SLAT2001 Introduction to SL learning and teaching

Week 3 Contexts for Language Learning

Outline of today
FAQ for the 1st assignment Review last week (Ch. 1: childhood language acquisition) This weeks reading (Ch. 2: pp. 29-38)
Contexts for language learning: Activity/discussion Behaviourism Innatist perspective (UG)
Krashens monitor model

Review
Child first language acquisition process
Similar processes across languages Morphemes, negations, and questions Follows cognitive development (e.g., time *yesterday+, object permanence *telephone calls+, conservation *bigger, more+)

Three theories
Behaviourist Innatist Interactionist

Cognitive (innatist)

Interactionist Theory

Environment (behaviourist)

Contexts for Language Learning

A child or adult learning a second language is different from a child acquiring a first language in terms of both
1) learner characteristics
and 2) learning conditions

Contexts for language learning

Four scenarios:
Young child learning L1 Child learning an L2 in day care or on playground Adolescent taking FL class Adult immigrant with limited education, a job using L2, and no opportunity to go to language classes

Differences in Learning L1 & L2

SLA/SLL theories need to account for

language acquisition/learning:
by learners with a variety of characteristics

and learning in a variety of contexts.

Knowledge of another language

All L2 and FL learners May increase metalinguistic awareness May cause interference
Order of languages may be important

Cognitive maturity, metalinguistic awareness, knowledge of world

Allow discussion about language World knowledge (and cognitive skills) can help learner to figure things out Cognitive skills and metalinguistic awareness may interfere with natural learning of language, however

Anxiety

Older learners want to be able to say exactly what they want They may be more self-conscious Younger learners more likely to give things a go regardless

Freedom to be silent

Younger learners more likely to have freedom to be silent initially and to be able to practice through songs and games Adults more likely to need to use the language straight away in the classroom or in-country

Time and contact

L2 classrooms tend to use more formal language and dont offer extensive contact with the language
Authentic activities (e.g., disciplining, do this for homework) may actually be carried out in the L1 (in schools especially)

Feedback
Similar to L1 learning, outside classroom, errors that dont interfere with understanding (e.g., pronunciation, grammar) are not usually corrected (impolite) Also inappropriate language is unlikely to be pointed out Errors that interfere with meaning (e.g., wrong word choice) may be corrected, however (albeit indirectly)

Modified input

Foreigner talk
Slower or louder? Both?

Teacher talk

Theories of SLA
Today:
Behaviourism Innatist

Next class:
Cognitive/developmental perspectives Sociocultural theory

Behaviourism

Behaviorism
Four characteristics of behaviorism:
1) imitation, 2) practice, 3) reinforcement, and 4) habit formation

emphasizing mimicry and memorization (audiolingual teaching methods)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKV1CR-LxIY&feature=related

Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis

A person learning an L2 starts off with the habits formed in the L1 and these habits would interfere with the new ones needed for the L2. Behaviorism was often linked to the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH): It predicts that where there are similarities between the L1 and the target language, the learner will acquire target-language structures with ease; where there are differences, the learner will have difficulty.

Behaviorism / CAH
Criticisms about the CAH:
Though a learners L1 influences the acquisition of an L2, researchers have found that L2 learners do not make all the errors predicted by the CAH.
1. Many of their errors are not predictable on the basis of their L1 (e.g. putted; cooker meaning a person who cooks; badder than) 2. Some errors are similar across learners from a variety of L1 backgrounds (e.g. he/she; th sound; the use of the past tense; propositions)

Behaviorism / Summary
The L1 influence may not simply be a matter of the transfer of habits, but a more subtle and complex process of - identifying points of similarity, - weighing the evidence in support of some particular feature, and - reflecting (though not necessarily consciously) about whether a certain feature seems to belong in the L2. By the 1970s, many researchers were convinced that behaviorism and the CAH were inadequate explanations for SLA.

