came on television on Wednesday.

Learning

acquisition

conscious

subconscious

knowing about

pick up

• The Acquisition – Learning Distinction

AcquisitionSub-conscious

by environment(Ex: games,

Movies, radio)

Picking up words

LearningConscious by

instructorsCorrect errors

Knowing aboutGrammar rules

SLA

Differencies • Acquisition

• Natural

• Conscious

• Informal setting

• Instruction?

• Learning

• Not natural

• Conscious

• Formal setting

• Instruction

Factors involved in L2Learning• Language Input The language one gets from listening or

reading.

• Learning Environment Whether the learner is encouraged to learn

or not.

• Age The age at which one starts to learn L2.

• Time The time learner has to learn L2

• Motivation The need or purpose of learning L2.

– to survive in L2 speaking community. – to complete a task there – to continue education

• Prior Knowledge What the learner has already acquired

and learned before learning L2. A previous S/F language

• Personality Personal traits such social, outgoing, .• First Language The language the learner has been

speaking from childhood.

• Situation The way the learner learns L2, by

formal instruction or natural interaction.

• Learner Strategies The styles the learner adopts in

learning L2.

The Monitor Hypothesis

• Krashen argues that the acquired system acts to initiate the speaker’s utterances and is responsible for fluency and intuitive judgments about correctness.

• The learned system, on the other hand, acts only as an editor or ‘ monitor’, making minor changes and polishing what the acquired system has produced.

• The Monitor hypothesis explains the relationship between acquisition and learning. The monitoring function is the practical result of the learned grammar. According to Krashen, for the Monitor to be successfully used, three conditions must be met:

• The acquirer/learner must know the rule: This is a very difficult condition to meet because it means that the speaker must have had explicit instruction.

• The acquirer must be focused on correctness: He or she must be thinking about form, and it is difficult to focus on meaning and form at the same time.

• Having time to use the monitor: The speaker is then focused on form rather than meaning, resulting in the production and exchange of less information.

• Due to these difficulties, Krashen recommends using the monitor at times when it does not interfere with communication, such as while writing.

Summary• Krashen has specified three conditions necessary for

monitor use: sufficient time, focus on form, and knowing the rules.

• Thus, writing is more conducive to monitor use than is speaking, where the focus is on content and not on form.

• He maintains that knowing the rules only helps the speaker polish what he has acquired via real communication, and the focus of language teaching should therefore be communication and not rule-learning.

Summary

• The obvious weakness in this hypothesis is that it is very difficult to show evidence of ‘monitor’ use. In any give utterance, it is impossible to determine what has been produced by the acquired sytem and what is the result of monitor use.

• Krashen’s claim that ‘learning cannot turn into acquisition’ means that anything which is produced quickly and apparently spontaneously must have been acquired rather than learned.

THE NATURAL ORDER HYPOTHESIS

• This hypothesis states that we acquire the rules of a language in a predictable sequence – some rules are acquired early while others are acquired late.

• Krashen asserts that the natural order is independent of the order in which rules have been taught.

Cont...• Most of the evidence for this

hypothesis comes from the morpheme studies, in which children’s speech has been examined for accuracy of certain grammatical morpheme (mostly noun and verb ‘endings’ such as plural –s and past tense –ed in English).

• A large number of studies have provided evidence that learners pass through similar sequences or stages in development.

Cont...

• The acquisition of grammatical structures follows a “natural order” which is predictable.

• English is perhaps the most studied language as far as natural order hypothesis is concerned, and of all structures of English, morphology is the most studied.

• FIRST MORPHEMES ACQUIRED:

• The progressive marker –ing• Plural marker /s/

• ACQUIRED LATER

• Third person singular marker• The possessive /s/

• The order of acquisition for second language is not the same as the order of acquisition for first language, but these are some similarities.

• Krashen believes that the implication of the natural order hypothesis is not that our syllabi should be based on the order found in the studies.

• He rejects grammatical sequencing in all cases where the goal is language acquisition.

• The only instance in which the teaching of grammar can result in language acquisition (and proficiency) is when the students are interested in the subject and the target language is used as a medium of instruction.

Table “Average order of acquisition of grammatical morphemes for English as a second language (children and adults)

Research in order of acquisition for other language

Acquiring English negation, many first and second language acquirers pass through a stage in which they place the negative marker outside the sentence.•No mom sharpen it. (from Klima and Bellugi’s (1966) study of child L1 acquisition)•No like it now (from Ravem’s (1974) study of child L2 acquisition)


A typical later stage is to place the negative marker between the subject and the verb, as in•I no like this one (Cancino et al. (1975) study of child L2 acquisition)•This no have calendar. (from Schumann’s (1978) study of adult L2 acquisition)


Predictable stages in the acquisition of wh-questions in English include an early stage in which the wh- word appears before the rest of the sentence, which is otherwise left in its normal uninverted form, as in:•How he can be a doctor? (Klima and Bellugi, 1966, child L2 acquisition)•What she is doing? (Ravem,1974 child L2 acquisition)

The Affective Filter Hypothesis

• ‘The affective filter’ is an imaginary barrier which prevents learners from using input which is available in the environment.

