Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

2 - General theories of the learning & acquisition of a foreign…

- - - - BUT 2 problems: 1) when children regularize verbs (meeted) they never heard that, 2) Lack of ability to imitate grammar structures when asked to do so
  - - - Halliday: HOME = interpersonal function - lang for social interaction. School= expression of ideas, also lang to talk about lang (metalanguage)
- - - - Assimilation of cultural traits of other groups. The degree to which the learner acculturates to target lang. group determines the degree of acq. of lang
      - 1) lang groups view each other as socially equal, 2) Everyone WANTS 2nd lang. group to assimilate, 3) Cultures are congruent, 4) Ppl have +tive attitudes, 5) 2nd lang group stays in target lang group for an extended period
        
        Affective factors:
        
        1) Lang shock (doubt, confusion), 2) Culture shock (disorientation, shock, fear), 3) MOTIVATION
        
        Level of functions the learner can perform: 1) Communicative (referential info), 2) Integrative (use of Eng to mark speaker as a member of a certain group) 3) Expressive (linguistic virtuosity).
        
        If level of acculturation is LOW = only 1st function reached. Explains why acq. almost never reachers native like competence BUT doesn't fully explain HOW 2nd lang learnt & used. Doubts over how to apply this theory to the classroom.
    - - Socio-linguist Howard Giles. Like the Acc. Model, it also focuses on the relationships between learners' social group & the target lang community BUT is explains them in terms of perceived social distance
        
        Suggests we change our language to 'accommodate' the person we are speaking to
        
        CONvergence=moving our lang closer to the other persons' (Mutual Convergence if both move towards each other) DIvergence = when people's speech styles move further apart.
        
        Divergence can be UPWARD or DOWNWARD. UC: Accentuation of ingroup speech markers- when learner is *+ively motivated towards group. DC: Accentuation of ethnic speech markers - when learner is not motivated
    - - Derives from a theory of lang use in which communication is most imp
        
        1) 2nd lang learning follows a natural route in syntactical dev. 2) Native speakers adjust speech to negotiate meaning with non-natives. 3) This influences 2nd lang acq - learners acquire commonly occurring formulas & learns grammar in same order as input. 4) thf all this is the natural route of learning how to hold conversation.
    - - Most imp. nowadays. Evolved late 1970s.
        
        5 basic hypothesis:
        
        A) Acquisition Learning Hypothesis (most imp)
        
        ACQ = subconscious. Result of meaningdul interaction in natural communication setting (eg task based). LEARNING = conscious process, results in knowing about lang. Doesn't turn into acq! Eg can know many grammar rules but can't speech
        
        B) The Monitor Hypothesis
        
        Learner's capacity to edit lang performance, control output & self correct (bit like a spellcheck!). For this, learners need:
        
        1) TIME, 2) to be CONCERNED with correct & form, 3) to KNOW the rules.
        
        Can be monitor over-users (perfectionist, scared of making errors, little fluency) under-users (fluent but lots of mistakes, maybe acquired not learnt) or optimal monitor users
        
        C) The Natural Order Hypothesis
        
        We acquire rules of lang in a predictable order. 4 progressive stages: 1) single words, 2) string words together based on meaning (not syntax) 3) sentences 4) identify elements within sentences, can rearrange etc
        
        D) The Input Hypothesis
        
        Argues humans only acquire lang by understanding messages or receiving comprehensible input. 1) Speaking is the result of acquisition 2) If input if understood & there is enough, the necessary grammar is automictically provided. Thf, comprehensive input is the route to acq.
        
        E) The affective filter hypothesis
        
        Imp role. Can be an affective filter (lack of confidence/motivation, anxiety about failure etc) that acts as a barrier to acq. (Link to Suggestopedia?)
      - SUMMARY KRASHEN
        
        ALL K's hypotheses can be regarded as questionable BUT still considered most imp contribution to lang learning studies.
        
        Children=superior lang learners as fewer filters & they do not use the monitor. Older learners are faster at early stages BUT YLs reach higher levels of proficiency in the long run.
        
        IMPLICATIONS for 2nd lang teaching
        
        1) Input should be comprehensible & motivating & at a slightly higher level then theirs (but understood) 2) Don't force students to speak before ready. Be tolerant with mistakes 3) Put grammar in proper place = not assigned too much importance.
  - - - Behaviourists describe the human mind in purely physiological terms. Result of HABITS deriving from the sequence-stimulus-response
        
        SKINNER 1957 'Verbal Behaviour' = lang & lang acq are the result of verbal habits.
        
        Imp. elements: 1) FREQUENCY with which an utterance is used 2) IMITATION, 3( REINFORCEMENT needed to reach higher levels. +tive vs -tive reinforcement.
        
        Theories gave rise to ALM in 1960s. Structural patterns in dialgogues are imitated until drilled until responses become automatic
      - Strongly influenced by Noam Chomsky - published critique of Skinner in 1959.
        
        Thought ppl made a creative use of the lang & that a speaker has a set of internal grammar rules that can be used to create infinite sentences
        
        Lang acq thf a procedure by which ppl use their own thinking process (cognition) to discover the rules.
        
        Didn't lead to a particular method but greatly influenced those which arose in 1970s-present
  - - - Many differences between the PLANNED condition of the classroom vs the natural setting: 1) Psychological demands - discipline, group dynamics etc, 2) preselected lang - planned curriculum, limited spontaneity, 3) grammar rules (can be inductive/deductive) 4) unreal, limited situations, 5) educational aids/assignments (books, tasks etc)
        
        Thf the acq of a foreign lang is V DIFFERENT from that of L1
- - - - Stages of interlanguage
        
        1) Random errors
        
        2) Emergent stage - learner begins to discern a system
        
        3) Truly systematic stage - ↑ in consistency
        
        4) Stabilisation - fluency & intended meaning are no longer a problem
        
        Interlanguage dev reflects cognitive learning strategies like: L1 transfer 'I have 10 years', Simplification: 'I wait the bus' Adding elements 'both the boys & the girls they study together' Overgeneralization (making irregular verbs regular)
        
        Application to teaching
        
        Teacher & materials must adapt to the students. Targeted support with reflects the stage of interlang they are at.
- - - - Common errors: omitting grammatical morphemes 'he hit the car' regularising rules 'womans for women', archiforms - her instead of she, mis ordering - what you are doing? Misplacing - they are all the time late
        
        Teaching implications
        
        Imp to know origin f error. Establish priorities when correcting. Need to get the right balance, which will depend on obj of activity & individual learner's preferences
        
        Correction techniques:
        
        1) Indicate the presence of an error but get the learner to reflect & self identify, 2) Description of the erros, 3) correct the error
- - - - Treatment of error needs to be carefully considered - can be dealt with by: teacher centred/ student centred / self evaluation etc