Thus, the internal organizer is responsible for the transitional stages through which the learner passes. The cognitive organizer operates subconsciously.
Dulay and Burt 1977; Ellis 1986 cognitive pruning
see SUBSUMPTION
cognitive psychology
the study of human behavior and processes which includes investigating how people perceive, learn, remember and think, as opposed to BEHAVIORAL PSY-CHOLOGY, which focuses on overt, observable, empirically measurable be-havior. Issues of attention and consciousness, how knowledge is represented in the human mind, how humans process information, how MEMORY is orga-nized, how people reason and make decisions and solve problems are all are-as that fall within the broader discipline of cognitive psychology. It is there-fore a highly interdisciplinary domain which draws from research and litera-ture in psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, computer science and biology (among others). An important sub-domain within cognitive psychology is language, and questions on how language is learned, how knowledge of lan-guage is represented and retrieved from memory, how lanlan-guage is produced and understood are prominent issues in cognitive psychology. Therefore, theories within the study of both first and second language learning and pro-cessing draw heavily from key issues within cognitive psychology.
In the context of SLA, two somewhat different cognitive paradigms can be identified. One of these draws on a COMPUTATIONAL MODEL of L2 acquisi-tion, which characterizes acquisition in terms of INPUT, the internal computa-tion of data from the input, and output. This is the mainstream model inform-ing SLA. The second account is perhaps better characterized as sociocogni-tive (see SOCIOCULTURAL THEORY) rather than cognitive. It affords a soci-ocultural explanation of L2 use and acquisition by viewing acquisition as originating in use and involving subsequent processes of internalization.
Both the computational and the sociocultural paradigms share a point in common: they treat L2 acquisition as essentially similar in nature to other kinds of learning in drawing on a common set of processes. In this respect, both paradigms contrast with the linguistic paradigm, which treats linguistic knowledge as unique and separate from other knowledge systems, and sees acquisition as guided by mechanisms that are (in part at last) specifically linguistic in nature.
see also INFORMATION PROCESSING THEORY, ADAPTIVE CONTROL OF THOUGHT MODEL, ATTENTION, AWARENESS, INDIVIDUAL LEARNER DI ERENCES, MULTI-DIMENSIONAL MODEL, NATIVIZATION MODEL, PARALLEL DISTRIBUTED PRO-CESSING MODEL, COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT
Ellis 2008; Lantolf & Tarone 1996, 2006; Macaro et al. 2010; VanPatten & Benati 2010
cognitivism 65 cognitive strategies
see LEARNING STRATEGIES
cognitive style see LEARNING STYLES
cognitive theory
a theory that describes phenomena in terms of mental constructs in the mind of individuals. Cognitive theory attempts to understand how humans create and use knowledge. As such, it is not domain specific. That is, for cognitiv-ists, there are no special places in the mind for language, math, or any other knowledge system (which stands in stark contrast to those who work in con-temporary linguistic theory (e.g., UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR). Cognitive research-ers are thus interested in learning processes, and a good deal of cognitive research centers on LEARNING STYLES, understanding (i.e., how people make sense of something), APTITUDE, INFORMATION PROCESSING, and other areas.
Within cognitive theory, all learning (no matter the object of that learning) utilizes the same general principles for human understanding and learning.
Thus, language learning would utilize the same mechanisms for learning as would, say, history learning and chess learning.
Applied to SLA, cognitive theory views language acquisition as the for-mation of a knowledge system that L2 learners must eventually tap for speaking and understanding. However, unlike linguists and psycholinguists, scholars within a cognitive psychology approach would be more interested in the learning factors that affect acquisition such as how learners come to understand the nature of a particular feature and what strategies (see LEARN-ING STRATEGIES) learners go about to master a concept. Under the umbrella of cognitive theory, then, would fall INDIVIDUAL LEARNER DIFFERENCES such as language aptitude, MOTIVATION, MEMORY, and others. A related area of interest would be RESTRUCTURING, that is, how the learning of new infor-mation causes changes in already existing knowledge. SKILL THEORY is a par-ticular branch within cognitive theory. In fact, some psychologists would prefer to speak of cognitive theories or even cognitive approaches.
VanPatten & Benati 2010 cognitivism
approaches to language acquisition which view the process as closely linked to general cognition and to COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT. Some accounts leave open the extent to which certain aspects of language are innate; but all take the view that acquisition is primarily driven by the way in which the infant’s cognitive abilities are brought to bear upon the INPUT to which it is exposed.
