Theories of second language acquisition

THEORIES OF SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITIONCẩm HàDiễm MyThùy Uyên AnSOME MODELS OF SLAA. An innatist model: Krashen’s input hypothesisB. Two cognitive modelsC. A social constructivist model: Long’s interaction hypothesisA. An innatist model: Krashen’s input hypothesis1. The acquisition- learning hypothesis2. The monitor hypothesis3. The natural order hypothesis4. The input hypothesis5. The affective filter hypothesis1. The acquisition- learning hypothesis According to Krashen, there are two independent systems of second 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. According to Krashen, 'learning' is less important than 'acquisition'. 2. The monitor hypothesis The “monitor” is involved in learning not in acquisition. It is a device for “watch dogging” one’s output, for editing and making alternations or corrections as they are consciously perceived.3. The natural order hypothesis Krashen has claimed that we acquire language rules in a predictable or natural order.4. The input hypothesisThe Input hypothesis is Krashen's attempt to explain how the learner acquires a second language. So, 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. If an acquirer is at level “i”, the input he or she understand should contain “i+1”.5. The affective filter hypothesisthe 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 and anxiety. Krashen claims that learners with high motivation, self-confidence, a good self-image, and a low level of anxiety are better equipped for success in second language acquisition. Low motivation, low self-esteem, and debilitating anxiety can combine to 'raise' the affective filter and form a 'mental block' that prevents comprehensible input from being used for acquisition. B. Cognitive modelsMcLaughlin’s Attention-Processing ModelImplicit and explicit models1. McLaughlin’s Attention-Processing ModelMclaughlin’s (1983) attention-processing model connects processing mechanisms with categories of attention to formal properties of language. Consequently there are four cells: focal automatic processes,focal controlled processes,peripheral controlled processes ,‘peripheral automatic processs Controlled processes are “capacity limited and temporary” and automatic processes are “relatively permanent”.Automatic processes mean processing in a more accomplished skill which means that the brain is able to deal with numerous bits of information simultaneously.  Attention to Formal Properties of languageInformation ProcessingControlled ProcessingAutomatic ProcessingFocalPerformance based on formal rule learning (CELL A)Performance in a test situation (CELL B)PeripheralPerformance based on implicit learning or analogic learning (CELL C)Performance based on communication situations (CELL D)2. Implicit and explicit modelsEXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE learntconsciousanalysedmetalingualovertcontrolled (processing)declarative IMPLICIT KNOWLEDGE acquiredsubconscious, internalisedunanalysedintuitivecovertspontaneous, automatictypically procedural C. A Social constructivist model: Long’s interaction hypothesisLong's proposes that language acquisition is strongly facilitated by the use of the target language in interaction. The Social constructivist perspectives emphasize the dynamic nature of the interplay between learners and their peers and their teachersInterpersonal context in which a learner operates takes on great significantInteraction between learners and others is very importantKrashen once said: “When we provide theory, we provide teacher’s with the underlying rationale for methodology in general.Professors and researchers constructed theory. They spend lots of time hypothesizing, describing, measuring and concluding things about learners and learning and the teachers: stimulating, encouraging, observing and assessing real-live learners.Researchers provide theory and teachers apply it in their classroom.From theory to PracticeFrom theory to PracticeWhen pedagogical approaches and techniques were conceived and developed, essential data were provided for the stimulation of research.Which in turn suggested more effective ways of teaching and learning, and the interdependent cycle continued.Thank you for your attention!