EXPLAINING
SECOND LANGUAGE
LEARNING
The innatist perspective
Second language applications:
Krashen's 'Monitor Model'
Krashen described his model in terms of 5 hypotheses.
In the acquisition/ learning hypothesis, Krashen suggests that we 'acquire' language as we
are exposed to samples of language that we understand in much the same way that children
pick up their first language-with no conscious attention to language form. We 'learn' on the
other hand through conscious attention to form and rule learning.
The monitor hypothesis, second language users draw on what they have acquired when
they engage in spontaneous communication. They may use rules and patterns that have
been learned as an editor or 'monitor', allowing them to make minor changes and polish
what the acquired system has produced. Such monitoring takes place only when the
speaker/writer has plenty of time, is concerned about producing correct language, and has
learned the relevant rules.
The natural order hypothesis was based on the finding that, as in first language acquisition,
second language acquisition unfolds in predictable sequences.The language rules that are
easiest to state (and thus to learn) are not necessarily the first to be acquired.
The comprehensible input hypothesis is that acquisition occurs when one is exposed to
language that is comprehensible and contains i + 1. The 'i' represents the level of language
already acquired, and the '+J' is a metaphor for language (words, grammatical forms,
aspects of pronunciation) that is just a step beyond that level.
Krashen's affective filter hypothesis is proposed to account for the fact that some people who
are exposed to large quantities of comprehensible input do not necessarily acquire language
successfully. The 'affective filter' is a metaphorical barrier that prevents learners from
acquiring language even when appropriate input is available. Affect refers to feelings of
anxiety or negative attitudes that, as we saw in Chapter 3, may be associated with poor
learning outcomes. A learner who is tense, anxious, or bored may filter out input, making it
unavailable for acquisition.
The cognitive perspective
From the cognitive psychology perspective, first and second language acquisition are seen
as drawing on the same processes of perception, memory, categorization, and
generalization. The difference líes in the circumstances of learning as well as in what the
learners already know about language and how that prior knowledge shapes their perception
of the new language.
Information processing
Most learning, including langusge learning, starts with declarative knowledge, that is
knowledge that we are aware of having, for example, a grammar rule. The hypothesis is that,
through practice, declarative knowledge may become procedural knowledge, or the
ability to use the knowledge. For example, of trying to drive a car while intentionally thinking
about and preparing every move. With enough practice, procedural knowledge eclipses the
declarative knowledge, which, in time, may be forgotten. For this reason, fluent speakers
may not even realize that they once possessed the declarative knowledge that set the
process in motion. Restructuring, may account for what appear to be sudden bursts of
progress and apparent backsliding. e.g. “ I saw”----” I seed” or “ I sawed” overapplying the
general rule. Transfer-appropriate processing(TAP) This hypothesizes that information is
best retrieved in situations that are similar to those in which it was acquired. This is because
when we learn something our memories also record something about the context and the
way in which it was learned.
• This can explain why knowledge that is acquired mainly in rule learning or drill activities
may be easier to access on tests that resemble the learning activities than in communicative
situations.
On the other hand, if learners' cognitive resources are occupied with a focus on meaning in
communicative activities, they may find grammar tests very difficult.
usage-based language learning theory is that language acquisition emerges from language
use. In other words, we learn language structures and words by using language and by
understanding the language that other people use. It’s essentially a first language acquisition theory,
but it has ramifications for second language learning
The competition model,
Learners understand how to use “cues”
_ word order, grammatical markers and animacy of nouns
Second language applications: Interacting, noticing, processing, and practising
The sociocultural perspective
According to Vygotsky, cognitive development, including language development arises as a result of
social interactions. • Unlike the psychological theories that view thinking and speaking as related but
independent processes, sociocultural theory views speaking and thinking as tightly interwoven.
• Speaking (and writing) mediate thinking, which means that people can gain control over their mental
processes as a consequence of internalizing what others say to them and what they say to others.
• Learning is thought to occur when an individual interacts with an interlocutor within his or her zone of
proximal development (ZPD)-that is, in a situation in which the learner is capable of performing at a
higher level because there is support from an interlocutor. • People sometimes wonder whether the
ZPD is the same as Krashent i+1.
• William Dunn and James Lantolf (1998) addressed this question in a review article, arguing that it is
not possible to compare the two concepts because they depend on very different ideas about how
development occurs.
• The ZPD is a metaphorical location or 'site' in which learners co-construct knowledge in collaboration
with an interlocutor.
• In Krashen's i+1 the input comes from outside the learner and the emphasis is on the
comprehensibility of input that includes language structures that are just beyond the learner's current
developmental level.
• The emphasis in ZPD is on development and how learners co-construct knowledge based on their
interaction with their interlocutor or in private speech.
Vygotskyan theory has also been compared to the interaction hypothesis because of the interlocutor's
role in helping learners understand and be understood.
• These two perspectives differ primarily in the emphasis they place on the internal cognitive
processes.
• In the interaction hypothesis, the emphasis is on the individual cognitive processes in the mind of the
learner. Interaction facilitates those cognitive processes by giving learners access to the input they
need to activate internal processes.
• In Vygotskyan theory, greater importance is attached to the conversations themselves, with learning
occurring through the social interaction. Sociocultural theory holds that people gain control of and
reorganize their cognitive processes during mediation as knowledge is internalized during social
activity.
KEY TERMS
• internalization: in Vygotsky's theory, the process through which the child turns the external social use
of language into internal mental use
• zone of proximal development (ZPD): to Vygotsky, the gap between the child's low point of
development, as measured individually, and high point, as measured on social tasks; in SLA research
often used to refer to the gap between the learner's current stage and the next point on some
developmental scale the learner is capable of reaching
• scaffolding: the process that assists the learner in getting to the next point in development, in
sociocultural theory consisting of social assistance by other people rather than of physical resources
such as dictionaries
