Theories of second language learning
Download as PPT, PDF52 likes42,113 views
Krashen proposed five hypotheses about second language acquisition: 1) The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis distinguishes between conscious learning and unconscious acquisition of a language. Learning does not necessarily become acquisition. 2) The Monitor Hypothesis states that learned grammar only helps to edit and monitor speech after it is initiated through acquired competence. 3) The Natural Order Hypothesis claims that language rules are acquired in a predictable order, not determined by simplicity or teaching order. 4) The Input Hypothesis argues that language is acquired by understanding messages at levels slightly above one's current competence. 5) The Affective Filter Hypothesis proposes that factors like motivation and self-confidence can lower
Theories of second language learning
- 1. Theories of second-language learning- Krashen’s theories Based on Barry McLaughlin: Thoeries of Second-language Learning (Edward Arnold, 1987) Lightbown and Spada: How Languages are learned (OUP,1993)
- 2. Krashen, five central hypothesis The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis The Monitor Hypothesis The Natural Order Hypothesis The Input Hypothesis The Affective Filter Hypothesis
- 3. The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis Learning- conscious, Acquisition-unconscious “ Learning” does not turn into “acquisition”, says Krashen
- 5. Claims Sometimes there is Acquisition without Learning- people can speak without knowing rules consciously Sometimes learning never becomes acquisition- knows the rule but always breaks it No-one knows anywhere near all the rules
- 6. LAD – Language Acquisition Device Krashen, Chomsky Do adults have it too?
- 7. The Monitor Hypothesis Learning has only one function, that is as a Monitor or editor Acquisition initiates the speaker’s utterances and is responsible for Fluency
- 8. 3 conditions for Monitor use Time Focus on form/ correctness Know the rule All these are problematic, difficult to demonstrate
- 9. Krashen explained the individual differences on the Monitor concept Monitor over-users Monitor under-users Optimal monitor users
- 10. Adults vs. Children Children are better learners because they do not use the Monitor The second explanation is related to the “affective filter”, discussed later
- 11. Problems Acquisition-learning distinction not clearly defined The theory that learning will not become acquisition can’t be tested empirically It is only in the phonological development that children do better! We simply cannot unequivocally identify the source of any utterance!
- 12. The Natural Order Hypothesis We acquire rules in a predictable order, some rules tending to come early and others late. The order of rules is not determined by its simplicity and is independent of the order in which rules are taught
- 13. The Natural Order Hypothesis, problems …is based on the “morpheme studies”, which, by focusing on the final form, tell us little about the acquisition process It can be accepted, but in a weak form: some things are learned before others, but not always
- 14. The Input Hypothesis People learn in only one way, by understanding messages, getting “comprehensible input” Speaking is a result, not a cause. If input is understood and there is enough of it, the necessary grammar is automatically provided.
- 15. Krashen tried to explain his theory by the “Silent period” Problems: No answer to how language is acquired There may be other explanations for the silent period (anxiety, personality, etc.) How do we learn, if in the beginning we know nothing?
- 16. The Input Hypothesis doesn’t explain How learners progress form understanding to acquisition What is “comprehensible input”, not clear … just beyond the syntactic complexity of what he knows at present… - impossible to define clearly
- 17. Conclusion Acquisition is caused by understanding the input but internal factors are given little emphasis The importance of output is de-emphasized A more balanced view is required
- 18. The Affective Filter Hypothesis There might be a mental block that prevents learners form fully profiting form “comprehensible input” If the filter is UP, the input is blocked
- 19. filter up down INPUT LAD Language acquisition device Acquired competence The operation of the “affective filter”, Krashen, 1982
- 20. The Affective Filter theory was used To account for he individual differences in language learning Def.: “ The filter is that part of the processing system that subconsciously screens incoming language based on… “motives, needs, attitudes, emotional states.”
- 21. The filter is described as having 4 functions, determining Which language model will we select Which part of the language will be attended first When the language acquisition effort should cease How fast we can acquire the language
- 22. Though most of the researchers agree that affective variables play a critical role, there role and existence of the “affective filter” is not clear
- 23. Problems with the theory No coherent explanation for the filter’s development Can’t be studied Vague in its origin and its function No connection wit first language acquisition, why? What about the children? … it can’t explain the individual differences completely!