Language Acquisition Theories

This mimicry

elicits 'positive reinforcements' which could take the form of praise, or simply successful

communication

(being

understood)!

What we choose to imitate may be determined by something within the child rather than

within the environment

Not all children

imitate, additionally

many of the things that children say reflect that they are using language creatively rather than simply imitating

The relationship with second language

acquisition

theory

Behviourism was linked

with a belief in the

audiolingual approach; as

with primary language learners, behaviourism for second language acquisition focuses on forming habits of language through repeating, practicing and phrases they hear, as well as the memorization of

sentence patterns

The form focused formation

of language habits and memorization may provide second language learners with a basic knowledge, however, teaching language in isolation, without real context or meaning leaves the learning forming child-like sentences and limits their learning

Principles of

the theory

Therefore, children are born

with innate knowledge of language principals - universal grammar - all they need to do is learn how to apply these principles

Problems and

deficiencies

associated with

the theory

There is controversy about innatist theory and second language learners who have passed the critical period; what is the explanation that allows these individuals to learn past their critical period?

The relationship with second language

acquisition

theory

One theory is that UG

(universal grammar) is

available to individuals for both their primary language, as well as second language learners-- Some believe the UG is exactly the same as with the first language, whereas others believe it exists for second language learners, but

has been altered

Secondary language

development depends on the availability of the language in the learner's natural environment, however at times, may need explicit information

Implications for language teaching (form focused vs. content based)

Piaget believed that language is used to represent the knowledge that children have gained through interacting with their environment

Restructuring is a term interactionists use when no

new learning occurs, but suddenly everything seems to come together and make sense – it also accounts for some backslides if a learner generalizes a rule they have learned to certain words

which are 'exceptions'

Language Acquisition

Imitation and practice alone cannot explain children's language development

Children continue to repeat and practice these sounds and patterns in order to form 'habits' of language

Children pick out patterns and generalize ideas and structures

Problems and

deficiencies

associated with

the theory

Young children imitate

or mimic the sounds and language patterns heard around them

Principles of

the theory

The environment a child lives in is very important for this theory

Language acquisition

is thought of as

similar to and affected

by the acquisition of other cognitive skills, rather than language being separate from other cognitive

functions

Behaviourism is not a sufficient explanation of children's more complex language acquisition, such as

complex grammar

Main:

Jean Piaget, focused on primary language

learners

Vygotsky believed that language and knowledge were interchangeable - thoughts or knowledge is internal language, and language is expressed in social situations, such as conversation - conversations are the origin of thought

and language

Language acquisition is developed through the interaction of an individual and their environment/the people within it

Principles of

the theory

The quality and

quantity of exposure

to language and

consistency of reinforcement shape

the child's language development and

behaviour

Main:

Lev Vygotsky, focused on primary language

learners

Both believed that interactions with the environment, objects, and people were important to development

Behaviourism was linked with the contrastive analysis hypothesis (CAH); the idea that second language learners will more easily pick up language patterns similar to those they have experienced in their own language

Behaviourist

√Proponents of

the

interactionst

perspective

Perspective

Interpersonal sources of language such as TV and radio are not sufficient

Main:

B.F. Skinner, focused on primary language

learners

Well-known, with respect to second language learning and interactionism:

Norman Segalowitz

J.R Anderson

Robert DeKeyser

Proponents of

the

behaviourist

perspective

The theory was believed to create a solid foundation

for second language learners and their acquisition of English as a second language

Behaviourism suggests that second language learners, if appropriately exposed to the language and allowed opportunity for practice, will acquire the second language the same way they acquired their first

Interactionists believe

that you need to hear, and practice language through interaction rather than tests, in fact, if an individual in a test situation is focusing so hard on reading and understanding the words, they may forget the proper grammar or word order when attempting to

respond

Overall, the interactionist perspective seems very well thought out an logical - there is not a lot of criticism directed toward the perspective

Interactionist

Well-known, with respect to second language learning and behaviourism:

Nelson Brooks and Robert Lado

Perspective

Second language learners should be immersed in the language – interact with their peers, group work is great, perform skits or oral presentations of knowledge rather than pieces of writing right away

Not all cultures

have the same parent-child relationships and interactions as we do in North America, where interactionism was initially studied – while all environments allow children to hear language that is meaningful to them, they may be lacking interaction with people

Powerful relationship between second language acquisition and the behaviourist approach

Like innatists, interactionist beliefs thrive through content-based teaching

After the 1970s, researchers began to believe the behaviourist approach was not adequate;

learners needed more than just isolated memorization and mimicking.

While second language learners draw on what they know, there is no real formula to predict behaviour and success

It was believed that forms similar to those of their first or primary language would be easier to connect; however, we have learned that this is something we cannot always predict accuraltely based on first language patterns

Problems and

deficiencies

associated with

the theory

Implications for language teaching (form focused vs. content based)

Second language learners

go through skill learning, first understanding and being able to engage in lower order thinking (declarative knowledge), and through practice and interaction, slowing building their way to be able to understand and engage in higher order thinking (procedural knowledge)

This may be seen in a second language learner as a gradual build up of fluency, for example, moving from being able to only read the words of a sentence, to being able to understand and analyze the meaning

Implications for language teaching (form focused vs. content based)

Behaviourism is very form focused; it focuses on the development of form and language patterns found in the English language

Second language

learning is described in this theory as the build up of knowledge, through practice, exposure, and interaction, which can eventually be relied on for speaking and understanding – first this development takes time and cognitive focus until development of the language allows recall to become automatic

The relationship with second language

acquisition

theory

The rejection of this

theory, or the search for a

more adequate explanation, leaves us with the thought that form-focused teaching may not be enough for second language learners - they need content based instruction with context and meaning rather than rote memorization and form

Theories

Chomsky claims children

could not develop such

complex knowledge of a language, such as being able to distinguish between sentences that are grammatically correct and those that are not, simply by the examples of those around us; especially with the slang

that people use with

improper or unfinished sentences

Like Skinner, Chomsky still attributes values to the environment, however basic, in the form of availability of people who speak to the child

Main:

Noam Chomsky, focused on primary language

learners

Well-known, with respect to second language learning and innatism:

Lydia White

Chomsky believes that language is innate; children are biologically programmed for language and it develops the same as any other biological function

√Proponents of

the

innatist

perspective

The innatist perspective is paired with the critical period hypothesis, in which there is a specific time frame allotted to the genetic acquisition or development of certain skills, such as language; therefore, Chomsky believes that after a specific age, while individuals may develop socially or develop cognitive functions (language is separate from other forms of cognitive development), it is not possible to develop language

Innatist

Perspective

There are limited examples to contrast the critical period hypothesis. Of the two examples readily available, there is no way to determine if there are other underlying factors that may have affected these individuals, such as brain damage before their isolation from language

They focus on immersion rather than direct instruction in order to allow learners to develop complex abilities and develop an understanding of complex facets of the language, such as grammar rules

Chomsky, as well as those who followed him in developing ideas based on his innatist theory, such as Stephen Krashen are content-based

It is important to note that while these theories primarily focus on content-based learning rather than form learning, for second language acquisition it may be important at times to explicitly teach second language learners certain skills or rules

Innatist perspective is criticized for putting too much emphasis on the product at the end of the acquisition process rather than paying attention to the process itself

Innatism has no concrete

answer to its connection with second language acquisition, but there is a lot of speculation and there are a lot theories

Researchers are very

interested in the developed learners, and their ability to determine complex grammar

and other complex language syntax to further develop a connection