Innatism
Universal Grammar (UG) in relation to second language development Competence vs. Performance Krashens monitor model

Innatism: (UG)
How UG works in SLA:
Two different views 1. The nature and availability of UG are the same in L1 and L2 acquisition. Adult L2 learners, like children, neither need nor benefit from error correction and metalinguistic information. These things change only the superficial appearance of language performance and do not affect the underlying competence of the new language

Innatism: (UG)
2. UG may be present and available to L2 learners, but its exact nature has been altered by the prior acquisition of the first language.

L2 learners need to be given some explicit information about what is not grammatical in the L2. Otherwise, they may assume that some structures of the L1 have equivalents in the L2 when, in fact, they do not.

Innatism:
Competence vs. Performance Competence:
It refers to the knowledge which underlies our ability to use language.

Performance:
It refers to the way a person actually uses language in listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Performance is subject to variations due to inattention, anxiety, or fatigue whereas competence (at least for the mature native speaker) is more stable.

Innatism:
Competence vs. Performance
SLA researchers from the UG perspective (innatism) are more interested in the language competence (i.e., knowledge of complex syntax) of advanced learners rather than in the simple language of early stage learners. Their investigations often involve comparing the judgments of grammaticality made by L2 and L1 learners, rather than observations of actual language performance

Universal Grammar
Researchers are divided on the applicability of UG to second language acquisition: Some think that the UG provides an adequate explanation only for first language acquisition.

UG provides the best explanation for second language acquisition

UG is equally available (the same) to second language learners as it was for first language learners

Instruction and corrective feedback change only superficial appearance of language Focus on Natural acquisition

UG has been altered; it is not the same after acquiring L1

Learners may need some explicit information and instruction

Monitor Model
Stephen Krashen

Model of second language acquisition Influenced by Chomskys theory of first language acquisition

Krashens Monitor Model

Influenced by Chomskys UG theory Early 70s: growing dissatisfaction with behaviourism
Very influential in the movement away from memorisation towards focus on use and meaning
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), Immersion, ContentBased Instruction Acquisition does occur without explicit instruction but tends to plateau

Innatism:
Krashens monitor model (1982) The acquisition-learning hypothesis The monitor hypothesis The natural order hypothesis The input hypothesis The affective filter hypothesis

Innatism:
Krashens monitor model The acquisition-learning hypothesis
Acquisition: we acquire L2 knowledge as we are exposed to samples of the L2 which we understand with no conscious attention to language form. It is a subconscious and intuitive process. Learning: we learn the L2 via a conscious process of study and attention to form and rule learning. Krashen argues that acquisition is a more important process of constructing the system of a language than learning because fluency in L2 performance is due to what we have acquired, not what we have learned.

Innatism:
Krashens monitor model The monitor hypothesis
The acquired system acts to initiate the speakers utterances and is responsible for spontaneous language use, whereas the learned system acts as a monitor, making minor changes and polishing 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.

Innatism:
Krashens monitor model The natural order hypothesis
L2 learners acquire the features of the TL in predictable sequences.
The language features that are easiest to state (and thus to learn) are not necessarily the first to be acquired. e.g. the rule for adding an s to third person singular verbs in the present tense

Innatism: Krashens monitor model

The input hypothesis Acquisition occurs by exposing learners (acquirers?) to a level of language slightly more advanced than their current level
i+1 comprehensible input Inductive versus deductive teaching http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4K11o19YNvk

Innatism:
Krashens monitor model
The affective filter hypothesis
Affect refers to feelings, motives, needs, attitudes, and emotional states.

The affective filter is an imaginary/metaphorical barrier that prevents learners from acquiring language from the available input.
Depending on the learners state of mind, the filter limits what is noticed and what is acquired. A learner who is tense, anxious, or bored may filter out input, making it unavailable for acquisition.

Monitor Model

Summary
Contexts for language learning include the environment and individual differences Behaviourism: audiolingualism & the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis Innatist perspective (UG)
Krashens monitor model: comprehensible input