Explaining Second Language

Learning
a. Behaviorist perspective
b. Innatist Perspective
- Krashen’s monitor model
c. Cognitive Perspective
d. Sociocultural perspective
Group 2
Ayub Elysia Wardani
Azzmiq Aulia Z.R
Dewi Intan Puspita N.
Lily Farianti
Niken Nungki Lasari
Pooja Anggunsari
Sances Giantika
Preview
• A general theory of language acquisition needs to account for language acquisition by
learners with varienty of characteristics in a varienty of contect.

The Behaviorist Perspective

• Behaviorist theory explained learning in terms of imitation, practice, reinforcement

( or feedback on success ), and habit formation.
 Second language applications: Mimicry and memorization
 Researchers found that  We saw ample  By the 1990s,
many of the errors leaners evidence that research agreed
make are not predictable on second language that mimicry is
the basis of their first learners draw on related to
language, nor do they what they already empathy, rapport,
always make the errors that know – incuding and liking
would be predicated by a previously learned
simple comparison. languages.
 The Innatist Perspective
Second Language Applications:
Krashen’s Monitor Model

 One model of SLA that was influenced by Chomsky’s theory of first

language aqusition was Stephen Krashen’s(1982)
 He first described it in the early 1970’s, at the time when there was
growing dissatisfaction with language testing methodeds based on
behaviourism
 Krashen’s Monitor Model

 The  The Affective

Acquisition-  The Natural Filter
Learning Hypothesis Hypothesis
Hypothesis  The Monitor  The Input
In which dichotomy Hypothesis In which rule of Hypothesis In which the
is draw between language of affective filter, like
acquisition and The essence of acquired in a Which state that a metal block, can
learning, the former which is that the predictable order, language is control the access
being a ability to produce which might be acquired by of comprehensible
subconscious was L2 utterances different from the receiving input to the
on developing L2 derives of the order followed in “comprehensible Language
ability the same as learner’s acquired class instruction. input” slighty Acquisition Device
children acquiring competence above one’s (LAD) for
there L1, whereas (subconscious current level of acquisition.
the letter a knowledge), simply competence (i+1).
conscious way to as monitor, help
know about him make
language. correction of chage
output.
 Since the 1990s, research and theories from cognitive
psychology have become increasingly central to our understanding of
second language development.

As in first language acquisition, cognitive and developmental

psychologists argue that there is no need to hypothesize that humans have
a language-specific module in the brain or that acquisition and learningare
distinct mental processes.

From the cognitive psychology perspective, however, first and

second language acquisition are seen as drawing on the same processes of
perception, memory, categorization, and generalization.
 Information Processing

Cognitive psychologists working in an information-

processing model of human learning and performance see second Another aspect of automaticity
language acquisition as the building up of knowledge that can
eventually be called on automatically for speaking and understanding in language processing is the
retrieval of word meanings.
When the proficient listeners
1. Learners must pay attention at first to
any aspect ofthe language that they are trying to learn or hear a familiar word, even for a
produce. split second, they cannot help
2. For proficient speakers, choosing words, pronouncing them, and
stringing them together with the appropriate grammatical but understand it.
markers is essentially automatic.
Information processing approaches to second language acquisition have been
explored by many researchers.
a. Start using declarative knowledge. (once skills become automarized, thinking
about the declarative knowledge while trying to perform the skill)
b. Sometimes changes in language behaviour do not seem to be explainable
in terms of a gradual build-up of fluenry through practice. These changes
have been described in rerms of restrucruring (Mclaughlin 1990).
c. Another concept from psychology offers insight into how learners store and
retrieve language. According to transfer-appropriate processing (TAP),
information is best retrieved in situations that are similar to those in which it
was acquired (Lightbown 2008b).
 Usage-Based Learning

 Usage-based theories take language to be human behavior embodied in social life and seek
explanation in that context. As the name suggests, this theoretical perspective combines the basic
insights that use has an influence on linguistic structure.

 At the same time, the display of compatible language acquisition (accordingly) has evolved. The
uneven distribution of words and constructs in speaking to children is somewhat reflected in the
acquisition process: children often produce their first grammatical construction example only in
the context of a particular lexical item and then generalize it to other lexical items, which
ultimately leading to productivity the language used by the child. (Tomasello, Lieven, and their
colleagues (eg, Lieven et al 2003; Tomasello 2003; Savage et al., 2003; Dabrowska and Lieven
2005).
 The Competition Model

 Elizabeth Bates and Brian MacWhinney (1981) described the ‘competition model’ as
an explanation for both first and second language acquisition that takes into account
not only language form but also language meaning and language use. And speakers of
a particular language come to understand how to use the ‘cues’ that signal specific
functions.

