Subject
SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
Author/s:
Dr. Jesu s Arzamendi
Dr. Ignacio Palacios
Mr. Philip Ball
Aim of the subject
CHAPTER 1. Applied linguistics 1.1. The development of linguistics
1.2. Main features of the pragmatic paradigm 1.3. The field of applied linguistics
1.4. Fields of study in applied linguistics: introduction 1.5. Suggestions for further reading
1.6. Web reading
CHAPTER 2. The acquisition and role of the first language 2.1. Introduction
2.2. Rules versus habits: behaviourism versus mentalism or cognitivism
2.2.1. Behaviourist theory
2.2.2. Nativist/Mentalist/Cognitive theories
2.2.3. Functional approaches, developmental or interactionist theory 2.3. Contrastive and error analysis
2.4. Interlanguage
2.5. L1 acquisition and L2 learning compared 2.6. Readings
2.7. Suggestions for further reading 2.8. Web reading
CHAPTER 3. The learning of a second language 3.1. Introduction
3.2. Individual learning factors: an overview 3.3. Input and interaction
3.5. Bilingualism and multilingualism 3.6. Suggestions for further reading
3.7. Web reading
CHAPTER 4. Second Language Acquisition models: critical review 4.1. Introduction
4.2. Main models or theories of SLA
4.2.1. Sociolinguistic models
4.2.1.1. The acculturation model (Schumann 1978)
4.2.1.2. The nativisation model (Andersen 1979)
4.2.1.3. Accommodation theory (Giles and Byrne 1982)
4.2.2. Linguistic models
4.2.2.1. Discourse theory (Hatch 1978)
4.2.2.2. The variable competence model (Ellis 1984; Tarone 1983; Widdowson 1979; Bialystok 1978)
4.2.2.3. The universal hypothesis (Chomsky 1976, 1986)
4.2.2.4. Swain's Output thesis
4.2.3. Cognitive models
4.2.3.1. The monitor model (Krashen 1981, 1982, 1985)
4.2.3.2. Mc Laughlin's Information Processing Model (Mclaughlin 1978, 1990)
4.2.3.3. The multidimensional model and processing operations (Clahsen, Meisel, and Pienenmann, 1983)
4.2.3.4. A neurofunctional theory (Lamendella, 1979)
4.2.3.5. Parallel Distributed Processing (PDP) (Rumelhart, McClelland and the PDP Research Group 1986)
4.3. Readings
4.5. Web reading Glossary
Aim of the subject
Although languages have been learned since time immemorial we still have many unanswered questions about the process of second language learning. It is not completely clear, whether as learners or teachers, how it is that languages are learned. Despite the important developments that have taken place in the field of SLA since the 1970s much remains to be discovered.
It is the purpose of this subject to present and explain in simple terms the basic issues connected with second language acquisition together with the implications that may be derived from them for our own personal teaching situation. We will start by exploring the domain of what is known as Applied Linguistics since language teaching and language learning are at present generally considered within this broad framework. Next, attention will be paid to the acquisition of the first language or L1, and a contrast will be drawn between this process and the learning of the second language or L2. Chapter 3 will mention in passing the factors that condition the learning of the L2, as this will be the main concern of the subject Individual factors in the learner's
development; the concepts of input and interaction will also be examined here, together
with the role of formal instruction. Finally, in Chapter 4 the most important theories which attempt to explain the second language acquisition process will be briefly explained. A series of tasks will alternate with the theoretical explanations to check your understanding of the main points. A list of readings will be found at the end of each chapter for further information. A glossary is also included in the final section to provide a quick reference for a series of concepts that may be new or which denote specific meanings in the context of second language acquisition.
In the pages that follow, no distinction will be made between the terms acquisition and learning, although scholars such as Krashen (1982) believe that they should be regarded as different concepts. According to Krashen acquisition is an unconscious process closely associated with informal modes of learning, similar to how we picked up the L1; learning, however, is conscious and is connected more with how we become competent in the L2. However, there is a tendency now to use the two terms interchangeably. Development is also used as a synonym for the previous two terms and it is in Sharwood Smith's opinion:
the best term as it focuses on the process itself, i.e. as something that 'happens' inside the learner or acquirer.
(1994: 11)
A second important set of terminologies also needs to be clarified before we embark on this subject. By second language or L2 we mean a language which is spoken together with the first language or mother tongue; this is the status of English, for example, in many African countries (South Africa, Kenya, Zambia) where it is an official language for a series of historical and/or political reasons, in combination with the native language(s). A second language situation is also that of a Mexican who goes to work in the United States. His/her native language is Spanish but s/he is learning English, the institutional language of the country which is widely used in all walks of life. In
contrast, we speak of a foreign language in a context similar to Latin America, where English is not an official language and access to it is only available through formal instruction, literary works, audio and video tapes, satellite TV and the internet.
Multilingualism is of course on the rise, with the increased movement of labour around the globe, a phenomenon which has prompted the UK, for example, to adopt the term EAL (English as an additional language) to indicate that the scholastic language (English) may be the second or the third language that the pupil speaks. Second Language Acquisition (SLA), is, therefore, a neutral term in this subject, and it is used to refer to all these situations as well as to the general field of enquiry.
Preliminary reflective task
Take a second to reflect upon your views on the nature of language learning and the corresponding implications for language teaching. Below are twelve general statements about language learning. Think about whether you agree or disagree with these statements. (See 'Webography' for discussion after you have done the task).
The pages that follow will also try to provide a definite reply to these controversial issues.
Below are some general beliefs and principles about the learning of a foreign language. Read each statement and decide if you:
(1) strongly agree, (2) agree, (3) neither agree nor disagree, (4) disagree, (5) strongly disagree
1. It is easier for someone who already speaks a foreign language to learn another one. 1 2 3 4 5
2. People who are good at mathematics or science are not good at learning foreign languages.
1 2 3 4 5
3. Everyone can learn to speak a foreign language. 1 2 3 4 5
4. First Language Acquisition (FLA) and SLA are very different processes. 1 2 3 4 5
5. All students learn English in a similar way. 1 2 3 4 5
6. The learning of a second language is a linear process. 1 2 3 4 5
7. Affective states do not play an important role in L2 learning. 1 2 3 4 5
8. Students learn what they are taught. 1 2 3 4 5
9. The majority of the mistakes students make in the use of the second language are due to interference from their mother tongue.
