Upload
christian-anamisi
View
445
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Chapter 2: Second Language Acquisition (SLA)
Week of 6/11/2012
Content Objectives
This week we will: Review chapter one material: (1)The process of first language acquisition
(FLA)(2) Behaviorist vs. cognitive perspectives of
FLA(3)Chomsky’s theories of Generative
Grammar and Universal Grammar Identify key theories associated with SLA,
while comparing with that of FLA.
Language Objectives
We will accomplish our CO by:◦As a whole group we will review the issues of
first language development.◦In cooperative group we will map the key
elements associated with the main theories of second language acquisition.
◦Read for new information and identify a specific text structure (compare/contrast).
B.F. Skinner (1957) : Language is learned through imitation and reinforcement. Children learn language through positive
reinforcement, i.e., every time the child says something “correctly,” the child is praised by the caretaker. In the behaviorist perspective, this causes the child to remember and internalize the structure to be learned.
Behaviorist vs. Cognitive Perspectives on FLA
Language learning is a complex process that involves much more than just imitation and reinforcement! It involves children interacting with their environment and testing hypotheses
(Chomsky,1959). Behaviorism does not explain why children make some errors and not others!
Cognitive Science Perspective on Language Acquisition
Cognitive Science Perspective on Language Acquisition Cognitive perspective explains how children
create new utterances that they have never heard before (i.e., they are not simply imitating adult language structures that they have already heard). - Argument against behaviorist view of language acquisition
Child-generated sentences give good evidence that young children do not simply imitate adults’ speech, but overgeneralize language rules.
Chomsky’s Theory of Generative Grammar Generative Grammar
◦ A limited set of rules for the unlimited generation of language
Deep Structure (DS) vs. surface structure (SS) of language (generation of SS from the same DS) “The boy threw the ball./The ball was thrown by
the boy”: 2SS (ACTIVE & PASSIVE),1DS (AGENT/DOER = boy; Action = throwing; OBJECT = the ball)
SS: the syntactic structure of the sentence, which a person speaks and writes.
How many SS and DS are there in the following sentence?
“The chicken is ready to eat.”
DS/underlying structure (more abstract than SS): considered to be in the speaker’s/writer’s mind.
Structurally ambigous
chicken = agent/chicken = object
Deep Structure & Surface Structure
Chomsky’s Theory of Universal Grammar Children are born with an innate capacity for
language/linguistic knowledge. Humans are pre-programmed to learn language. EVERY CHILD HAS THE POTENTIAL TO LEARN ANY LANGUAGE IN THE WORLD!
This innate capacity or knowledge is called Universal Grammar
Knowledge of those things common to all languages (e.g., have subjects and predicates, pre/post-positions)
Proposed to use the language acquisition device [LAD].
Children’s Errors in FLA and What they Teach Us Errors children make when acquiring English
as L1:◦ He hitted me.*◦ She bringed me the toy.*◦ We goed to the party.*
Errors children DON’T make when acquiring L1 = evidence for their innate ability.
“Is the person who is sitting at the table is a linguist?”* (p. 16)
Children acquire language rules in a productive and analytical way (not in rote fashion).
The Wug Test (Berko, 1958)
FLA occurs more rapidly than other kinds of developmental learning (e.g., motor skills) - even without formal instruction.
Uttering grammatical sentences>tying shoe laces
Early correction of children’s language output tends to inhibit rather than encourage FLA.
First Language Acquisition (FLA)
Recapping FLA Concepts How would you explain the behaviorist
and cognitive perspectives on language acquisition to someone who is unfamiliar with these concepts?
Give examples of the behaviorist explanation for language learning.
Give examples that support Chomsky’s theories of Universal and Generative Grammar.
Krashen’s Theories of SLA:Map out a Hypothesis
1. Learning/Acquisition Hypothesis (p. 35)
2. The Natural Order Hypothesis (p. 36)
3. The Monitor Hypothesis (p. 37)
4. The Input Hypothesis (p. 38)5. The Affective Filter
Hypothesis (p. 39)
Activity:
• Divided into teams of 3.
• Review your assigned theory.
• Create a visual that represents the main points of your theory on chart paper.
• We’ll revisit the visual after the lecture on Krashen’s 5 Hypotheses.
The Learning/Acquisition Hypothesis (Krashen) : 2 Independent systems of Language Performance
Learning: Conscious process of accumulating knowledge
Acquisition: Subconscious process
Explicit Learning
Learned Grammar/Rules
“Knowing about” a language
Natural Input (similar to L1 development)
Acquired Competence
“Picking up” a language
Learned System
This system is the product of formal instruction, and it comprises a conscious process, which results in conscious knowledge about the language (e.g., vocabulary and grammar rules through drill and practice).
Is mathematics learned or acquired? Why?