• ‘Affect’ refers to such things as motives, needs, attitudes, and emotional states.

• A learner who is tense, angry, anxious, or bored will screen out input, making it unavailable for acquisition.

The Affective Filter Hypothesis

• Thus, depending on the learner’s state of mind or disposition, the filter limits what is attended to and what is acquired.

• The filter will be ‘up’ or operating when the learner is stressed, self-conscious, or unmotivated.

• It will be ‘down’ when the learner is relaxed and motivated.

The Affective Filter Hypothesis• What makes this hypothesis attractive to

practitioners is that it appear to have immediate implications for classroom practice.

• Teachers can understand why some learners, given the same opportunity to learn, may be successful while others are not.

• The difficulty with the hypothesis is that , it is difficult to be sure that the affective factors cause the differences in language acquisition.

• The Affective Filter hypothesis, embodies Krashen's view that a number of 'affective variables' play a facilitative, but non-causal, role in second language acquisition.

• These variables include: motivation, self-confidence and anxiety.

• Low motivation, low self-esteem, and debilitating anxiety can combine to 'raise' the affective filter and form a 'mental block' that prevents comprehensible input from being used for acquisition. In other words, when the filter is 'up' it impedes language acquisition.

• Krashen claims that learners with high motivation, self-confidence, a good self-image, and a low level of anxiety are better equipped for success in second language acquisition.

THE INPUT HYPOTHESIS

• Krashen asserts that we acquire language in only one way – by receiving comprehensible input, that is, by understanding message.

• If the input contains forms and structures just beyond the learner’s current level of competence in the language, then both comprehension and acquisition will occur.

Cont...

In other words,•We acquire language only when we understand language that contains structure that is “a little beyond” where we are now.

•This is possible because we use more than our linguistic competence to help us understand.

• The input hypothesis says that we acquire by “going for meaning” first, and as a result, we acquire structure.

• It also states that speaking fluency cannot be taught directly. It emerges over time, on its own.

• The best way to teach speaking, according to this view, is simply to provide comprehensible input.

• Early speech will come when the acquirer feels “ready:” It is typically not grammatically accurate.

• Accuracy develops over time as the acquirer hears and understands more input.

Summary• Krashen’s writing has been influential in

strengthening the recent focus on communicative language teaching, particularly in North America.

• On the other hand, the theory has also been seriously criticized for failing to meet certain minimum standards necessary in scientific research and writing.

Providing Input for AcquisitionA. The Potential of the Second Language

Classroom The classroom is of benefit when it is the major

source of comprehensible input. When acquirers have rich sources of input

outside the class , and when they are proficient enough to take advantage of it (i.e., understand at least some of it), the classroom does not make an important contribution.

Providing Input for AcquisitionIn the case of the adult beginner, the classroom

can do much better than the informal environment.

In the second language classroom, we have the potential of supplying a full 40-50 minutes per day of comprehensible input, input that will encourage language acquisition.

The value of second language classes , then lies not only in the grammar instruction, but in the simpler “teacher talk”, the comprehensible input.

Providing Input for AcquisitionB. Limitation of the Classroom It is clear that the outside world can supply more

input. Living in the country where the language is spoken can result in an all-day second language lesson!

The discourse that the student can be exposed to in a second language classroom is quite limited, no matter how “natural” we make it. There is simply no way the classroom can match the variety of the outside world, although we can certainly expand beyond our current limitations.

Providing Input for AcquisitionThe classroom will probably never be able to

completely overcome its limitations, nor does it have to. Its goal is not to substitute for the outside world, but to bring students to the point where they can begin to use the outside world for further acquisition, to where they can begin to understand the language used on the outside.

It does this in two ways: by supplying input so that students progress in language acquisition, so that they understand “real” language to at least some extent,

Providing Input for AcquisitionAnd by making the student conversationally

competent, that is, by giving the student tools to manage conversations despite a less than perfect competence in the second language.

Providing Input for AcquisitionC. The Role of Output The Input Hypothesis makes a claim that may

seem quite remarkable to some people we acquire spoken fluency not by practicing talking but by understanding input, by listening and reading. It is , in fact, theoretically possible to acquire language without ever talking.

Output has a contribution to make a language acquisition, but it is not a direct one: Simply, the more you talk, the more people will talk you!

Providing Input for AcquisitionA second language speaker who makes lots of

mistakes, has a poor accent, and is hesitant, will most likely receive, in general, more modified input than a speaker who appears competent and fluent.

Engaging in conversation is probably much more effective than “eavesdropping, to listen secretly to what other people are saying, for acquisition.

Providing Input for AcquisitionIn conversation, the second language acquirer

has some degree of control of the topic, can signal to the partner that there is a comprehension problem etc.

In other words, he can manage and regulate the input, and make it more comprehensible.

There is no such control in eavesdropping! But in order to participate in conversation, there must be at least some talk, some output, from each partner. Hence, the indirect contribution of speech.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

• Krashen, Stephen D. Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Prentice-Hall International, 1987.

• Krashen, Stephen D. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Prentice-Hall International, 1988.

• Lightbown, P& Nina Spada.1993. How language are learned. New York: Oxford University Press.

THANKS

Education

Second language acquisition in the classroom