10. Languages are learned mainly through imitation. 1 2 3 4 5
11. Environment plays an important role in the learning of a second language. 1 2 3 4 5
12. Students' errors should be corrected as soon as they are made in order to prevent the formation of bad habits.
Chapter 1
Applied linguistics
1.1. The development of linguistics
Before we take a look at what the field of Applied Linguistics comprises, it would be a good idea to situate the linguistic discipline historically. Where has the field come from? Who have been the key figures in the evolution of Linguistics in modern times? Which have been the main linguistic schools or trends in the 20th century and how have these been maintained or changed in the 21st? These are the questions that we will address first in this chapter.
Although Applied Linguistics began to take shape as a discipline in the 1950s, the roots of linguistics as a real science and with complete independence from other disciplines go back to earlier this century. A key figure is Ferdinand de Saussure, a Swiss scholar who is generally considered to be the founder of modern linguistics and the father of the structuralist approach to linguistics. During the 19th century the study of language had tended to be diachronic (that is, language was studied historically, as an evolutionary phenomenon, over a period of time). Saussure was the first to suggest that linguistics also needed studies which were synchronic (or static). In other words, Saussure proposed that linguists should concern themselves with the state of a given language at the present time.
In a celebrated series of lectures compiled in a Course in General Linguistics, Saussure proposed his famous distinction between langue and parole.
Langue, he claimed, referred to language as a system, an abstract series of
rules which were acquired by all speakers of the same language. By parole, on the other hand, is meant the individual, idiosyncratic utterances which are used by each member of a speech community. By offering the concept of langue as a stable, overarching body of linguistic knowledge, Saussure was effectively delineating a field for descriptive linguistic enquiry. In Saussure's words:
In separating language [langue] from speaking [parole] we are at the same time separating: (1) what is social from what is individual; and (2) what is essential from what is accessory and more or less accidental. (1959:13)
Apart from this distinction between langue and parole, we can refer to a series of basic concepts in the structuralist paradigm: linguistic sign, structure, level, and component.
Sign
Language is formed by a number of linguistic signs and each one of these possesses a value or a linguistic identity that derives from the relationships maintained with the rest of the signs within the system. The sign emerges as the result of an association of a concept (meaning) with an acoustic image (significant).
Figure 1.1: Structure of a linguistic sign. Structure
In close connection with the sign, we find the notion of structure, which is at the heart of Structuralism. The relationship existing between several elements is what is meant by "structure". The elements themselves are not the most important thing within a structure - rather the relationship existing between them is what is important.
Level
The concept of level is mainly used by the American branch of Structuralism whose main representative is Leonard Bloomfield, author of an extremely influential work entitled Language (1933). According to Bloomfield, language is formed by a series of levels that are in fact equivalent to a group of hierarchical subsystems. In the first years of Structuralism three main levels were distinguished: the phonetical, the morphological and the syntactic. Some years later the semantic level was added to this list and the morphological and syntactic were grouped into a single level known as morphosyntactic.
Component
The notion of component used by both the American and the European branches of Structuralism is used to characterise the phonetic and semantic levels of the language. Thus, the phonemes are units formed by a number of distinctive features (i.e. the consonant /p/ in English is bilabial, plosive and voiceless) and lexical items consist of several semantic elements which are usually referred to as semes. The word chair shares some features with
armchair but these two lexical items also show some differences; both are
pieces of furniture and are used to sit on, but chair also contrasts with armchair because the former tends not to have arms and is generally smaller in size. The analysis of the different constituents of the structures permits us to classify formal units in different classes or categories. Taking the sentence as starting point and as the superior unit, we may speak of classes of sentences, classes of clauses, word classes and in this way we come to the lowest level, morpheme classes.
This brief account of the structuralist paradigm would not be complete if we did not mention the goal of both European and American structuralists: the analysis and description of languages. Structuralists defined themselves as descriptivists in contrast to the precriptivist attitudes of traditional grammar. The prescriptivist approach to language seeks to modify and even change the
linguistic behaviour of speakers by means of a series of rules and norms which state what is right and what is wrong. The descriptivist approach aims to describe language as a linguistic representation through systematic observation and collection of data. Most of the linguistic research conducted in this framework consists of the design and production of coherent and relevant descriptive systems as the result of the exhaustive analysis of data.
Generativism
As a reaction against the structuralist approach to Linguistics, we find the Generative paradigm which has its origin in the work of Noam Chomsky.
Syntactic Structures, published in 1957, and Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,
published in 1965, are key texts in this paradigm. The generative paradigm is characterised by being in constant revision; in fact, new reformulations have been put forward in the last few years.
In 1981 Chomsky presented a new theory known as GB or Government and
Binding Theory and even more recently he refers to a system of Principles and Parameters. It would take a long time to explain in close detail the principles
underpinning each of these theories. As with Structuralism we will concentrate on the most important features of the generative paradigm. These can be stated as follows:
a) Idealisation, intuition and introspection
A psychologist and mentalist conception of language, typical of the rationalism of the 17th and 18th centuries, underlies this paradigm. Therefore, generativists are interested in formulating linguistic theories which may represent the idealisations of a prototypical speaker of the language who is perfectly acquainted with it. According to Chomsky, attention must be paid to the introspective evidence and to the native speaker's intuition. In other words, generativists believe that language is innate and the speaker of the language possesses an innate knowledge of it. It is the function of linguists to explain and systematise the language by means of a series of rules.
b) The importance of rules
If in the case of the structuralist approach, linguistic description is obtained by means of structures, levels and components, generative grammar is characterised by a focus on rules. What exactly do we mean by this? Take, for example, the sentence Mary wrote a letter.
