Factors Affecting Language Acquisition

By:

Dian Pawitri Ayu (2223042003)

Kommen Sohni (2223042019)

Ranti Pratiwi (2223042026)

MASTER OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF LAMPUNG
2022
 Introduction

Language and humans are inseparable. In everyday life, we communicate

with other people using language. We both convey our thoughts and receive other

people’s messages through language. However, before being able to use language

properly to communicate, humans need to experience a unique process to acquire

it. Since baby, we have been exposed to the language used by our parents. At first,

we perceive our parents’ utterances as abstract sounds as we do not have any idea

about them. Even so, our brains comprehend and memorize those sounds and we

start to understand the meaning and continuously produce them. This

transformation is called language acquisition – the process of acquiring a first or

native language. We will naturally speak in Indonesian language if we are born in

Indonesia and raised by parents who are also Indonesian speakers. The same goes

for any native languages we are taught.

Furthermore, another type of language acquisition is the one that happens

after we have acquired our native tongue which is commonly known as second

language acquisition. A well-known linguist named Stephen Khrasen (1982)

believes that people should acquire second languages in the same way children

learn their first. Thus, it entails meaningful and natural exposure in communication

using the language that speakers are more concerned with the messages being

conveyed than the structure of their speech. Nevertheless, acquiring a language is

not as easy as it is thought that several components such as age, sex, aptitude,

motivation, and anxiety level may influence someone’s success in second language

acquisition. Therefore, this paper aims to provide further elaboration on language

acquisition, especially in acquiring a second language, including some factors

affecting someone’s language acquisition process. Moreover, the implication of this

topic to EFL teaching is also included in this discussion.

 Literature Review

a. Concept of Language Acquisition

The notion regarding the process of acquiring a language has been widely

discussed by experts that they may propose their own theories and definitions.

Primarily, language acquisition refers to the way how humans develop the ability

to recognize and understand language as well as to create and utilize words and

sentences to communicate. According to Troike (2012), language acquisition is the

term used to describe the process of people and groups acquiring language that

sometimes they may acquire a new language after learning their first as young

children. The additional language is referred to as a second language (L2), although

it may also be the third, fourth, or tenth language learned by people. Thus, it is also

broadly known as target language (TL) which indicates any language learned in

addition to one's native language. To illustrate, a kid raised by Indonesian parents

speaks Indonesia language as his mother tongue. However, as his family moved to

Australia, he starts to acquire English as his second language. He also learns

Spanish at school which becomes the target language to be mastered by him.

Therefore, Lightbown and Spada (1998) highlight that language learners may

obtain a language in one of two ways: either by "acquiring" it or by "learning" it. In

essence, people acquire a language when they interact meaningfully in the second

language which is similar to how toddlers take up their native language without

paying much attention to structure. On the other hand, they learn a language through

a deliberate process of study and most of the time they put much attention to form

and error correction. Thus, learning is mostly taken place in a formal language

classroom which involves instructors or teachers who teach them grammatical

rules. This concept is similar to Krashen’s idea in the acquisition hypothesis.

Furthermore, Krashen (1982) perceives language acquisition as a

subconscious process. It indicates that language acquirers often do not recognize

that they are acquiring a language; rather, they simply recognize that they are

utilizing the language to communicate. Acquired competence, the end outcome of

language acquisition, is obtained subconsciously as well. Most of the time, people

do not aware of recognizing the rules of the languages they have received. Instead,

they rely on their feeling for accuracy, for example, correct structure "sounds" or

"feels" proper whereas mistakes “feel” incorrect even if they are not consciously

aware of the grammatical rule. By having this fundamental principle, Krashen

(1982) then elaborated his theory by focusing on five hypotheses of language

acquisition, especially in second language acquisition, as presented below.

1. Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis

According to this hypothesis, there are two ways that second language

communication might develop: language learning and language

acquisition. When a person feels the urge to communicate with others,

language acquisition happens implicitly. This is similar to how toddlers

develop their first language (L1). Thus, acquisition is the unconscious

action by which someone integrates a new language, emphasizing the

content above the form. On the other hand, learning a language requires

intentional learning and direct teaching regarding the language's rules.

As an illustration, in daily interaction with native speakers of their own

language, people put less attention to the linguistic aspects of the speech

uttered by the speakers. In contrast, they are more interested in the

meaning conveyed by them. However, when it comes to the learning

process that mostly takes place inside a classroom, students are aware

of the structure of the sentences that they are produced. It is because

most teachers in traditional classes insert grammar lessons into the

learning. As a result, students always remain conscious of what they

want to say.
2. Natural Order Hypothesis

The natural order hypothesis implies that structural elements are

obtained by second language learners in a predictable order. Brown

(1973) adds his argument regarding this theory that certain grammatical

morphemes or functional words are often acquired by English as second

language learners earlier than others, for example, the progressive

marker ing (as in “She is watching a movie”) and the plural marker /s/

(“three cars”) are among the first morphemes acquired, while the third

person singular marker /s/ (as in “She lives in London”) and the

possessive /s/ (“Gina’s hat”) are typically acquired much later.

3. Monitor Hypothesis

The monitor hypothesis suggests that formal rules, or conscious

learning, play only a limited role in second language performance.

Regarding this theory, Krashen argues that the learned grammar

activates the monitoring function. Therefore, the acquired system aids

in initiating utterances while the learned system serves as the monitor.

The monitor acts in a planning, editing, and correcting function when

three specific conditions are met: second language learners have

sufficient time at their disposal, they focus on form or think about

correctness, and they know the rules. Additionally, Krashen divides

language learners into three categories: those who constantly use the

"monitor" (over-users); those who have not acquired or who prefer not

to utilize their conscious knowledge (under-users); and those who

correctly use the "monitor" (optimal users). To picturize, there are three

students represent the three types of users. They are asked to tell their

last holiday in front of the class. The first student who is the over-user

may repeat some words to correct his sentences because he always

 thinks about the grammar used in his sentences. On the other hand, the

second student who is the under-user focuses more on the messages that

he wants to express. This kind of student may produce more errors as

he does not really care about the correct structure yet he conveys more

meaning than over-user. Last, the third student who is believed to be

optimal-user can speak using the language accurately since he is able to

maintain his fluency and self-correction.

4. Input Hypothesis

This hypothesis believes that people acquire languages by

understanding messages by receiving comprehensible input. It is

assumed that when the input is somewhat above a learner’s present

level, their language proficiency will increase. This is referred to by

Krashen as “I + 1," where “I” indicates a person’s existing language

level and "+1" refers to a new competence or knowledge that is a little

bit more difficult. As an illustration, some students know a lot of

English vocabulary related to animals which reflects their current

competency. Then, they are given input in the form of a video of

someone describing a cat. Their brain will process new information

through the utterances that they listen to. Thus, it is important to give

an example or model before asking them to perform independently.

After that, students should be facilitated to produce the language, for

example by asking them to describe an animal. In this part, they may

try to use the input by composing sentences to describe something

which is also quite challenging for them.

 5. Affective Filter Hypothesis

The affective filter hypothesis argues that a number of affective factors,

such as motivation, self-confidence, and anxiety, influence second

language acquisition. In order to accept the changes necessary to

acquire the language, someone needs to feel comfortable in his

surroundings. Thus, the emotional state of a learner will have an impact

on his openness to comprehensible input. To picturize, students who

have a great curiosity about a language, for example English, can

acquire better and more language input. They might receive and

understand various vocabulary and phrases spoken by other people

easier and faster than those who have low motivation.

After all, in the process of acquiring a language, people unconsciously

receive language input produced and given by their surroundings. As a result, they

sometimes are not aware of the grammatical rules as opposed to learning which

involves activities that can activate their competence regarding form and structure.