Acquired System The product of a subconscious process -
very similar to the process children undergo when they acquire their first language.
“Picking up” an L2 in another country from long periods spent in interaction with native speakers of the language is acquisition.
Language Acquisition TheoryAcquisition vs. LearningStephen Krashen and Tracy Terrell, 1983
Acquisition: Subconscious Similar to first
language development
Focus is on needs and interest of students
All attempts at communication are praised and reinforced; errors are accepted as developmental
Involves student-centered
Situational activities
Learning: Conscious Knowing about
language Focus is on grammar Corrections of errors Involves drills and
grammar exercises
CIMA © 2008
The Learning/Acquisition Hypothesis
Implications: Those who are exposed to a learning type of
experience in their L2 (e.g., memorizing, drill and practice testing) tend not to develop the proficiency as those who had more of an acquisition type of experience (e.g., constantly using the language through meaningful communications).
The Natural Order Hypothesis(Krashen) The acquisition of
grammatical structures follows a natural order that is predictable.
It is independent of the learner’s age & L1 background.
REGULAR PAST (e.g.,” walked”)
III SINGULAR –S POSSESIVE -S
IRREGULAR PAST (e.g., “ate”)
AUXILIARY (progressive, as in “he is going”
ARTICLES (a, the)
ING (progressive)
PLURAL COUPULA (“to be”)
“Average” order of acquisition of grammatical morphemes for ESL (children & adults)
CIMA © 2008
Natural Order Hypothesis Implications:
SLA occurs in a natural order of predictable
stages
◦ Master teachers account for these stages in lesson
planning and instruction for CLD students.
Students will naturally derive the language
rules
◦ From meaningful language interactions
Intensive grammatical drilling will not speed
the process of SLA.
Monitor Hypothesis: Language learning may not lead to language acquisition.
The acquisition system as an utterance initiator - When the focus of language is communicating for meaning, language is more easily acquired.
The learning system as a monitor/editor - When the focus of language is grammatically correct communication, language is learned; therefore, is subject to the influences of self-monitoring.
Acquired competence Output = acquired AND learned
together
Learned competence (the monitor)
Acquisition and learning in L2 production
Krashen’s Monitor Hypothesis Knowing how language works and how words are
comprised can facilitate the language acquisition process.
This hypothesis suggests that knowledge of the rules of language helps second language learners to check or monitor the language they produce or their linguistic output. This can occur with both oral and written output. Writing > Speaking
Monitor Hypothesis continued: The monitor acts in a planning editing and
correcting function when three specific conditions are met:◦ The second language learner has sufficient time◦ He/she focuses on form or thinks about
correctness◦ He/she knows the rule.
CIMA © 2008
Recapping Monitor Hypothesis – Implications:
Role of Learning in the acquisition process
◦ Can be used to monitor spoken or written output that is formal
Necessary conditions for monitor use:
◦ Time, focus on language form, & knowledge of rules
Teaching for effective monitor use encourages:
◦ Checking to avoid major errors while keeping the focus on the message.
Input Hypothesis Condition 1: Language is acquired by receiving comprehensible input with linguistic items that are a slightly beyond the learner’s current level.
Current Level of competence = “i”
Comprehensible Input contains “i” + 1
The Input Hypothesis
Explains how second language acquisition takes place.
Only concerned with acquisition not learning.
The learner improves and progresses along the natural order when he/she receives comprehensible input in the second language.
“i+1” input is appropriate for ELLs’ current stage of linguistic competence.
CIMA © 2008
The Input Hypothesis – implications:
Comprehensible Input (CI) is key to language acquisition◦ CI involves oral or written messages that
students understand Language input that is slightly above
current mastery (i + 1) yields optimal growth i+1 is comprehensible & uses
grammatical structures that challenge (but do not frustrate)
E.g., free choice reading lowers student anxiety about SLA, implicitly teaches grammar, and typically offers the student, i +1.
Affective Filter Hypothesis
Condition 2: a low affective filter to allow the input “in”
High motivation, strong self-confidence, & a low level of anxiety lead to being better equipped for classroom performance & SLA
Input LAD Acquired
Competence
Filter
Operation of the “affective filter”
Affective Filter
Conversely, the opposite characteristics can raise the affective filter and form a mental block that prevents comprehensible input from being used for acquisition when a person feels nervous or threatened. A high filter can impede language acquisition.
CIMA © 2008
Affective Filter Hypothesis
Not all comprehensible input leads to acquisition ◦A high-level affective filter may block the
input Blocked input - never reaches the LAD
Why good lessons sometimes fail to reach
◦A low-level affective filter enables acquisition A motivated student is an engaged student
This is why SLA can occur as an aspect of chants, dramas, or hands-on activities.
Becoming Hypothesis Experts: Jigsaw Activity
Pretend that you’re teaching students who are non-education majors about your group’s hypothesis.