Look at the diagram on page 12. Here we see that such a sentence is formed by a noun phrase (Mary), which can be represented as NP, and a verb phrase (wrote a letter), which can be represented as VP. The verb phrase in its turn consists of a verb and a noun phrase and the noun phrase may be represented as consisting of a determiner (DET - a) plus a noun (N - letter).
According to the generativists, everything in the language can be explained by rules and the grammar of a language should generate well-formed utterances. One should bear in mind that the rules of a generative grammar are of a different nature from those typical of traditional grammar. A prescriptive traditional grammar adopts the form of a statement that warns us against what is incorrect, for instance, 'prepositions should not stand on their own at the end of a sentence: Constructions such as What are you looking at? are incorrect and should be avoided'. However, generative rules have very little to do with social correctness since they are objective descriptions of the grammatical patterns the sentences represent.
c) Explanation as the main objective of the linguistic study
According to Chomsky, a linguistic theory should not only describe linguistic phenomena but should also be able to explain them. Linguistic theories should thus have an integral explanatory element.
d) The existence of linguistic universals
Generativists postulate that there exists a series of linguistic universals, that is, a number of features which are all common to all languages. Most natural languages, for example, possess ways and means to express negation; negation could then be regarded as a linguistic universal. Two types of linguistic universals have been suggested: formal and substantive. The former are related to the form of a grammar, that is, its components (syntax, semantics, phonology) as well as to the different types of rules; the latter, in contrast, have to do with the contents of those rules and syntactic categories such as, for example, the distinctive features in phonology and the structure of the verb phrase in syntax. By investigating linguistic universals, Chomsky and his associates maintained that Linguistics would thus help in the understanding of the nature of the human mind.
e) The creative nature of language use
Language is not simply viewed as a store of basic structures acquired by imitation and repetition. Language use is characterised by being creative. The users of the language are able to produce utterances that they have never heard before and this is due to the creative nature of language. In Chomsky's opinion, the notions of rule and creativity are not contradictory terms since any act of creativity is conducted within the framework of a rule.
f) The notions of deep, surface structure and transformation
If the structuralist approach was mainly concerned with the phonological and morphological levels of the language, generativism focuses mainly on syntax since it is considered to be the central component of grammar. According to Chomsky, it is not enough for a linguistic description to indicate whether a particular sentence is right or wrong; it should also provide explanations about the speaker's ability to understand and generate new sentences.
To do that, three main levels are at least required:
- A surface structure, that is, a series of sentences we perceive. It is a concrete representation that would correspond to what we would hear if the sentence were spoken.
- A deep structure or propositions that may undergo transformations when the speaker actually uses the language. The sentence is represented in an abstract way showing all the factors that govern how it should be interpreted.
- Transformations or operations that go from the deep structure to the surface structure which allow us to see the connections between sentences that express the same meaning but use a different grammatical form. For example, the case of active sentences and their passive counterparts, e.g. Jill caught the ball vs. The ball was caught by
Jill.
g) Competence versus performance
This differentiation is very closely connected with Saussure's distinction between langue and parole described above. Competence can be defined as the intuitive knowledge that every speaker possesses of the language. Consequently, Chomsky believed that Linguistics should be concerned with the study of competence. By performance is meant the act of interpreting or producing a speech act. Although some linguists believe that the terms langue and competence are interchangeable, it should be pointed out that langue differs from competence by having a social nature; Chomsky's label, on the contrary, reflects a purely psycholinguistic viewpoint.
Pragmatics
In the last two decades of the twentieth century several groups of scholars and linguists highlighted the limitations of the generative paradigm especially because very little attention was paid to the analysis of data. Generativism was particularly concerned with the grammar of an ideal speaker of the language disregarding the actual context and the functions of language. Applied linguists in general and language teachers more particularly began to feel the need for a systematic study of language use; a theory without excessive abstraction and
formalism and which could explain what the speakers actually do with the language. Serious weaknesses in the generative paradigm were identified by Dell Hymes, Searle, Beaugrande, Van Dijk, Stubbs, Grice and Austin. All of these theorists were interested in the study of language in use, that is, the analysis of the relationships existing between the language and the communicative contexts where this is used. Alcaraz (1990) claimed that all the linguistic research having language in use as its main objective may be classified under the paradigm of Pragmatics. This discipline focuses on the relationships existing between the linguistic sign and the users of the language within a particular context.
The term 'Pragmatics' is at present understood in two different ways:
- A branch of linguistics that is concerned with the way language is used in communication; in this respect it is closely related to Semantics since both are concerned with the meaning of language, although Pragmatics tends to deal more with the meaning of words and sentences within a particular context.
- A linguistic trend with specific aims and research methods. Pragmatics as a linguistic trend aims at analysing the use of language using specific models and tools with a pluridisciplinary methodology.
1.2. Main features of the pragmatic paradigm
These can be summarised as follows:
- Language is considered as discourse and text in contrast with structuralist and generativist principles that regarded language as a collection of sentences.
- Language is mainly a means of communication whereas in the case of the two previous linguistic theories language was considered primarily as a system.
- The use of language is more important than its forms.
- The processes that take place in communicative acts are what really matter. The mental reality underpinning the verbal human behaviour typical of generativism as well as the features and characteristics of the superficial linguistic structures studied by Structuralism are now almost ignored.
- In contrast with the utterances and sentences constructed artificially by generativists, the followers of the pragmatic trend make use of real and contextualised linguistic data.
- Pragmatics takes into consideration the contributions of disciplines and sciences which are in one way or another connected with Linguistics and language in general. It stands out by being interdisciplinary. In this
respect it also opposes Generativism and Structuralism since these two are quite constrained in their scope, centring only on language and disregarding any kind of connection with other fields of knowledge.
- Attention is specially paid to the usefulness and applicability of linguistic theories that may account for communicative competence. Reflective task 1.1.
Explain the main difference between Structuralism, Generativism and Pragmatics as regards their main objectives and the units of analysis used.
