Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Psycholinguistic theories images - Coggle Diagram
Psycholinguistic theories
Palmer (2000), Innatism /Nativist
Factors involved bilingual brain
Universal grammar
Cognitive flexibility
Meta linguistic awareness
Innate mechanisms
Modularity
Newborn brain preorganized
Palmer (2000) critically examines the foundations of nativism by questioning the empirical evidence supporting
Chomsky’s claims about the innate nature of grammar and the universality of grammatical structures.
Main features and impact on EFL students
Ability to extract grammatical rules
David C. Palmer offers a rigorous examination of Chomsky’s theory, analyzing both the strengths and weaknesses of the concept of universal grammar.
His work provides a balanced perspective by questioning how innate mechanisms interact with actual language input from the environment
Grammatical intuitions
Individual differences in exposure
Grammatical sensitivity
Individual variability
natural acquisition (L1)
Nuclear grammar
Zone of proximal development and scaffolding
Factors involves bilingual brain
Executive function enhancement
task - switching
inhibitory control
Metalinguistic awareness
facilitate learning of additional languages
Cross-language activation
Main fratures and impact on Efl students
Scaffolding
Social context and interaction
The ZPD refers to the gap between what a learner can do independently and what they can achieve with guidance.
Constructivist
Collaborative learning
Tailored instruction
Impact on teaching and learning in CLIL
Language processing and production
Interlanguage development
Enhanced metacognition
Incorporating psycholinguistic principles into CLIL instruction can lead to effective teaching strategies, such as scaffolding, integrated skill development, and formative assessment.
Cognitive load management
Social interactionist / Interactionism
Factors involved in bilingual brain Vygotskian theory
Social interaction
According to Vygotsky, cognitive and linguistic growth is deeply rooted in social interaction, with language emerging first on a social level before being internalized individually (Alharbi, 2023).
Zone of proximal development
Scaffolding
Private speech
Main features and impact on EFL students
Increased linguistic competence
Role of context
Enhanced cognitive flexibility
Critical role of collaboration
Integrated scaffolding
Impact on Teaching and learning CLIL clasroom (Alharbi,2023)
Focus on interaction
Utilization of private speech
Dynamic grouping
Alharbi’s
analysis incorporates diverse contexts, including L1 and L2 acquisition, children from different socio-economic backgrounds, and learners with disabilities.
role of caregivers/ environmental input
Behaviourist and behaviourism Skinner
Main features and impact on EFL students
Reinforcement sensitivity
Memory and learning variability
Behavioral repertoires
Structured reinforcement
Stimulus control/ response
Stimulus-response matching
Repertoire expansion
Variation and adaptation
Gamification and motivation
Impact in CLIL classroom
Behavioral theories suggest that EFL students require frequent, immediate, and meaningful reinforcement to encourage the use of English and minimize fallback to L1.
Stimulus - response
repetition, pronunciation and fixed expressions
Factors involved in bilingual brain
Interaction of
behavioral elements
neurological
cognitive
According to Skinner's operant conditioning, learning—including language acquisition—is a product of reinforcement and stimulus-response associations (Efgivia et al., 2021; Staddon, 2017).
Krashen's monitor model
Main features and impact on EFL students
FIVE HYPOTHESES
Natural order
Grammar acquired in sequence
Input
comprehensible input
language input (i+1) is essential
Monitor
Concious correction mechanism
Affective filter
Motivation
anxiety
Influence learning
Acquisition - learning Hypothesis
Subsconcious
conscious processes
Impact FL learning
natural communication
Comprehensible input
Low-stress, motivational enviroment
Natural approach
Natural order and acquisition focus
Factors involved in bilingual brain
Innateness
multiple languges similarity (Hassan,2022)
Affective factors
Motivation
Self-confidence
anxiety levels
Implicit vs. Explicit systems
subconscious ''acquired'' competence (Hassan2022)
Cognitivism
Main fratures and impact on Efl students
Recognizing cognitive stages
helps tailor EFL teaching methods
EFL students
Readiness for language
tied to cognitive develeopment
Stages of cognitive development Piaget
Preoperational (2-7 years)
Symbolic thinking
Concrete operational (7-11 years)
Logical thinking
Sensorimotor (0-2 years)
Experiencing world through senses
Formal operational (11+years)
Abstract and hypothethical thinking
Language learned through
memory
perception
problem solving
("Theory of Cognitive Development by Jean Piaget" by Pakpahan and Saragih, 2022)
Promotes active engagement
Enhances language learning
Teaching impact and learning CLIL classroom
Transfer skills
transfer of cognitive and metalinguistic skills
across languages benefit CLIL learning
Code-switching strategy
using L1 can support comprehension
in complex content task
Language processing and cognitive load
Students process content and L2 sumultaneously
Working memory and attention
working memory help students
subject content and language
Individual differences
flexibility in tasks and assessments is crucial
task - based learning
restructuring - mental models
Factors involves bilingual brain
Cross-linguistic influence
language can affect the process of the other
Cognitive flexibility
manage 2 linguistic systems
Code switching
switch languages depending on context
Working memory
Two languages enhance working memory
Language store and access
stored in brain depending on age of acquisition and proficiency
Environmentalism
Factors involved in bilingual brain
Social and psychological proximity
Contextual and affective factors
Main features and impact on EFL students
Negative affective/social distance
Learners more motivated
natural input and real-life exposure
Pidgin language
Languages
Creole languages
L2/FL vs natural L1 contexts