Moreover, the five hypotheses proposed by Khrasen (1982) present how people

obtain and master a language. Nevertheless, some factors may affect someone’s

language acquisition which are discussed in the following subchapter.

b. Factors Affecting Language Acquisition

According to Troike (2012), whether learning takes place through formal

instruction in school – immersion in a situation where one must learn a new

language to meet basic needs – or informal exposure to speakers of other languages,

these acquisition processes are frequently profoundly influenced by strong social,

cultural, and economic factors affecting the status of both languages and learners.

Besides, some components might also affect language acquisition which is related

to age, sex, motivation, anxiety level, and aptitude. Those aspects are highly
contributed to the success of someone’s language acquisition. Further elaboration

on the factors affecting is provided below.

1. Age

It is a common belief that children are more successful L2 learners than

adults, but the evidence for this is actually surprisingly equivocal. One reason

for the apparent inconsistency in research findings is that some studies define

relative success as the initial rate of learning that older learners have an

advantage. Meanwhile, other studies define it as ultimate achievement that

learners who are introduced to the L2 in childhood indeed do appear to have an

edge. The following is the table showing age differences in SLA:

Furthermore, Lenneberg (1967) speculated that the critical period

applies to SLA as well as to first language acquisition, and that this accounts

for why almost all L2 speakers have a foreign accent if they do not begin

learning the language before the cut-off age. However, Seliger (1978) and Long

(1990) argue instead that there are multiple periods that place constraints on

different aspects of language. They also suggest that these periods do not

impose absolute cut-off points; it is just that L2 acquisition will more likely be

complete if begun in childhood than if it does not start until a later age. This
weaker claim seems warranted since some older learners can achieve native-

like proficiency, although they definitely constitute a minority of second

language learners.

While most would agree that younger learners achieve ultimately higher

levels of L2 proficiency. The evidence is just as convincing that adolescents and

adults learn faster in the initial stages. While brain plasticity is listed as a

younger learner advantage, older learners are advantaged by greater learning

capacity, including better memory for vocabulary. Greater analytic ability might

also be an advantage for older learners, at least in the short run, since they are

able to understand and apply explicit grammatical rules. On the other hand,

Newport (1990) suggests that less is more in this respect: one reason younger

learners develop more native-like grammatical intuitions is that they are in a

non-analytic processing mode. This calls for another qualification: younger

learners are probably more successful in informal and naturalistic L2 learning

contexts, and older learners in formal instructional settings.

Other advantages that younger learners may have are being less

inhibited than older learners and having weaker feelings of identity with people

– other than close family or caregivers – who speak the same native language.

Children are also more likely to receive simplified language input from others,

which might facilitate their learning. On the other hand, older learners may be

advantaged as they include higher levels of pragmatic skills and knowledge of

L1, which may transfer positively to L2 use; more real-world knowledge

enables older learners to perform tasks of much greater complexity, even when

their linguistic resources are still limited. Therefore, it can be said that younger
and older learner may acquire language in different process which is adjusted

to their capacity.

2. Sex

Most research on the relation between learner sex and SLA has been

concerned with cognitive style or learning strategies or issues of what variety

of L2 is being acquired or opportunities for input and interaction. There is a

widespread belief in many western cultures that females tend to be better L2

learners than males. There do appear to be some sex differences in language

acquisition and processing, but the research evidence is mixed. As an example,

women outperform men in some tests of verbal fluency (such as finding words

that begin with a certain letter), and women’s brains may be less asymmetrically

organized than men’s for speech (Kimura, 1992). Particular potential relevance

to SLA are findings in relation to mental representations in the lexicon versus

the grammar: females seem to be better at memorizing complex forms, while

males appear to be better at computing compositional rules (e.g. Halpern, 2000).