1.3. The field of applied linguistics
In the last few years of the 20th century, a great deal of attention was devoted to the area of Applied Linguistics (henceforth to be written as 'AL') as opposed to "Theoretical Linguistics". According to Widdowson (1996:125) AL is:
An area of enquiry which seeks to establish the relevance of theoretical studies of language to everyday problems in which language is implicated.
Halliday in the preliminary pages to his Introduction to Functional Grammar (1994: xix) mentions the different applications of Linguistics; these range from research applications of a theoretical nature to quite practical tasks. In fact, 18 out of a total of 21 of these applications of linguistics have to do with AL, for example:
- To understand how a child develops language and how language may be evolved;
- To understand linguistic variation;
- To understand the relation between language and culture/situation; - To help in the diagnosis and treatment of language pathologies; - To help translators; and
- To help people learn a foreign language or their own native tongue. Overall, it is generally accepted that AL is in its essence a problem-oriented discipline, as opposed to "theory based" linguistics. Crystal defines it as follows:
A branch of Linguistics where the primary concern is the application of linguistic theories, methods and findings to the elucidation of language problems which have arisen in other areas of experience. (1991: 22)
1. The methods and results from one branch of science which are used to develop insights into another area of knowledge; translation studies can be included here.
2. The methods and results from a branch of science used to solve practical social problems; foreign language teaching or clinical linguistics can be here taken as examples.
3. The application itself; under this interpretation the teacher who teaches a group of students is actually involved in AL.
In the light of this, AL stood out by being:
- interdisciplinary (several disciplines are involved);
- scientific (it does not work by intuition but with hard data and with scientific and tested methods);
- educational (it seeks to inform pedagogy); and
- a problem-solving activity (it attempts to find solutions for specific problems).
1.4. Fields of study in applied linguistics: introduction
Although the primary aim of AL may not be the development of theoretical linguistics, AL may still conduct research which properly speaking comes under the heading of theoretical linguistics.
The major fields of study in AL can be identified as the following: - Language teaching and language learning,
- Translation studies,
- Clinical Linguistics (speech pathology), - Language planning and policy, and - Computational linguistics.
The most developed branch of AL is the teaching and learning of second languages, to the extent that some authors have made use of these two terms interchangeably. Alternative expressions to that of Language Teaching are
Language Didactics, Glottodidactics and Educational Linguistics.
This branch of AL is concerned with both the teaching and the learning of second languages together with all the factors, elements and variables that determine and condition both processes. This includes issues such as teaching methods, syllabus design, materials production, testing and evaluation,
treatment of the four skills (reading, writing, listening and speaking), language planning, classroom language and classroom management, action research, CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning), etc.
The discipline of Translation Studies does not really require a detailed definition as it is self-explanatory. It deals with the transfer of linguistic information from one language to another. Nowadays, it is generally considered within the framework of communication theory. The translator becomes the sender of a message which has been previously coded in the form of a text, the recipients are different from the ones intended and the sociocultural context may have also changed. Some approaches claim that there is no equivalence between the original text and its translated version. The latter is a derived text that has been manipulated to meet certain communicative objectives. In this case Theoretical Linguistics stands as a useful tool that may offer solutions to the problems found when processing information and producing texts in a translation project.
Clinical Linguistics, also known as Speech Pathology, Linguistic Aphasiology or Psycholinguistic Aphasiology, presents biological models and hypotheses to explain the functioning of language in our brain. At the same time this discipline takes these models to the clinical domain and provides useful means for the diagnosis and treatment of language problems detected in individuals.
Language planning generally refers to all the activities of intervention over linguistic practices. This includes language management as regards the role, function and status of the language or languages, if more than one, used by the community, the process of language standardisation, language policies on educational matters, etc. In Spain, an example might be the role played by the Generalitat (Local Government) in Catalonia in its shaping of linguistic policy for the use of the Catalan language.
Computational linguistics is concerned with a series of aspects, factors and processes that are involved in the computation of language; it tries to develop theories and techniques that serve to process natural languages into machine language. On the one hand, this discipline has borrowed key notions and tools from Computer Sciences (i.e. the structure of the data bases), from Logic (i.e. some of the grammatical formalisms), from the Processing of Signs, apart from those derived from the linguistic field itself. On the other hand, Computational Linguistics has developed its own formalisms, especially in syntax and in the description of lexis, as well as its own theoretical concepts. Such concepts constitute the starting point for the development of a series of systems that carry out particular operations such as translation, transformation of a written text to spoken language, production of texts, etc. and they also serve as tools for the treatment of data, i.e. automatic syntactic analysis, word classes tagging, corpora coding, etc.
Apart from these fairly specific fields, there are many linguists who also consider Ethnolinguistics, Sociolinguistics and Psycholinguistics as subjects within the scope of AL.
Ethnolinguistics studies language as the expression of a particular culture and in relation to communicative situations. It is also called Anthropological
Linguistics. It is concerned with the connections existing between linguistics and
a particular view of the world, the importance people give to language, the study of secret languages and the problems derived from the linguistic and social structures of different peoples.
Sociolinguistics is concerned with the exploration of the inter-relationship between linguistic and social phenomena. Hudson (1981), for example, defines it as "the study of language in relation to society". Sociolinguistics deals among other things with the processes of language preservation, language change, attitudes to language, code-switching, relationships between language and social background, etc. It is thus primarily concerned with external factors and their effect of language learning.
Finally, Psycholinguistics is centred on the study of language learning as a cognitive process, including the processes of First Language Acquisition (FLA) and SLA, neurolinguistics, etc. Put simply, it is concerned with what goes on inside the human mind during the process of acquiring language. It is thus primarily concerned with internal factors and their effect on language learning. Where is Applied Linguistics now, in the 21st century? According to Wiśniewski (2007):
"As it can be seen there are many trends in applied linguistics, some interconnected, others not having too much in common. There are, however, some very general tendencies among applied linguists to put more effort into certain investigations such as languages of wider communication, corpus analysis, or critical applied linguistics ... Corpus analysis takes both quantitative and qualitative approaches to the study of language and applied linguists focus on the identification of patterns of language use depending on social context, audiences, genres and settings. Critical applied linguistics is interested in the social problems connected with language such as unemployment, illiteracy and peda-gogy".
