University of Leicester, School of Education MA in Applied Linguistics and TESOL Module One: Second Language Teaching and Learning

Session 1: INTRODUCTION TO SLL: ISSUES AND DEFINITIONS Simon Gieve Session Objectives 1. to explore the goals of SLA research; 2. to explore terms and definitions used in SLA studies; 3. to consider why SLA research is needed by teachers of English

1. GOALS of SLA research The goal of SLA is the description and explanation of the learners linguistic or communicative competence (Ellis, 1994: 15) unless we know for certain that the teachers scheme of things really does match the learners way of going about things, we cannot be sure that the teaching content will contribute directly to language learning (Ellis, 1985: 1). Pica (1994: 51) suggested ten principal concerns for which teachers would welcome advice. What questions concern teachers? 1. In what ways does knowing one language help or hinder the learning of a second? 2. What is more important to L2 learning: comprehension or production? 3. Should students drill and practise new structures? 4. How effective is group work as an aid to L2 learning? 5. What can be done to encourage participation among students who seldom ask questions or initiate interactions? (Or, does participation make any difference?) 6. How much attention should be given to explicit grammar instruction? 7. To what extent does correction of error assist L2 learning? 8. How necessary to learning a language is the learn ers cultural integration? 9. Why do some students have less accurate pronunciation than others, and what can be done about this? 10. What can be done for language learners who seem to have reached a plateau in their learning?

Scope of SLA studies (Ellis, 1994:15-17)

Ellis (1994: 18) identifies four principal areas: Area 1.Characteristics of learner language: errors; orders in which language is acquired; variability; learning of pragmatic features of language. Area 2 Learner external factors: social context; input and interaction. Area 3 Learner internal factors: learning processes; communication strategies; knowledge of linguistic universals; L1 transfer. Area 4 The language learner and individual differences: general factors e.g. aptitude, motivation, attitudes; learner strategies.

PICA (2005) provides a one-chapter historical overview of second language acquisition research over the last few decades. Development of SLA research: starting point a. b. c. Inception of SLA (1950s/60s): Contrastive Analysis; Error Analysis Influence of linguistic structuralism and behaviourism Language as system Learning as habit formation Research on Development of Learners Language Interlanguage (Selinker, 1972) Vast varied development since 1970s Research on Interlanguage Development (Eng/French/German) Patterns of development Morpheme Studies (accuracy order) in 1970s Developmental Sequences (1970s/80s) L1 transfer Universal strategies of communication and learning Research on Linguistic processes Role of linguistic universals in SLA (constraints on language; underlying rules): is SLA like first language acquisition? To what extent do learners rely on first language settings in SLA? To what extent do learners rely on general cognitive principles for L2 development? Research on Cognitive Processes L2 as a skill: Mental processes for skill building and learning (2005: 272) Consciousness and attention Conscious activity: Attention, noticing (explicit processes, though implicit view of learning is also accepted), restructuring of learner language Roles of conscious awareness and practice Comprehension, Input, Interaction Participation in negotiation of meaning Input Intake Internalization Acquisition learning debate.

This analysis leaves out mention of studies conducted from a Vygotskyan socio-cultural perspective (e.g. see Zuengler & Miller, 2006).There is a lot of controversy about the focus of SLA (see for example Larsen-Freeman, 2002, Firth & Wagner, 1997, Gass, 1998; Lantolf, 1996).

2.

Terms Used in Second Language Acquisition Research

Ellis provides a useful overview (Ellis 2005) of the issues involved in instructed language learning. Formulaic expressions and a rule-based competence; Focus on meaning; Focus on form; Implicit knowledge and explicit knowledge; The built-in syllabus (order of acquisition); L2 Input; L2 Output; Interaction in L2 Individual differences (particularly aptitude and motivation) Free and controlled production.

There are some review articles which summarise some of the conclusions from SLA studies (Lightbown, 1985; 2000; Long, 1990, Larsen-Freeman, 1991; Gardner and MacIntyre, 1992, 1993; Zuengler & Miller, 2006).