Other differences may be related to hormonal variables as higher androgen level

correlates with better-automatized skills, and high estrogen with better

semantic/interpretive skills. As reported by Kimura (1992) that higher levels of

articulatory and motor ability have been associated in women with higher levels

of estrogen during the menstrual cycle. However, it does not mean that women

always perform better than men that some other factors may take a role to

someone’s success in acquiring second language.

3. Aptitude

The assumption that there is an ability that is specific to language

learning has been widely held for many years. Ellis (1986) cited in Khasinan

(2014) states that aptitude refers to a learner's special capacity to acquire a

second language. In other words, language proficiency is believed to be a

combination of diverse abilities, including the ability to identify sound patterns

in a new language and the ability to recognize the various grammatical functions

of words in that language. Therefore, students require aptitude - a set of unique

skills responsible for language acquisition. The following four components are

proposed by Carroll (1965) as underlying ability in language acquisition.

• Phonemic coding ability

• Inductive language learning ability

• Grammatical sensitivity

• Associative memory capacity

Phonemic coding ability is the capacity to process auditory input into

segments which can be stored and retrieved. It is particularly important at

very early stages of learning when this ability is concerned with the extent to

which the input which impinges on the learner can become input that is worth

processing, as opposed to input that may simply be an auditory blur or

alternatively only partially processed (Skehan, 1998). In other words, if the

hearer cannot analyze the incoming stream of speech into phonemes in order

to recognize morphemes, the input may not result in intake.

 In addition, inductive language-learning ability and grammatical

sensitivity are both concerned with central processing. They account for

further processing of the segmented auditory input by the brain to infer

structure, identify patterns, make generalizations, recognize the grammatical

function of elements, and formulate rules. It is in central processing that

restructuring occurs. On the other hand, associative memory capacity is

importantly concerned with how linguistic items are stored, and with how

they are recalled and used in output. Associative memory capacity determines

appropriate selection from among the L2 elements that are stored, and

ultimately determines speaker fluency.

After all, based on the four elements, someone's language ability is

rather consistent throughout their lifetime. It can enhance foreign language

acquisition and decrease the complexity of learning. It can therefore predict

the rate of foreign language acquisition.

4. Motivation

Another factor which is frequently cited to explain why some L2

learners are more successful than others is individual motivation. Motivation

largely determines the level of effort that learners expend at various stages in

their L2 development, often a key to the ultimate level of proficiency.

Furthermore, the most widely recognized types of motivation are integrative

and instrumental. Integrative motivation is based on interest in learning L2

because of a desire to learn about or associate with the people who use it (e.g.

for romantic reasons), or because of an intention to participate or integrate

with the L2-using speech community; in any case, emotional or affective

factors are dominant. Instrumental motivation involves the perception of

purely practical value in learning the L2, such as increasing occupational or

business opportunities, enhancing prestige and power, accessing scientific

and technical information, or passing a course in school. Neither of these

orientations has an inherent advantage over the other in terms of L2

achievement. The relative effect of one or the other is dependent on complex

personal and social factors: e.g. L2 learning by a member of the dominant

group in society may benefit more from integrative motivation, and L2

learning by a subordinate group member may be more influenced by

instrumental motivation.

Moreover, Brown (2000) mentions that integrative and instrumental

motivation are not always mutually exclusive. When learning a second

language, learners often choose a combination of the two motivational

orientations rather than choosing just one. He refers to an illustration of an

overseas student studying in the United States who wants to integrate with the

locals and their culture while also learning English for academic purposes.

Thus, it can be concluded that the achievement of L2 is significantly

influenced by motivation. Because of this, it is crucial to recognize the

motivational factors that contribute to the effective learning of a second

language. At the same time, it is essential to see motivation as one of the

elements in a complex model of interconnected personal and environmental

characteristics that are unique to each language learner.