Reflective task 1.2.
Here is a list of linguistic issues. Examine them carefully and decide whether they are more closely associated with Theoretical Linguistics (TL) or with Applied Linguistics (AL). If they belong to the latter, discuss the branch where they would best fit.
E.g. The teaching of English to children with special needs. Answer: AL, language learning and language teaching.
1. The notion of ergativity in the English language.
... 2. The problems derived from the translation of proper names. ...
3. The problems associated with the standardization of minority languages in Latin America.
... 4. The importance of word order in English.
... 5. Disorders in the production of lexical units.
... 6. The automatic oral translation systems.
...
7. The importance of the age factor in the learning of foreign languages. ...
8. Special features of Yorkshire English as compared with standard British English.
... 9. Clinical description of aphasia.
... 10. Lexical revolution as an expression of nationalism in the Balkans. ... 11. The classification of the form to in to go as a word class. ... 12. Disorders of syntactic comprehension.
13. An analysis of the teacher's language in the EFL classroom. ... 14. The simulation of speech systems.
... 15. Shifts of cohesion and coherence in translation.
...
1.5. Suggestions for further reading
[1] Alcaraz Varó, E. (1990). Tres paradigmas de la investigación lingüística. Alcoy: Marfil.
[2] Corder, S. P. (1973). Introducing Applied Linguistics. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
[3] Crystal, D. (1997). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.pp. 88-107; 410-413. 2nd edition.
[4] Fernández Pérez, M. (ed.). (1996). Avances en Lingüística Aplicada. Servicio de Publicaciones e Intercambio Científico de la Universidade de Santiago. Santiago.
[5] Robins, R. H. (1980). General Linguistics: An Introductory Survey. Longman. London. 3rd edition.
[6] Scovel, T. (1998). Psycholinguistics. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [7] Widdowson, H. G. (1996). Linguistics. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
1.6. Web reading
[1] Deep and surface structure (Extract from 'The Study of Language', George Yule, 1985). Link to webpage:
http://books.google.es/books?id=EYIwL-Gr0XIC&pg=PA97&lpg=PA97&dq=deep+and+surface+structure&source =bl&ots=-32XGH8JB4&sig=i_1TaoC- smh_LPFScGYOMoYmpDY&hl=en&ei=GI_-S-6MCYP14AaM6qDxDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ve d=0CDIQ6AEwBjge#v=onepage&q=deep%2 [Read: August 25, 2010, GMT-5].
Chapter 2
The acquisition and role of the first language
2.1. Introduction
In this chapter we will consider the role of L1 in the learning of a second language. Firstly, we will review the main theories on L1 acquisition. Then, we will describe how the first language is present and manifested in second language learning. In the third and last part of the chapter we will compare and contrast between the processes of L1 and L2 learning.
2.2. Rules versus habits: behaviourism versus mentalism or
cognitivism
Every individual, unless unfortunate enough to suffer from some disability, manages to learn his/her first language. How exactly does this almost miraculous process occur? Three main theories have been proposed to account for the acquisition of the first language or mother tongue: behaviourist, nativist and developmental. We will turn to each of these in detail.
2.2.1. Behaviourist theory
According to the behaviourists children come into the world as blank slates and are influenced by the environment. In their view, the learning of a language is based on the formation of a series of habits that children gradually acquire by imitation. Children imitate the sounds and words they hear around them. They first perceive a stimulus, and then they obtain a response from their parents or from the people around them which is encourages the formation of a habit. For example, a child feels the need to drink water and asks for it (stimulus). Somebody gives the child the water (response). With this association of ideas, reinforcement takes place as the child realises that when s/he says "water", s/he will get it. It was B.F. Skinner in his extremely influential work Verbal
Behaviour, published in 1957, who formulated the notion of "operant
conditioning" on which this theory is largely based. Stern (1983:315) defines an operant as follows:
An operant is defined as a form of behaviour in which the behaviour of the organism leads to a stimulus which presents rewards... Only the right operant is rewarded.
Behaviourist theory was based largely on the observation of how rats and other animals respond under experimental laboratory conditions, and the findings were generalised to refer to human beings. In the subject Methodological
Approaches we have already examined the implications of behaviourist theory
2.2.2. Nativist/Mentalist/Cognitive theories
As mentioned above, behaviourist theories were tested mainly on animals. Chomsky (1959) believed that while the theory might work with animals it did not necessarily apply to people. In his view, children come into this world with very specific innate knowledge of the nature of language and of the world. Language develops in the child in the same way as other biological functions. The term nativist is derived from the fundamental assertion that language acquisition is innately determined, that we are born with a built-in device of some kind that predisposes us to language acquisition, that is, to a systematic perception of language around us, resulting in the construction of an internalised system of language. This is what Chomsky called the LAD - the metaphoric Language Acquisition Device. The LAD was thus hypothesised to be part of the child's inherited human character, and it consisted of three main components:
- substantive universals, - formal universals, and - evaluation procedures.
Thus, while learning his/her first language, the child is constantly forming hypotheses on the basis of linguistic information received, and then testing these hypotheses in speech and comprehension.
Chomsky gradually abandoned the LAD concept, although it has remained a powerful metaphor in the circles of Applied Linguistics. He has gradually abandoned it in favour of a parameter-setting model of language acquisition called principles and parameters (see 'Webography') which is now considered to be the dominant form of mainstream generative linguistics.
Within this framework, the goal of linguistics is to identify all of the principles and parameters that are universal to human language (called: Universal
Grammar). As such, any attempt to explain the syntax of a particular language
using a principle or parameter is cross-examined with the evidence available in other languages. This leads to a continual refinement of the theoretical machinery of generative linguistics in an attempt to account for as much syntactic variation in human language as possible.