Lightbown has twice considered SLA research and teaching, in the following articles: Lightbown, P.M. (2000) Classroom second language acquisition research and second language Teaching Applied Linguistics 21/4; 431-462 Lightbown, P.M. (1985) Great expectations: second language acquisition research and classroom Teaching Applied Linguistics 6/2; 173: 189 Her general conclusions are as follows in bold: 1. Adults and adolescents can acquire a second language (2000: 439; 1985: 176) To what extent is the learning conscious or unconscious? 2. The learner creates a systematic interlanguage which is often characterised by the same systematic errors as the child learning the same language as a first language, as well as others based on the learners own native language (2000: 441; 1985: 176) This generalisation is at the heart of modern SLA research (2000: 441). This means that a theory of SLA has to be able to explain systematicity, stage and transfer. 3. There are predictable sequences in L2 acquisition such that certain structures have to be acquired before others can be integrated Many linguistic features are acquired according to a developmental sequence. Form focused instruction may alter the pace but not the order of acquisition. Learners can be taught only what they are ready to learn (2000: 443) when it comes to certain syntactic features (see Pienemann 1998, 1999 on teachability, learnability). 4. Practice (meaningless rote learning and drills) does not make perfect (2000: 443) Meaningful language use is clearly beneficial and even essential (2000: 443) but learners may appear to get worse as they are making progress. Learning is uneven, often u-shaped. There may be a learning U-curve: High levels of accuracy can be achieved through learning and use of memorized chunks or formulae, but accuracy can then drop as they try to make novel utterances.

5. Knowing a language rule does not mean one will be able to use it in communicative interaction But a focus on form consciousness-raising or noticing, does make a positive difference for classroom second language acquisition. See Long 1991 who distinguishes focus on forms which involves step by step explicit grammar teaching, from focus on form.

6. Isolated explicit error correction is usually ineffective in changing language behaviour Lightbown maintained her belief in this claim in the 2000 review, but this does not mean that feedback is not helpful. It can be effective if sustained over time, and explicitly related to the noticing of form (2000: 446). 7. For most adult learners, acquisition stops fossilizes before the learner has achieved native-like mastery of the target language Is fossilization another example of seeing the learner as defective? This is not discussed any further in Lightbown (2000), but the issue is taken up in recent publications e.g. Doughty & Long (2003) in a chapter by Long. 8. One cannot achieve native-like (or near native-like) command of a second language in one hour a day The CPH continues to find support (2000: 448), but not without controversy. We dont know exactly how long, but young first language acquirers get at least15,000 hours by the age of six; but six years x 5 hours a week gives less than 1,000 hours in instructed settings. 9. The learners task is enormous because language is enormously complex Difficulty in learning pragmatic and sociolinguistic features of language, as well as complex morpho-syntax or lexicon. And much can never be taught in classroom exposure 10. A learners ability to understand language in a meaningful context exceeds his/her ability to comprehend decontextualised language and to produce language of comparable complexity and accuracy.

