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