2.2.3. Functional approaches, developmental or interactionist theory
This approach developed because it was clear that nativists did not account for an important facet of language: meaning. The idea of language as functional, as capable of creating individual meaning, seemed to be disregarded. This model tried to reconcile the previous two hypotheses by combining the role of the environment with the learner's innate knowledge of the language.
An extremely influential American linguist, Bloom, was instrumental in popularising a new view of first language learning. Bloom's research, along with that of Piaget, Bruner, Slobin, Halliday, and others, paved the way for a new wave of language study, this time centring on the cognitive prerequisites of linguistic behaviour. Piaget described overall development as the result of children's interaction with their environment, with a complementary interaction between their perceptual cognitive capacities and their linguistic experiences. Language development is explained in terms of the experience the child gains before he/she is capable of uttering the first word. What children learn about language is determined by what they already know about the world. The interactionists believe that language which is modified or adapted with the purpose of facilitating the learner's understanding is a crucial factor in the language acquisition process. In fact, interactionists have examined the speech addressed to children, which is known as motherese or caretaker talk, very carefully, in order to try to identify exactly what features of it seem to facilitate the learning of a further language.
Reflective task 2.1.
Reading 2.1. describes some of the problems involved in conducting research into motherese (also referred to as child directed speech in the article). Read the text and answer the following question:
Lieven poses three questions on the first page of the article. Explain (very briefly) the main points she makes with regard to each one.
2.3. Contrastive and error analysis
While the interlanguage theory that will be studied in the next section is related to the cognitive theory of language learning, Contrastive Analysis (CA) and Error Analysis (EA) are connected with structural linguistics and with a behaviourist theory of learning.
The framework provided by Contrastive Analysis (CA) had pedagogical aims in its origins, and it was initially formulated by Lado (1957) in his book
Linguistics Across Cultures. According to CA, L2 errors can be predicted by
identifying the differences between the target language and the learner's L1. CA was strongly criticised in the 1970s because of a series of empirical, theoretical and practical considerations: although a number of attempts were made to validate the CA approach, these showed that many of the errors predicted did not arise. As a result of this, the theory of CA was questioned. Gradually, the role of the first language was reappraised in two ways. Firstly, the CA approach was modified to take account of avoidance, the need for there to be a degree of similarity between the first and the second language items for interference to take place, and the multi-factorial nature of learner error. Secondly, the CA approach was incorporated into a cognitive framework by reinterpreting "interference" as "intercession", that is, as a strategy for communicating when there were insufficient L2 resources.
Error Analysis (EA) arose as a development of CA. This Behaviourist learning theory predicts that transfer will take place from the first to the second language. Transfer will be negative when there is proactive inhibition. In this case, errors will result. On the contrary, transfer will be positive when the first and the second language habits are the same. In this case no errors will be detected. Thus differences between the first and the second language create learning difficulties which bring about errors, while the similarities between the first and second language, in contrast, promote quick and easy learning.
Dulay, Burt and Krashen (1982) proposed the following taxonomy of learners' errors in order to systematise and thus investigate them.
CATEGORY DESCRIPTION EXAMPLE
Omissions Absence of an element in a grammatical
sentence.
She not come (instead of She did not come)
Additions Presence of an item that must not occur
in a grammatical sentence.
She were be very angry (instead of She was very angry)
Misinformation
The use of an incorrect form of a particular grammatical form, on occasions due to over-generalization.
They drinked a lot of water (instead of They drank a lot of water)
Misorderings The normal word-order is partially or
totally distorted.
In the garden were playing the children (instead of The children were playing in the garden)
The problem with the above typology of errors lies in the fact that on certain occasions when a learner makes an error it is difficult to say whether we are dealing with one or another category. Furthermore, several kinds of errors may be found simultaneously in a learner's output.
From the above account, it is quite clear that the learner's L1 is an important factor in SLA; however, it is not the only one and it is not the most important. The L1 is a resource of knowledge learners use to internalise L2 linguistic data. The influence of the L1 is likely to be particularly noticeable in L2 phonology. Thus when we listen to a Spanish beginner speaking English, we clearly identify speech deviations from standard English pronunciation which may be explained by the presence of the Spanish sound system. Perhaps the most negative aspect of traditional CA was the assumption that the influence of the L1 in the learning of the L2 was fully negative. If SLA is considered to be a developmental process, then the L1 can be viewed as a contributing factor to this development, which in the course of time, will become more secondary.
2.4. Interlanguage
This term was first used by Selinker (1972) and it is closely connected with cognitive theories of language learning. Other alternative expressions are
approximative systems (Nemser, 1971), idiosyncratic dialects and transitional competence (Corder, 1971).
The notion of interlanguage can be understood in two different ways:
- The structured system which the learner constructs at any given stage in his learning development.
- The series of interlocking systems which form what Corder called the learner's "built-in syllabus" (the interlanguage continuum).
Interlanguage theory encouraged empirical research into SLA. This research initially took the form of error analysis which helped to demonstrate that many of the errors that L2 learners made were not traceable to the L1; there were other factors that could also provide an explanation for this. Research also helped to identify some of the processes that were responsible for interlanguage development as SLA research concentrated on identifying the developmental route along which learners passed.
In both FLA (First language Acquisition) and SLA it is possible to speak of a route or order of acquisition although certain differences have been identified between them. Apparently, all learners in both FLA and SLA follow a similar route of development although the rate of development, that is, the speed they go through each of the stages may vary from one individual to another. Acquisition research in the 1970s concentrated on the order of acquisition of a series of grammatical units or morphological features which were not restricted to English but also to other languages such as Spanish and German. Their main purpose was to identify an order of acquisition for the different languages in both a first and a second language situation. These studies are known in the second language field as the morpheme studies. In the case of FLA we can mention the surveys conducted by Brown (1973), de Villiers and de Villiers (1973), Klima and Bellugi (1966), and Clark and Clark (1977). Morpheme studies in SLA are numerous; those carried out by Dulay and Burt (1973), Larsen-Freeman (1976), Krashen (1977), and Krashen, Butler, Birnbaum and Robertson (1978) stand out.
