5 Hypotheses of the Krashen’s

Theory

• Krashen's theory of second language

acquisition consists of five main hypotheses:

• the Acquisition-Learning hypothesis

• the Monitor hypothesis
• the Natural Order hypothesis
• the Input hypothesis
• the Affective Filter hypothesis
The Acquisition-
Learning hypothesis
• The Acquisition-Learning distinction is the most
fundamental of the five hypotheses in Krashen's theory and
the most widely known among linguists and language
teachers.
• According to Krashen there are two independent systems
of foreign language performance: 'the acquired system'
and 'the learned system'.
• The 'acquired system' or 'acquisition' is the product of a
subconscious process very similar to the process children
undergo when they acquire their first language.
• It requires meaningful interaction in the target language -
natural communication - in which speakers are
concentrated not in the form of their utterances, but in the
communicative act.
• The "learned system" or "learning" is the product of formal
instruction and it comprises a conscious process which
results in conscious knowledge 'about' the language, for
example knowledge of grammar rules.
• A deductive approach in a teacher-centered setting
produces "learning", while an inductive approach in a
The Monitor
hypothesisThe Monitor hypothesis explains the relationship between
acquisition and learning and defines the influence of the latter
on the former. The monitoring function is the practical result of
the learned grammar. According to Krashen, the acquisition
system is the utterance initiator, while the learning system
performs the role of the 'monitor' or the 'editor'. The 'monitor'
acts in a planning, editing and correcting function when three
specific conditions are met:
• The second language learner has sufficient time at their
disposal.
• They focus on form or think about correctness.
• They know the rule.
It appears that the role of conscious learning is somewhat
limited in second language performance. According to Krashen,
the role of the monitor is minor, being used only to correct
deviations from "normal" speech and to give speech a more
'polished' appearance.Krashen also suggests that there is
individual variation among language learners with regard to
'monitor' use. He distinguishes those learners that use the
'monitor' all the time (over-users); those learners who have not
learned or who prefer not to use their conscious knowledge
(under-users); and those learners that use the 'monitor'
appropriately (optimal users). An evaluation of the person's
psychological profile can help to determine to what group they
belong. Usually extroverts are under-users, while introverts
and perfectionists are over-users. Lack of self-confidence is
frequently related to the over-use of the "monitor".
The Input hypothesis

• The Input hypothesis is Krashen's attempt to explain how the

learner acquires a second language – how second language
acquisition takes place.
• The Input hypothesis is only concerned with 'acquisition', not
'learning'.
• According to this hypothesis, the learner improves and
progresses along the 'natural order' when he/she receives
second language 'input' that is one step beyond his/her
current stage of linguistic competence.
• For example, if a learner is at a stage 'i', then acquisition
takes place when he/she is exposed to 'Comprehensible Input'
that belongs to level 'i + 1'.
• Since not all of the learners can be at the same level of
linguistic competence at the same time, Krashen suggests
that natural communicative input is the key to designing a
syllabus, ensuring in this way that each learner will receive
some 'i + 1' input that is appropriate for his/her current stage
of linguistic competence.
The Affective Filter
hypothesis
• The Affective Filter hypothesis embodies Krashen's
view that a number of 'affective variables' play a
facilitative, but non-causal, role in second language
acquisition.
• These variables include: motivation, self-confidence,
anxiety and personality traits.
• Krashen claims that learners with high motivation, self-
confidence, a good self-image, a low level of anxiety
and extroversion are better equipped for success in
second language acquisition.
• Low motivation, low self-esteem, anxiety, introversion
and inhibition can raise the affective filter and form a
'mental block' that prevents comprehensible input from
being used for acquisition.
• In other words, when the filter is 'up' it impedes
language acquisition.
• On the other hand, positive affect is necessary, but not
sufficient on its own, for acquisition to take place.
 The Natural Order hypothesis
• Finally, the less important Natural Order hypothesis is based on research findings (Dulay &
Burt, 1974; Fathman, 1975; Makino, 1980 cited in Krashen, 1987) which suggested that the
acquisition of grammatical structures follows a 'natural order' which is predictable.
• For a given language, some grammatical structures tend to be acquired early while others
late.
• This order seemed to be independent of the learners' age, L1 background, conditions of
exposure, and although the agreement between individual acquirers was not always 100% in
the studies, there were statistically significant similarities that reinforced the existence of a
Natural Order of language acquisition.
• Krashen however points out that the implication of the natural order hypothesis is not that a
language program syllabus should be based on the order found in the studies.
• In fact, he rejects grammatical sequencing when the goal is language acquisition.
The Role of Grammar in Krashen's View
According to Krashen, the study of the structure of the language can have general educational advantages and values that
high schools and colleges may want to include in their language programs. Any benefit, however, will greatly depend on the
learner being already familiar with the language. It should also be clear that analizing the language, formulating rules, setting
irregularities apart, and teaching complex facts about the target language is not language teaching, but rather is "language
appreciation" or linguistics, which does not lead to communicative proficiency.

The only instance in which the teaching of grammar can result in language acquisition (and proficiency) is when the students
are interested in the subject and the target language is used as a medium of instruction. Very often, when this occurs, both
teachers and students are convinced that the study of formal grammar is essential for second language acquisition, and the
teacher is skillful enough to present explanations in the target language so that the students understand. In other words, the
teacher talk meets the requirements for comprehensible input and perhaps, with the students' participation, the classroom
becomes an environment suitable for acquisition. Also, the filter is low in regard to the language of explanation, as the
students' conscious efforts are usually on the subject matter, on what is being talked about, and not the medium.

This is a subtle point. In effect, both teachers and students are deceiving themselves. They believe that it is the subject matter
itself, the study of grammar, that is responsible for the students progress, but in reality their progress is coming from the
medium and not the message. Any subject matter that held their interest would do just as well.