Create an analogy for remembering your team’s hypothesis—be ready to explain your analogy to the class.
Come up with an original phrase to help you/classmates remember the 5 hypotheses.
Act out your hypothesis—BE CREATIVE!
Two Conditions in Which L2 Learners Acquire a New Language
The Silent Period http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiTsduRr
eug&feature=related
Let’s Meet Stephen Krashen
M. Long agrees with Krashen on some points but not others. His research shows that teaching rules in context through use of negotiated interactions makes “i + 1” language input more comprehensible.
Reactions to Krashen’s Theory of SLA
How do we best support SLA? Contextualize learning
to make language input comprehensible (e.g., visuals, hands-on, & guarded vocab.)
Create an affectively supportive climate (e.g., L1 use & small groups)
Differentiate instruction through a variety of meaningful/communicative activities
Allow preproduction level students should be develop listening comprehension without requirement of performing orally
Krashen’s
Stages of Second Language
Acquisition
P reproduction
E arly P roduction
S peech Emergent
I ntermediate FluencyA dvanced Fluency
i+1 Consultants © 2008
CIMA © 2008
Pre-production
Silent Period- ◦500 words in passive/receptive vocabulary
◦Parroting◦Response to visuals◦Exhausting
CIMA © 2008
Early production
May last up to 6 months◦Passive & active/expressive
vocabulary 1000 words◦Speak in one- or two-word phrases◦Memorized chunks may not be used
correctly◦Reliance on pictures/native language
CIMA © 2008
Speech emergence
3000 word vocabulary◦Short phrases, simple sentences◦Short conversations◦Content work with support
CIMA © 2008
Intermediate Fluency
6000 active words◦ More complex sentences in speaking and
writing◦ Student asks questions◦ Native language use as navigation
device◦ Writing will have errors as mastery of
complexity of English grammar and sentence structure occurs
CIMA © 2008
Advanced Fluency
4-10 years to achieve cognitive academic proficiency(CALP)◦Near-native◦Many students exited by this time
◦Support still needed in certain content areas
Additional Points to Remember about SLA….
Neurological Factors (accent remains post critical
period) pp. 42-43
Cognitive Factors (younger = acquisition without
needing to analyze the L2) p. 43
Affective Factors (self-conscious) can create a barrier to
acquisition pp. 43-44
Interlanguage – in-between system (Yule, pp. 191-
192)
Fossilization – fixed repertoire of L2, not progressing
any further p. 44
Additional SLA Concepts:Create a Slide
1. The Critical Period Hypothesis (F & F, pp. 41-42)
2. Interlanguage (Yule, pp. 191-192)
3. Fossilization (F & F, p. 44)4. Communicative Competence
(Yule, p. 194
Activity:
• Divided into teams of 2/3.
• Investigate your assigned theory/concept.
• Create PowerPoint slides that represent your understanding of the theory/concept
• Teach the class!
CIMA © 2008
Exploring Reading and SLA
Consider these L2 factors:◦ Multiple language skills◦ Affective filters◦ New form of print character ◦ New forms of syntax (e.g., Adj + N, SVO)◦ Not just a foreign language course
Recapping Learning/Acquisition Hypothesis (Krashen)
Learning= conscious process◦Memorize, drill, emphasis on words and their
components to construct meaning◦Learn vocabulary in advance of reading◦Deductive approach toward language
teaching Acquisition= subconscious process
Occurs in and out of school When messages are received and
understood Inductive approach to language teaching
CIMA © 2008
Authors compare 2 things to show how they are alike and different. Sometimes, they define a new word by telling how it is like or different from something that they think their readers know about by using comparison words and contrast words
Comparison words: like, just as, similar to, the same as
Contrast words: in contrast, different from this, on the other hand, however, whereas
Using comparison/contrast to understand text
The freshman year of college is the first year of college study; it is like grade thirteen in that it is the 13th year that students will be in school.
In contrast to the bachelor’s degree, the master’s degree requires six years of college study – four years to obtain the bachelor’s degree and an additional two years for the master’s degree.
Compare & Contrast: Word Clue to Define Key terms
What is the clue word that tells us what each of the following key terms means?
1) The smallest asteroid are irregular in shape, like boulders.
2) Whereas asteroids travel between the planets in roughly circular orbits, the orbits of comets are highly elliptical, extending far beyond Pluto’s orbit.
Comparison and Contrast Word Clue Exercise 1
A unified field theory is one in which two forces, seemingly different from each other, are shown to be basically identical. According to such a theory, unification will take place at various stages as the energy and temperature increase.
Identical is: (a) different, (b) unified, (c) equal, and (d) level
Comparison and Contrast Word Clue Exercise 2
Let’s Compare and Contrast FLA and SLA