The tables below present the order of L1 and L2 acquisition respectively in English morphemes as described by Clark and Clark (1977) and Krashen (1977).
MORPHEME EXAMPLE
1 Present progressive -ing He is sleeping.
2 Preposition 'in ' The pen is in the drawer.
3 Preposition 'on' The book is on the table.
4 Plural - 's ' The cats are running.
5 Past irregular They ate very little.
6 Possessive -'s ' That is Peter's car.
7 Uncontractible copula 'be ' Are they boys or girls? 8 Articles 'a '/'the ' Pass me the sugar, please.
I saw a man.
9 Past regular -ed They played football. 10 Third person regular -s She works at home.
11 Third person irregular e.g. has/does Has she got a lot of money?
12 Uncontractible auxiliary 'be ' Are you reading? 13 Contractible copula 'be ' He's a doctor.
14 Contractible auxiliary 'be ' They're driving very fast.
Table 1.2. The order of L1 acquisition of English morphemes.
STAGE 1 -ing plural copula STAGE 2 auxiliary article
STAGE 3 irregular past
STAGE 4
regular past 3rd person singular
possessive -s
Table 1.3. The order of L2 acquisition of English morphemes.
Not only is there a route or order of acquisition of morphemes, but there is also a sequence of acquisition of the individual morphemes themselves. In other words, while learners (or native-speaker children) are busy acquiring, for example, the past tense in English, they go through several stages. The past tense is not learnt in one single jump.
Reflective task 2.2.
Look at these utterances. Each group (a-d) corresponds to the hypothetical utterances made by a single L2 learner at different times while acquiring the past tense in English. Put the groups in order to reflect the sequence that this learner probably went through to acquire this morpheme. Justify your order.
a) he went shops / she walked street / they visited friend b) he go shop / she walk street / they visit friend
c) he goed shop / she walked street / they visited friend d) he went shops / she walk shop / they visit friend
To see the comments on this task you will find the "Assessment " section of the subject (virtual campus).
However, it should be pointed out that internal processing and innate
mechanisms are not the whole story in SLA. There are also other factors which play an important role in this process.
2.5. L1 acquisition and L2 learning compared
SLA stands in contrast to FLA. SLA is the study of how learners learn an additional language after they have acquired their mother tongue. The study of language-learner language began with the study of FLA. SLA research has tended to follow in the footsteps of L1 acquisition research, both in its methodology and in many of the issues that it has dealt with. It is not surprising that a key issue has been the extent to which FLA and SLA are similar or different processes.
There are obvious parallels between FLA and SLA but by no means should they be considered as completely similar. There is a series of factors which makes them clearly different. As McDonough explained, views on this matter are not at all conclusive:
Positions have been defended which can be located all the way across the continuum from the idea that second language development is a recapitulation of the first in a new code, to the belief that the two are totally unrelated processes. How much notice you take of the first language work depends partly on how convincing you find the parallels between error patterns and acquisition orders in the two circumstances of language learning.
(1981: 111)
Let us explore then the points in common and the differences between the two processes:
a) Acquisition or learning order
The order of acquisition varies from FLA to SLA learners. This means that first language learners do not go through the same stages in the learning of a language as second language learners. Thus articles, auxiliary "be" and copula are acquired earlier by L2 learners, while some other morphemes such as the irregular past form of verbs are acquired later. In both cases it is possible to speak of an order of acquisition which is more or less universal for all learners, that is, all learners, independently of their language backgrounds, follow a similar path in their learning process. Furthermore, second language learners already possess certain linguistic knowledge when they start learning the second language. This is an advantage but it may also be in some ways a disadvantage because of the language transfer factor mentioned above. b) Success in language learning
This is something very obvious but not irrelevant. In the L1 learning process, all subjects, unless they suffer from brain damage which may produce language disorders such as speech impediments, normally succeed in gaining a command of the language after a certain period of time; in L2 learning this is not always the case. Moreover, second language learners may fossilize in their language progress, that is, they may reach a stage in which they do not make any progress or development. This is known as fossilization (Selinker, 1972).
c) Objectives
Learners' objectives are completely different. In the first language situation children feel a need to communicate with the people around them to establish a connection with the outside world and to satisfy their physical and psychological needs. In the second language situation, needs and interests will vary from one learner to another. In one case learners may want to learn the L2 to be able to communicate with others and make themselves understood, while in other cases the main objective may be the understanding of medical or economic texts, or the writing of reports of one type or another.
d) The nature of input
The input or the linguistic data the individual is exposed to and has access to is completely different in both situations. In L1 learning, input is received from parents, relatives, family, friends, etc. However, in L2 learning, apart from the fact that the quantity and the quality of input are completely different, learners obtain it through different sorts of channels (formal instruction, books, radio, TV, etc.).
e) Cognitive and affective factors
Cognitive and affective factors play a more important role in SLA than in FLA. Attitudes and motivation are crucial factors in SLA, while they are almost secondary in FLA. So, for example, in FLA we cannot speak of motivation as such since it is in itself a natural process. The same is true of the role of other variables such as age, intelligence, cognitive style, personality, etc.
f) Time devoted to the task of learning
Language learners differ in the total amount of time they spend on the task. In the L1 situation learners, in fact, do not need to devote any time to language learning as this takes place spontaneously. In a second language situation this will vary according to the situation of the individual, number of class hours, opportunities for language practice and so on.
FEATURE FLA SLA
Success/Result. Learners achieve a more or less "perfect" command of the language.
It is very difficult to obtain a "perfect" command of the language.
Variation. Very little variation as regards progress
and result.
Quite a lot of variation as regards progress and level obtained.
Objectives. The main and final objective is to
communicate.
The main and final objective(s) may vary from one learner to another.
Fossilization. Not known.
Students in certain phases of their learning may not progress and even backslide.
Formal instruction.
Not required. If done, it is with the purpose of developing learner's writing or spoken skills.
Formal instruction favours learner's progress and it is required.
