TOPIC 2:
GENERAL THEORIES ABOUT FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING AND
ACQUISITION. THE CONCEPT OF INTERLANGUAGE. ERROR
ANALYSIS.
Introduction
The need to communicate is present from our birth. We progress from crying to
uttering consonantal and vowel sounds. We then form words and utterances to express
basic needs, then more syntactically complete utterances to express more complex needs
and we learn to interact with others in what is a complex system of turn-taking and
strategies to seize the floor and hold it. What we are concerned with in this topic is how
we learn language and how we acquire it.
We acquire our first language as we are acquiring schematic knowledge simultaneously
and working out the rules of human communication. Acquisition of a language takes
place in its natural setting, often unconsciously without effort. On the other hand, we
learn a second language by studying. It is a more formal process involving effort.
However, when we consolidate the second language, acquisition takes place. Linguists
have tried to simulate acquisition in classroom situations, but the student thinks in a first
language and so there is language interference that prevents acquisition from taking
place. This can lead to problems of interlanguage which will be discussed later in this
topic.
A. First Language Acquisition
To understand how we learn and can acquire a second language, it is important to
consider first language acquisition. We acquire our first language by:
- imitation
- positive reinforcement
- parental input (motherese) i.e. simplified sentences and words
- innateness – Chomsky refers to our LAD (Language Acquisition Device) which
provides information about linguistic universals (our competence).
- Cognition – Piaget pointed out that babies can only name concrete and not
abstract words as they have not reached the stage of abstraction.
B. Second Language Acquisition: Theories
i) Behaviourism (Skinner)
In his book Verbal Conditioning Skinner applied to language the same
theory of stimuli as Pavlov’s dogs. The stimulus of hunger leads to the vocal
response, ‘I’m hungry’ and is reinforced by being given food.
ii) Mentalism (Chomsky)
Chomsky proposed that we have an LAD (Language Acquisition Device)
that enables us to learn rules by hypothesis testing. With our innate
universal grammar, we test structures until they are accepted and therefore
acquired. We consciously apply rules. Creation is the key to success.
iii) Krashen’s Monitor Model (Constructivism)
- Acquisition Learning Hypothesis – Acquired knowledge is stored in the left
hemisphere of the brain. Learnt knowledge is also stored there but not
necessarily in the language areas. In performance, acquired knowledge is more
readily available – it is automatic. Learning can take place, but is not
necessarily acquired.
- The natural order hypothesis – The learner acquires grammatical structures in a
predictable order (simple to complicated). In natural conversation we show this
natural order.
- The monitor hypothesis – The learner edits his/her language output before
speaking/ writing. To do this s/he must i) have time; ii) focus on the form and
not the meaning; iii) know the rule.
- The input hypothesis – Students should be exposed to ‘roughly-tuned’ and
‘comprehensible input’ for acquisition to take place, that is the input should be a
bit beyond the learner’s current level (i+1).
- The affective filter hypothesis – This is linked to the acculturation theory. We
have to do away with affective factors (anxiety, fear, nerves etc) if we want to
learn. The affective factors can block the LAD from receiving language input.
iv) The acculturation model (Schumann’s model)
This deals with how the learner’s community and the target language community
view each other.
Social distance = factors affecting learners as a member of a social group.
Psychological distance = affective factors concerning the learner as an individual
(stress, fear, motivation).
The more the students know about the culture of the target language, the more
positive and successful they will be in learning. Schumann suggests that when
social and psychological distances are great, the learner fails to progress and
language is pidginised (e.g. Spanish = no + verb)
The acculturation model (Anderson’s Nativisation Model)
Nativisation = assimilation – the learner makes the input conform to his/her
internalised view of the L2 system (indigenisation of language).
Denativisation = accommodation – the learner adjusts his internalised system to
make it fit the input.
v) Neurofunctional theory
The left hemisphere is responsible for language but the right hemisphere may handle
patterns (pattern practice, minimal pairs etc). If the left hemisphere is not used to
process this information, then it cannot be used in spontaneous speech. In addition,
both hemispheres are devoted to acquisition of linguistic patterns up to one year old.
As we get older we are better at understanding structures and vocabulary but not as
good orally.
vi) Additional elements
We must take into consideration the pupil’s profile (affective factors):
- motivation/ ambition to communicate
- motivation to pass exam
- social background
- geographical background
C. Interlanguage
The term interlanguage was coined by Larry Selinker in 1972 to describe the interaction
between the mother tongue and the second language. As we learn, we formulate our
own system (cf. nativisation). Language is pidginised as a result of interlanguage. This
is part of the learner’s development. Acquisition occurs when the learner has succeeded
in creating the correct form (cf. Chomsky) but fossilisation of non-standard forms may
arise when the learner has succeeded in communication (before developing an accurate
form) when s/he has focused on meaning rather than form.
Errors of interlanguage can be caused by:
- language transfer (e.g. false friends)
- over-generalisation of target language rules (e.g. –ed for al the past tense)
D. Error Analysis
Pit Corder (1967) distinguished between an error and a mistake. An error is a failure in
competence whereas a mistake is a flaw in performance. Therefore errors are part of the
learner’s transitional competence. The dilemma arises over whether we should penalise
errors (behaviourist attitude) or be lenient (mentalist attitude). Behaviourists think that
penalising prevents future errors whereas mentalists believe that errors are part of the
learning process as we develop our language system (LOE attitude). He swimmed, after
all, is activating a past tense rule, so the error is not so terrible. The learner is testing
hypotheses.
The teacher has to distinguish between developmental errors and interference errors.
Errors can be caused by:
- over-generalisation (e.g. –ed)
- first language interference (e.g. false friends)
- evolutional errors – we are developing our internalised language framework
which is constantly being revised. If communication is achieved with an
inaccurate structure, acquisition will not take place.
- Extra-linguistic errors – faulty material or understanding.
Conclusion
It is the teacher’s job to decide when to intervene and correct the student’s errors. If the
language has been covered and mistakes are still being made, then the teacher must step
in to ensure that this is not fossilised. However, a certain amount of freedom must be
given to the student if s/he is to be creative and experiment with the language to
communicate. We must not intimidate our students and any attempt to communicate
effectively must be rewarded. Certain strategies are available to the teacher to correct
students. Although they should never be interrupted when involved in an oral activity,
the teacher can observe and make notes of errors committed and present to the class
afterwards for them to be corrected. Similarly, games can be devised to promote
accuracy involving a certain amount of competition for motivation.
Bibliography
Ellis, R. – Understanding Second Language Acquisition
Corder, Pit – Error Analysis and Interlanguage
Noam Chomsky – Aspects of the Theory of Syntax (1965)
Skinner - Verbal Conditioning
Krashen, S.J. – Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning (1988)