5. Anxiety Level

Personality factors are sometimes added to cognitive style in

characterizing a more general learning style. However, the personality factor

is tightly related to someone’s level of anxiety. Anxiety has received the most

attention in SLA research, along with the lack of anxiety as an important

component of self-confidence. Anxiety correlates negatively with measures

of L2 proficiency including grades awarded in foreign language classes,

meaning that higher anxiety tends to go with lower levels of success in L2

learning. In addition to self-confidence, lower anxiety may be manifested by

more risk-taking or more adventuresome behaviors. We need to keep some

complex issues in mind when we read about or interpret research on anxiety:

1. The direction of cause and effect is uncertain. Lower anxiety levels

might very well facilitate language learning; conversely, however,

more successful language learners might feel less anxious in

situations of L2 learning and use, and thus be more self-confident.

2. Instructional context or task influences anxiety level and reporting.

As an illustration, foreign language classes or tests that require oral

performance normally generate more anxiety than do those in which

production is in writing.

3. Although personality factors are defined as individual traits,

systematic cultural differences are found between groups of learners.

As an example, oral performance in English classes generates

relatively more anxiety for Korean students (Truitt 1995) than for

Turkish students (Kunt 1997). This may be because of cultural

 differences in concepts of “face” (i.e. projecting a positive self-

image; see Liu 2001 ), or because of cultural differences in classroom

practices and experiences.

4. Low anxiety and high self-confidence increase student motivation to

learn, and make it more likely that they will use the L2 outside of the

classroom setting. It is therefore not clear whether more successful

learning is directly due to lower anxiety, or to a higher level of

motivation and more social interaction.

Therefore, if anxiety levels are raised to a certain extent, it may be

impossible to acquire language at that moment. A low anxiety environment

is more inducive to absorb comprehensible input. That is why to

successfully acquire a language, it is necessary to lower the anxiety level.

In a classroom setting, teachers may help their students cope with anxiety,

or they can try to create a classroom environment that does not foster anxiety

by employing enjoyable learning process.

 Discussion

The Implication of Language Acquisition to EFL Teaching

Learning a foreign language is one of the most important things, especially

the English language. Most people desire to be able to use English for certain

purposes. It means they need a level of English that will enable them to achieve

their objectives. By learning English, they can learn the language necessary to travel

to another country and get employment with a multinational company. However,

the issue is that they should be concentrating on improving their language skills

rather than on their level. Therefore, English becomes a tool for them instead of a

means to get what they want. Besides, schools play a significant impact in affecting

the learning of second languages for students.

Meanwhile, for students who reside in a nation where English is not the

primary language of communication daily, learning English can be challenging due

to a variety of factors that may affect students’ language acquisition. They could be

familiar with the terms but not understand their context. Furthermore, the students

have their own unique language and educational background, and this will affect

how well they learn English. Krashen (1982) states that a teacher can promote

acquisition, by providing students with appropriate comprehensible input. The only

alternative procedure for language teachers which he describes is that of presenting

students with a rule and then helping them practice applying it, a procedure which

leads of course to learning.

 In addition, students’ understanding of the language development process is

a key element in the process of learning a second language because the students’

awareness encourages and supports language acquisition. Besides, learners can be

encouraged to acquire language by exposure to the authentic spoken or

communicative language. Students who lack some competencies in communication

might have a low level of second language acquisition especially in speaking

English. Thus, to assist students to reach their goals by understanding the process

of second language acquisition, teachers must provide them with an effective

learning approach. The most important thing is to provide them with a natural

environment in order that they may communicate normally and not feel like they

are acting differently. Therefore, the teacher can provide a strategy for learning

activities to students with a lot of speaking practice.