For example :the relationship between words in a sentence may be signalled by word
order, grammatical markers, and the animacy of the nouns in the sentence.
What helps you figure out the meaning?

 English use word order as the most commen indicator of the relationships between sentence components. Most
English sentences have the order Subject-Verb-Object (SVO). That is the typical English sentence mentions the
subject first, then the object.

Two or three years old in language acquisition Four years Old

 Two- and three-year old English-speaking children can usually  By the time they are four years
use cues of animacy and their knowledge of the way things old, children may attribute the
work in the world in the world to interpret odd sentences SVO relationship to sentence in
 Example : the passive voice and learn to
When the children hear a string of words such as pay attention to the
grammatical markers that
‘Box push boy’
distuingish the active voice
they will act it out by making a boy doll push a tiny box, sentence from the passive word
focusing on the fact that the ‘boy’ is the natural agent of order.
action in this situation.
Language and The
Brain
Some of the questions investigated include whether first and second
languages are acquaired and represented in the same areas of the brain and
whether the brain processes second language input differently from first language
input.

Recent brain imaging studies show activation in differences

locations have been observed, depending on the learners’ age and level of
proficiency.
 Second language application: Interacting, noticing, processing and
practicing.
The Interaction hypothesis

Long argued that modified interaction is the necessary mechanism for making language comprehensible.
Some example of conversation modification are :
1. Comprehension checks
2. Clarification requests.
3. Self repetition or paraphrase

The noticing hypothesis

Richard Schmidt (1990,2001) proposed the noticing hypothesis, suggesting that nothing is learned unless
it has been ‘noticed’. Noticing does not itself result in acquisition, but it is essential starting point.
 Input Processing
• Input processing (VanPatten,
2004)
- Learners have limited
processing capacity and
cannot
pay attention to form and
meaning at the same time.
- They tend to give priority
to meaning. When the
context in which they hear
a sentence helps them
make sense of it, they do
not notice details of the
language form.
Processability Theory
• Processability theory (Pienemann,
1999, 2003)
- The research showed that the
sequence of development
for features of syntax and
morphology was affected by
how easy these were to process.
- It integrates developmental
sequences with L1 influence.
- Learners do not simply transfer
features from their L1
at early stages of acquisition.
- They have to develop a certain
level of processing
capacity in the L2 before they
can use their knowledge
of the features that already exist
in their L1.
The Role of Practice
From cognitive perspective, the
practice needed for language
development is not
mechanical, and it is not
limited to the production of
language. Lourdes Ortega has
propossed three principles of
practice in foreign language:
1. Practice should be
interactive
2. Practice should be
meaningful
3. There should be a foccus on
task essential-form
The Sociocultural Perspective

 Sociocultural theory views speaking and thinking as tightly interwoven. Speaking (and
writing) mediates thinking, it means that people can control their mental processes as a result
of internalizing what someone say to them and the opposite, they say to another. This
internalizing happened when they interact with another so, their zone of proximal
development that It can make the learner perform higher level because of supporting from
another learner.

 In fact, people sometimes wonder whether the ZPD (Zone of Proximal Development) is the
same Krashen’s i + I. The emphasis in ZPD is on development and how learners co-
construct knowledge based on their interaction with their interaction with their interlocutor
or in private speech.

 Patsy M. Lightbown and Nina Spada, How Language are Learned, (United Kingdom,
Oxford University Press, 2013), 118.
 Second Language Applications:
Learning by talking

 Extending Vygotskyan theory to second language

acquisition, Jim Lantolf (2000), Richard Donato
(1994), and others are interested in showing how
second language when they collaborate and
interact with other speakers. Swain (1985), first
proposed the comprehensible output hypothesis
based on the observation that France immersion
students were considerably weaker in their
reading and listening comprehension.
 Swain’s early work on the output hypothesis was
influenced by cognitive theory, but more recent work has
been motivated by sociocultural theory. Swain and Lapkin
and their colleagues have carried out a series of studies to
determine how second language learners co-construct
linguistic knowledge while engaging in production task
(i.e speaking and writing) that simultaneously draw their
attention to form and meaning.

Sociocultural theorist assume that the cognitive processes begin as an external socially mediated
activity and eventually become internalized. Other interactionist model assume that modified input and
interaction provide learners with the raw material that is interpreted and analyzed through internal
cognitive processes.
Thanks For Your Attantion