References Allwright, R. (1980) Turns, topics and tasks: Patterns of participation in language learning and teaching. In Larsen Freeman, D. (ed.) Discourse analysis in second language research (pp.165-187). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Atkinson, D. (2003) Language socialization and dys-socialization in a South Indian College. In Bayley, R. & Schechter, R. (eds) Language socialization in bilingual and multilingual societies, (pp. 147-168), Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Bley-Vroman, R. (1988) The logical problem of second language learning, in Gass, S. & Schachter, J. (eds.) (1989) Linguistic Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Cook, V. (2001) Second Language Learning and Language Teaching, London: Arnold Corder, S.P. (1967) The Significance of Learner Errors, International Review of Applied Linguistics, 5: 161-169 Dornyei, Z., & Ushioda, E., (eds) (2009) Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Doughty, C. & Long, M.H. (eds) (2003) The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, Oxford: Basil Blackwell Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (1998) Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Duff, P. & Early, M. (1999); Language socialization in perspective: Classroom discourse in high school humanities courses. Paper Presented at the American Association of Applied Linguistics Conference, Stamford: CT Ellis, R. (1985) Understanding Second Language Acquisition, Oxford: Oxford University Press Ellis, R. (1993a), Talking shop: second language acquisition research: how does it help teachers, English Language Teaching Journal, 47/1: 3-11 Ellis, R. (1993b) Second language acquisition research: how does it help teachers? English Language Teaching Journal 47/1 Ellis, R. (1993c) The Structural Syllabus and Second Language Acquisition, TESOL Quarterly 27/1 91-113 Ellis, R. (1994) The Study of Second Language Acquisition, Oxford: Oxford University Press, Chapter 1 pp 11-40 Ellis, R. (2005) Principles of instructed language learning, System 33 209-224. Firth, A. & Wagner, J. (1997) On discourse, communication and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research, The Modern Language Journal, 81: 285-300 Firth, A. & Wagner, J. (1998) SLA property: no trespassing, The Modern Language Journal, 82/1: 91-94 Gardner, R.C. and MacIntyre, P.D. (1992), A Students Contributions to Second Language Learning, Part I: Cognitive Variables in Language Teaching, 25/ 2:11-20 Gardner, R.C. and MacIntyre, P.D. (1993), A Students Contributions to Second Language Learning, Part II: Affective Variables in Language Teaching, 26/ 1:1-11 Gass, S (1998) Apples and oranges: Or, why apples are not orange and dont need to be. The Modern Language Journal, 82/1: 83-90 Hinkel, Eli (2005), Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum. Lantolf, J. (1996), SLA Theory Building: Letting all the flowers bloom! Language Learning 46/4: 713-749 Larsen-Freeman, D. (1991) Second Language Acquisition Research: staking out the territory, TESOL Quarterly 25/2: 315-350 Larsen-Freeman, D.(2002) Language acquisition and language use from a chaos/complexity theory perspective, in Kramsch, C. (ed.) Language acquisition and language socialization: Ecological perspectives (pp. 33-46), London: Continuum. Lightbown P.M. (2000) Classroom second language acquisition research and second language teaching, Applied Linguistics 21/4 431-462 Lightbown, P.M. and Spada, N. (1993, 1999), How Languages are Learned, Oxford: Oxford University Press

Lightbown, P.M. (1985) Great expectations: second language acquisition research and classroom teaching, Applied Linguistics 6/2; 173-189 Long, M. (1983) Does second language acquisition make a difference? A review of the research. TESOL Quarterly, 17/3 359-382 Long, M. H. (1990) The Least a SLA theory needs to Explain, TESOL Quarterly 24/4: 649666 Long, M. H. (2003) Stabilization and Fossilization in Interlanguage, chapter 16, pp. 487-536, in Doughty, C. & Long, M.H. (eds) (2003) The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, Oxford: Basil Blackwell Mackey, A. (ed) (2007) Conversational Interaction in Second Language Acquisition, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Marinova-Todd, S.H., Marshall, D.B. & Snow, C.E. (2000) Three Misconceptions about Age and L2 Learning, TESOL Quarterly, 34/1: 9-34 McLaughlin, B. (1990) Restructuring. Applied Linguistics, 11/2: 1-16 Mitchell, R. & Myles, F. (2004), Second Language Learning Theories, London: Arnold, Chapter 1 pp 1-21 or pp. 4-28. Nunan, D. (2005) Classroom Research, chapter 13 pp 225-240, in Hinkel, Eli (2005), Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning , NY: Lawrence Erlbaum. Pica, T. (1994) Questions from the Language Classroom, TESOL Quarterly 28/1 49-80 Pica, T. (2005) Second Language Acquisition Research and Applied Linguistics, chapter 15, pp, 263-280 in Hinkel, Eli (2005), Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Rymes, B. (1997); Second Language Socialization: A new approach to second language acquisition, Journal of Intensive English Studies, 11: 143-155. Sato, C.J. (1990) The syntax of conversation in interlanguage development, Tubingen: Gunter Narr Schecter, S. & Bayley, R. (2004) Language socialization in theory and practice International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 17/ 5: 605-625(21) Schmidt, R.W. (1990) The role of consciousness in second language learning, Applied Linguistics, 11/2: 17-46 Selinker, L. (1972) Interlanguage, International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10: 209-231 Spolsky, B. (1989) Conditions for Second Language Learning, Oxford: Oxford University Press Willet, J. (1995) Becoming first graders in an L2: An ethnographic study of L2 socialization. TESOL Quarterly, 29/3: 473-503. Zuengler, J. & Miller, E.R. (2006) Cognitive and Sociocultural Perspectives: Two Parallel SLA Worlds? TESOL Quarterly, 40/1: 35-58.