These cognitive abilities may reflect developing awareness of objects, spatial relations, defining characteristics, etc., or they may take the form of
percep-66 cognitivism
tual biases which incline the child to recognize patterns in linguistic materi-al. Among views on acquisition which can be characterized as cognitive are:
• An infant cannot express concepts in language unless it has previously developed them. Example: A child cannot use language to refer to objects that are not visible unless it has grasped the idea of object permanence.
For Piaget, language was the product of cognitive and perceptual pro-cesses. His research with children led him to conclude that there were four stages of COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT. They represent a gradual pro-gression and not a sudden shift in behavior; and the age at which a partic-ular child goes through each varies considerably. However, they are closely linked to linguistic development.
• Both language and cognition are part of a staged maturation program, in which they operate in parallel, supporting each other. For Vygotsky, thought exists pre-verbally. There is initially a separation between thought and language: the infant’s first words are devoid of thought. Dur-ing three phases, the separate roles of thought and language become es-tablished (see VYGOTSKYAN).
• Innate cognitive tendencies may predispose us:
a) To find patterns in language data (as in data in general). A theory of syntactic BOOTSTRAPPING postulates that infants reach conclusions about words on the basis of their inflections and other grammatical properties: thus the child learns that the difference between It’s sib and It’s a sib serves to distinguish real-world entities that are mass from those that are count.
b) To adopt certain strategies in response to language data. Slobin con-cludes that infants apply a set of universal strategies or OPERATING PRINCIPLES in order to deconstruct the input to which they are ex-posed. (Pay attention to the ends of words. Pay attention to the order of words and morphemes.) More cognitively complex features are acquired later.
c) To apply individual learning styles to language data. Some infants appear to break the input into words, while others acquire chunks of language in a holistic manner
• The infant’s limited cognitive capacity renders it more sensitive to the features of language than it might be before or later. The ‘less is more’
argument holds that it may be the very limitations of the infant’s early cognitive state which enable it to identify structure in language and to recognize that language constitutes a set of inter-related symbols.
Bates et al. 1995; Deacon 1997; Field 2004; Piattelli-Palmarini 1980; Slobin 1973
communication strategies 67 communication strategies
strategic options which relate to output, how one productively expresses meaning, and how one effectively delivers messages to others. While LEARN-ING STRATEGIES deal with the receptive domain of intake, memory, storage, and recall, communication strategies pertain to the employment of verbal or nonverbal mechanisms for the productive communication of information.
While the research of the last decade does indeed focus largely on the com-pensatory nature of communication strategies, more recent approaches seem to take a more positive view of communication strategies as elements of an overall STRATEGIC COMPETENCE in which learners bring to bear all the possi-ble facets of their growing competence in order to send clear messages in the second language. Moreover, such strategies may or may not be ‘potentially conscious’; support for such a conclusion comes from observations of first language acquisition strategies that are similar to those used by adults in second language learning contexts.
Perhaps the best way to understand what is meant by communication strate-gy is to look at a typical list of such strategies. Table C.1 offers a taxonomy that reflects accepted categories over several decades of research.
Table C.1. Communication strategies
Avoidance Strategies
1. Message abandonment: Leaving a message unfinished because of language difficulties
2. Topic avoidance: Avoiding topic areas or concepts that pose language diffi-culties
Compensatory Strategies
3. Circumlocution: Describing or exemplifying the target object of action (e.g., the thing you open bottles with for corkscrew)
4. Approximation: Using an alternative term which expresses the meaning of the target lexical item as closely as possible (e.g., ship for sailboat)
5. Use of all-purpose words: Extending a general, empty lexical item to contexts where specific words are lacking (e.g., the overuse of thing, stuff, what-do-you-call-it, thingie)
6. Word coinage: Creating a nonexisting L2 word based on a supposed rule (e.g., vegetarianist for vegetarian)
7. Prefabricated patterns: Using memorized stock phrases, usually for ‘survival’
purposes (e.g., Where is the________or Comment allez-vous? where the morphological components are not known to the learner)
8. Nonlinguistic signals: Mime, gesture, facial expression, or sound imitation 9. Literal translation: Translating literally a lexical item, idiom, compound
word, or structure from LI to L2
10. Foreignizing: Using a LI word by adjusting it to L2 phonology (i.e., with a L2 pronunciation) and/or morphology (e.g., adding to it a L2 suffix) 11. Code-switching: Using a LI word with LI pronunciation or a L3 word with
L3 pronunciation while speaking in L2