THEORIES OF SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
Taxonimies, hypotheses and models
I believe everybody creates their own way to learn. Nobody thinks the same and just the brain of everybody works different. A teacher can’t ask a student to learn a whole book by the next day, but he can ask the students to read it in a certain period of time, because everything takes time, and depending on how everybody’s brain works, the students will know how to create a process to finish that book. Nobody can tell you how to learn something, not even a language. You see the vocabulary on the blackboard but everybody put learn those words together in their way. You can be based on what other people tell you to be based on, or in some recommended books as well. After you read a lot and you have all your ideas clear, then you create your learning process. Theories of second-language acquisition are various theories and hypotheses in the field of second-language acquisition about how people learn a second language. Research in second-language acquisition is closely related to several disciplines including linguistics, sociolinguistics, psychology, neuroscience, and education, and consequently most theories of second-language acquisition can be identified as having roots in one of them. Each of these theories can be thought of as shedding light on one part of the language learning process; however, no one overarching theory of second-language acquisition has yet been widely accepted by researchers.
Krashen’s Input Hypothesis
Adults have two different ways to develop competence in a language: language acquisition and language learning. Language acquisition is a subconscious process not unlike the way a child learns language. Language acquirers are not consciously aware of the grammatical rules of the language, but rather develop a "feel" for correctness. "In non-technical language, acquisition is 'picking-up' a language." Language learning, on the other hand, refers to the "conscious knowledge of a second language, knowing the rules, being aware of them, and being able to talk about them." Thus language learning can be compared to learning about a language. The acquisition-learning distinction hypothesis claims that adults do not lose the ability to acquire languages the way that children do. Just as research shows that error correction has little effect on children learning a first language, so too error correction has little effect on language acquisition. The Monitor Model hypothesis is based on the language that one has subconsciously acquired "initiates our utterances in a second language and is responsible for our fluency," whereas the language that we have consciously learned acts as an editor in situations where the learner has enough time to edit, is focused on form, and knows the rule, such as on a grammar test in a language classroom or when carefully writing a composition. This conscious editor is called the Monitor. Different individuals use their monitors in different ways, with different degrees of success. Monitor Over-users try to always use their Monitor, and end up "so concerned with correctness that they cannot speak with any real fluency." Monitor Under-users either have not consciously learned or choose to not use their conscious knowledge of the language. Although error correction by others has little influence on them, they can often correct themelves based on a "feel" for correctness. Teachers should aim to produce Optimal Monitor users, who "use the Monitor when it is appropriate and when it does not interfere with communication." They do not use their conscious knowledge of grammar in normal conversation, but will use it in writing and planned speech. "Optimal Monitor users can therefore use their learned competence as a supplement to their acquired competence." The input hypothesis answers the question of how a language acquirer develops competency over time. It states that a language acquirer who is at level “A”,...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document