Additionally, in case the students travel to another country if they get lost

during the trip and need to ask for directions from someone. How are they supposed

to ask and give directions? What happen if the dialogue they have already learned

in class does not pan out as expected? Thus, understanding the directions in English

is quite helpful to students thus they can reach their destination. It is also helpful to

be able to give directions to tourists. Despite, students have problems giving and

understanding directions even in their own language. Thus, in order for making the

students able to communicate appropriately and effectively in the communicative

context, teachers can assist students by facilitating the acquisition of the English

language in the classroom. Besides, there is a strategy that can be used for the
implementation of language acquisition in language teaching. The role-play method

can be used as a learning activity for the teaching of a second language. There are

some activities that teachers can implement to enhance students’ communication

by using role play method:

1. The teacher asks the students to work in pairs

2. Each pair is given a topic, for example when the students meet a tourist

who gets lost in a town and then asks them for directions. Thus, one

student gives a direction and the other students ask directions as a

tourist.

3. Then, the students are asked to arrange a plot for their role-play

performance related to the topic.

4. Students are asked to perform the role play based on the topic given in

front of the class and other students pay attention to their friends’

performance.

5. After performing the role play, the teacher evaluates and writes the

expression spoken on the board, then it is analyzed with all of the

students to find out the mistakes.

By conducting the activities above, students will learn situational awareness

by giving and receiving directions, which also helps them develop their second

language and communication skills. Students explore realistic situations by

interacting with other people in a managed way in order to develop experience. On

the other hand, they simulate real-life situations and allow them to act out what they

would do in a real situation. Students will enjoy learning responses to actual English
situations and get more confidence. Hence, role play can be used for increasing their

confidence. It also helps students to have self-motivation since motivation is one of

the factors affecting language acquisition.

 Conclusion

Based on the explanation above, language acquisition is the process of how

people learn to recognize, interpret, and produce words and phrases for

communication. Besides, the different kind of language acquisition after we have

mastered our native tongue is known as second language acquisition. In second

language acquisition, there are five hypotheses proposed by Krashen in 1982, the

acquisition-learning hypothesis, the natural order hypothesis, the monitor

hypothesis, the input hypothesis, and the affective filter hypothesis. All those

hypotheses play a significant role in second language acquisition. Besides, some

factors of second language acquisition are affected by individual learners’ factors

such as age, sex, aptitude, motivation, and anxiety level. Those factors also play a

major role in how successfully someone learns a language. In addition, the process

of acquiring a second language may be effective when both the learner and teacher

are involved in the learning process. Hence, by understanding the hypothesis and

factors in language acquisition, the teacher can provide some methods to implement

the materials in the classroom for the students in acquiring a second language.
 References

Brown, R. (1973). A first language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Brown, H. Douglas. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. New

York: Longman.

Carroll, Vern. (1965). An outline of the structure of the language of Nukuoro.

Wellington: Polynesian Society.

Dornyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Ellis, R. (1986). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford University

Press.

Halpern, D. F. (2000). Sex differences in cognitive abilities. Mahwah, N.J.:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Kimura, M. (1992) Behavioral modulation of sensory responses of primate putamen

neurons. Brain Research, 578, 204-214.

Krashen, S.D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition.

Oxford: Pergamon.

Kunt, N. (1997). Anxiety and beliefs about language learning: A study of Turkish-
speaking university students learning English in North Cyprus. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas, Austin.

Lenneberg, E. H. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley.

Lightbown, Patsy M. and Spada, N. (1998). How languages are learned. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.

Liu, J. (2001). Asian students’ classroom communication patterns in US

Universities: An emic perspective. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Long, M. (1990) Maturational constraints on language development. Studies in

Second Language Acquisition, 12, 251-285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S02722631
00009165

Newport E.L. (1990). Maturational constraints on language learning. Cognitive

Science, 14, 11–28.

Oxford, R. L., and Ehrman, M. (1993). Second language research on individual

differences. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 188-205.
Saville-Troike, M. (2012). Introducing second language acquisition. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Seliger, Herbert W. (1978). Implications of a multiple critical periods hypothesis

for second language learning. In Second Language Acquisition Research: Issues
and Implications, William C. Ritchie (ed.), 11-19. New York: Academic Press.

Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Truitt, S. N. (1995). Anxiety and beliefs about language learning: a study of Korean
university students learning English. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Texas at
Austin.