Affective factors. Almost irrelevant. Very important role.
Input. Wide in scope. More opportunities for practice.
Limited and restricted opportunities for language practice.
Acquisition
order. Different in both processes.
Table 1.4. A summary of the main differences between FLA and SLA.
2.6. Readings
[1] READING 2.1: Lieven, E. (1994). Language addressed to children: Linguistic
and Cultural Aspects in Learning English: development and diversity. Mercer, N.
2.7. Suggestions for further reading
[1] Ellis, R. (1994). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[2] Ellis, R. (1997). Second Language Acquisition. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[3] Lightbown, P. M. & SPADA, N. (1993). How Languages are Learned. Oxford University Press. Oxford. (Chapter 1).
2.8. Web reading
[1] Vivian Cook's quick and easy-to-read questioning of various L1 v L2 assumptions (Cook, V. 2000). Link to webpage: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/vivian.c/SLA/L1%20and%20L2.htm
Chapter 3
The learning of a second language
3.1. Introduction
The learning of a second language is not the result of a single factor, but of several variables of different types: contextual (environment), plus individual or personal (age, cognitive style, intelligence, aptitude, attitudes and motivation, personality, affective factors, learning opportunities, type of instruction, etc.). The table that follows, adapted from Skehan (1989: 120), provides an overview of the influences on language learning.
Figure 3.1: Variables which influence language learning.
The diagram consists of five boxes which represent different types of variables in language learning. These may be divided into three independent variables (teaching, learner and context) and two dependent ones (learning and outcome) which are determined or conditioned by the previous ones. Each of these variables needs to be subdivided further as they are affected by several factors or elements. The first box, teaching, makes reference to the teaching conditions under which instruction is being conducted. Factors such as the type of methodology used, the syllabus selected, the teacher profile and the resources available will play a significant role. The second box is centred on the
learners and on all the variables that may directly affect them. These can be cognitive, such as intelligence, cognitive style or aptitude for language learning; they may also be affective, that is, attitudes and motivation towards learning. Physical and psychological factors such as age and personality will also influence the learner.
The third box is related to the contextual conditions where language learning takes place. It is quite clear that language learning will not be of the same nature in a second language as in a foreign language situation; the opportunities for language use and practice will vary considerably from one to the other. In the middle of this lies the learning box. It is no doubt the most complex of all; it is located at the very centre because it is influenced by the previous three. It consists of two kinds of processes: unconscious and conscious. The former processes cannot be controlled directly by the learner and are determined to a high degree by the L1. The latter are monitored by the learner and they include the mechanisms used by the student in their learning. Finally, the box on the right shows the result of the whole learning process, that is, the proficiency level attained by the learner as well as several aspects of language performance, such as errors and external reactions to the language, the people and the culture that the target language represents.
The complexity and multiple nature of the second language learning process may explain the large number of theories and models formulated for the explanation of this phenomenon. However, as we shall see in the next chapter, none of them has been thorough enough to provide a comprehensive analysis of the whole field.
3.2. Individual learning factors: an overview
As mentioned above, there is a set of variables involved in the learning process (L1, context etc.) which may be regarded as general for a group of learners; they may influence all of them in a similar way. However, there is another group of factors which are particular to the individual learner and which may explain the different proficiency levels obtained by learners. Something similar will apply to our teaching situation. There is a series of conditions which is shared by all the learners; however, we are all aware of the fact that in our groups of students, we are dealing with individual learners who have their own attitudes and possess their own personality and aptitude for language learning. This will in fact be the field of study covered in the subject Individual factors in the
learner's development. Here we will mention key issues as an introduction to
the topic.
Nearly all the research into learner variables has involved either investigating their effect on the proficiency levels achieved by different learners, or describing how they affect an individual learner's response to the task of learning an L2. Neither proficiency nor learning response provides any insights into the route of acquisition. Research has demonstrated that individual factors play an important role in the rate and in the success of learning. However, the influence of these factors on the route of acquisition has not yet been proved.
Individual learning factors can be grouped as follows: - Affective: personality, attitudes, motivation, anxiety.
- Cognitive: aptitude, learning or cognitive style, intelligence, learning strategies.
- Other: age.
As stated above, the role and importance of each of these factors in second language learning will be studied in greater depth in the corresponding subject.
3.3. Input and interaction
Input can be defined as the language information or data the learner is exposed to and has access to. Ellis (1985: 127) describes it as "the language that is addressed to the L2 learner either by a native speaker or by another L2 learner". The notion of input should not be confused with that of intake. Intake refers to that part of the input which is really processed and assimilated by the learner. This language processing and assimilation does not usually occur at the very moment we are told or taught something. This may explain why learners may be using new linguistic forms without being completely aware of it. This is quite common in the learning of vocabulary. So, for example, in the middle of a conversation we may introduce new words and expressions that we do not remember learning although we have been exposed to them at some time or another. Furthermore, the learning of a second language should not be regarded as a linear process. One should not think that a language is learned in chunks according to different, already established, degrees of difficulty, going from the most simple to the most complex. If teachers operate with syllabuses and with teaching units or lessons, it is mainly for pedagogical purposes rather than for learning requirements. The learning of a second language could be compared to a cycle; it is necessary to go back to areas already studied at some point to consolidate them. This explains the inclusion of consolidation or revision units in most modern textbooks.
From what has been said so far, it is clear that we cannot discuss SLA without mentioning input. The nature of this input may vary according to the form of exposure (whether natural setting or formal instruction), and the medium used for its transmission (speech or writing). The latter are not mutually exclusive and we may have a combination of several types. Thus, for example, we may think of an average secondary school pupil in our country. This learner receives input from different sources: the teacher, textbook, readers, audio and video tapes, other students in the class, satellite TV, etc.
A central topic in SLA has been the nature and role of this input. In fact, general SLA theories study and analyse this question from different perspectives.
Behaviourism, for instance, stressed the importance of input. The whole process of SLA could be easily controlled by presenting the L2 in the right doses to the learner. The second language was then learned automatically by