-Applied Linguistics-

Second Language
Acquisition
Jihan Nawal Aini – 180403048
Novita Dyah Pitaloka - 180403004
 Building a Theory of SLA

 Yorio’s (1976) classification of learner variables. (Figure 10.1, p. 286). It shows

different domains of inquiry to be included in a theory of SLA.
 Domains and Generalizations (Classification of learner variables (Yorio, 1976)) :
1. Age 4. Input
2. Cognition 5. Affective Domain
3. Native Language 6. Educational Background
 Domains and Generalization

 Domains and Generalizations (Domains of consideration in a theory of SLA) : 

1. An understanding of language, learning, and teaching.
2. Knowledge of children's learning of their 1st language provides insights to SLA.
3. The differences between adult and child learning and between 1st and 2nd language acquisition
must be accounted for.
4. 2nd language learning is governed by general principles of human learning and intelligence.
5. There is variation across learners in cognitive style and within a learner in strategy choice.
6. Personality (= the way people view and reveal themselves in communication) will affect the 2nd
language learning.
7. Learning a 2nd culture is intertwined with learning a 2nd language.
8. The acquisition of communicative competence (= language socialization) is the learners’ ultimate
goal 9. The linguistic contrasts between the native and target language form one source of
difficulty in learning a 2nd language.
 Domains and Generalization
 Beneficial learner strategies cannot be specified without reference to age, human
learning in general, and some affective factors.
 In comparing and contrasting the 1 st and 2 nd language acquisition, it is impossible to
ignore affective and cultural variables and differences between adult and child
cognition.
 Determining the source of L2 learner’s errors involves consideration of cognitive
strategies and styles, group dynamics and even the validity of data–gathering
procedures.
 No single component of this “theory” is sufficient alone: the interaction and
interdependence of other components are necessary.
 Hypothesis and Claims
 A theory of SLA is an interrelated set of hypotheses/ claims about how people become
proficient in a 2 nd language.
 Popular hypothesis/claims include:
 Lightbown’s claims about SLA (1985)
1) Adults and adolescents can "acquire" a 2nd language.
2) The learner creates a systematic interlanguage
3) There are predictable sequences in acquisition so that certain structures have to be
acquired before others can be integrated.
4) Practice does not make perfect.
5) Knowing a language rule does not mean one will be able to use it in
communicative interaction.
 Hypothesis and Claims
6) Isolated explicit error correction is usually ineffective in changing language
behaviour.
7) For adult learners, acquisition stops/fossilizes before the learner has achieved
native like mastery of the target language.
8) One cannot achieve nativelike command of a 2 nd language in one hour a day.
9) The learner’s task is enormous because language is enormously complex.
10) A learner’s ability to understand language in a meaningful context exceeds his/her
ability to comprehend decontextualized language and to produce language of
comparable complexity and accuracy.
 Hypothesis and Claims
 Lightbown & Spada’s
1) Languages are learned mainly through imitation.
2) Parents correct young children when they make errors.
3) People with high IQs are good language learners.
4) The earlier a 2nd language is introduced in school programs, the greater the
likelihood of success in learning.
5) Most of the 2nd language learners’ mistakes due to interference from their 1st
language.
6) Learners' errors should be corrected as soon as they are made in order to prevent the
formation of bad habits. 
 Criteria for a Viable Theory

 Diane Larsen-Freeman (1997), argued that SLA is a dynamic, complex and non-linear
system Each learner takes a different path to achieve success.
 Larsen- Freeman (1997) suggested some lessons from the chaos theory to help us design
a theory of SLA:
 Beware of false dichotomies (contradictions). Look for complementarity,
inclusiveness and interface.
 Beware of linear, causal approaches to theorizing because SLA is very complex with
so many interacting factors.
 Beware of overgeneralizations - focus on details.
 Beware of reductionist thinking - oversimplifying a complex system. 
 Criteria for a Viable Theory

 Long’s 8 criteria for a theory of SLA :

1)  Account for universals.
2) Account for environmental factors.
3) Account for variability in age, acquisition rate and proficiency level.
4) Explain both cognitive and affective factors.
5) Account for form-focused learning, not just subconscious acquisition.
6) Account for other variables besides exposure and input.
7) Account for cognitive/ innate factors which explain interlanguage systematicity.
8) Recognize that acquisition is not a steady accumulation of generalizations.
Hot Topics in SLA Research

Explicit and Implicit Learning

Awareness
Input and Output
Frequency
 Explicit and Implicit Learning
 Researchers are still occupied with the questions about the effectiveness of explicit
and implicit learning.
 Explicit Learning - involves conscious awareness and attention.
 Implicit Learning - learning without conscious attention or awareness.
 Related concepts: intentional and incidental learning.
 Attention can occur under both conditions.
 There is a universal agreement that both explicit and implicit learning offer
advantages and disadvantages.
 Generalizations are not possible, all the specifics of a given context should be
considered before making a conclusion.
 Awareness
 Awareness is similar to conscious (vs. subconscious) learning, where learners are
intentionally controlling their attention and some aspects of input and output.
 Schmidt’s (1990) proposed the noticing hypothesis in which he suggested a central
role for focal attention, stemming from awareness, for a learner to notice language
input.
 Noticing may be an essential prerequisite to a learner’s ability to convert input into
intake (Schmidt, 1990; Robinson, 2003; Ellis, 1997; Leow, 2000).
 Input refers to the subset of all input that actually gets assigned to our long-term
memory store.
 Intake is what you take with you over a period of time and can later remember. 
 Awareness
 The debate over requisite levels of awareness in SLA is complex and demands a
careful specification of conditions before any conclusion can be offered.
 Certain degree of focus on form can be beneficial.
 It seems advantageous that learners are aware of their own strengths and weaknesses
and to consciously employ strategic options in their learning (Brown, 2002).
 However, many learners are much too consciously involved in the forms of the target
language that it blocks their ability to focus on meaning.
 Input and Output
 The relationship of input to output in SLA was controversial but is becoming less so.
 Input- the process of comprehending language (listening and reading).
 Output- is the production of language (speaking and writing)
 Both input and output are necessary processes, which are in varying degree of
complementary distribution in L2 learners’ language learning process.
 There is still a great debate over what constitutes the optimal quality of input and
output.
 Frequency
 Frequency = how many times a specific word, structure, or other defined element of
language captures the attention of a learner.

 Frequency may be more important than traditionally thought.

 Educators cannot simply ignore the possibility that frequency can potentially influence
acquisition.
THANK
YOU