T02.pdf

(1)

http://www.sarasuati.com http://www.sarasuati.com

Tema 2: Tema 2:

Teorías

Teorías generalesgenerales

sobre

sobre aprendizajeaprendizaje yy

la

la adquisiciónadquisición dede

una

una lengualengua

extranjera. extranjera. ElEl concepto concepto dede Interlengua. Interlengua. ElEl tratamiento

tratamiento deldel

error. error.

Madhatter

MadhatterWylderWylder

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Q Q U

U E E D D

A

A P P

R

R O O H H

I

I B B I I D D

A A * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * L L A A I I M M P P R R E E S S I

I O O N N

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * D D E

E E E

S S T T E E D D O O C C U U M M E E N N T T O O * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

(2)

T T 1. 1. 2. 2. 3. 3. 4. 4. 5. 5. eorías generales eorías generales Teorías g Teorías g ble of con ble of con General p General p 1.1. Lingui 1.1. Lingui 1.1.1. Stru 1.1.1. Stru 1.1.2. Cog 1.1.2. Cog 1.2. Socioli 1.2. Socioli 1.2.1. The 1.2.1. The 1.2.2. Spe 1.2.2. Spe 1.2.3. Mot 1.2.3. Mot 1.2.3.1. 1.2.3.1. 1.2.3.2. 1.2.3.2. 1.2.3.3. 1.2.3.3. 1.2.3.4. 1.2.3.4. 1.2.3.5. 1.2.3.5. 1.2.3.6. 1.2.3.6. 1.2.4. Apt 1.2.4. Apt 1.3. Neurol 1.3. Neurol 1.3.1. He 1.3.1. He 1.3.2. Age 1.3.2. Age 1.3.2.1. 1.3.2.1. 1.3.2.2. 1.3.2.2. 1.3.2.3. 1.3.2.3. Treatment Treatment 2.1. Introd 2.1. Introd 2.2. Error 2.2. Error 2.2.1. Con 2.2.1. Con 2.2.2. Cor 2.2.2. Cor Interlangu Interlangu Brief sum Brief sum bibliograp bibliograp sobre aprendizaj sobre aprendizaj nerales so nerales so El conc El conc tents tents rspectives rspectives tics ______ tics ______ cturalism ___ cturalism ___ nitivism ____ nitivism ____ guistics: _ guistics: _ Labovian pa Labovian pa ech accommo ech accommo ivation. ____ ivation. ____ Definition o Definition o Intrinsic and Intrinsic and Motivation i Motivation i Integrative Integrative Instrumental Instrumental Conclusion Conclusion tude. ______ tude. ______ nguistics _ nguistics _ isphere domi isphere domi hypothesis. hypothesis. _ _ Introduction Introduction Critical peri Critical peri Critical peri Critical peri of errors _ of errors _ ction ____ ction ____ nalysis (E nalysis (E trastive Anal trastive Anal er (1967): In er (1967): In age age ____________ ary. ary.__________ y ______ y ________ y la adquisición y la adquisición bre aprend bre aprend pto de Int pto de Int n SLA n SLA ____ _________ _________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________ _________ adigm ____ adigm ____ dation theory dation theory __________ __________ Motivation Motivation Extrinsic M Extrinsic M SLA ____ SLA ____ otivation. otivation. _ _ Motivation Motivation __________ __________ __________ __________ _________ _________ nance _____ nance _____ __________ __________ __________ __________ d for first la d for first la d for second d for second ________ ________ _________ _________ ): its roots ): its roots sis _______ sis _______ troduction of troduction of ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ Topic 2: Topic 2: de una lengua ex de una lengua ex Topic Topic izaje y la a izaje y la a erlengua. erlengua. ________ ________ _________ _________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________ _________ __________ __________ (SAT). ____ (SAT). ____ __________ __________ __________ __________ tivation ____ tivation ____ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________ _________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ guage acquis guage acquis language acq language acq ________ ________ _________ _________ and develo and develo __________ __________ the Concept ' the Concept ' ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ranjera. El conce ranjera. El conce :: dquisición dquisición l tratamie l tratamie ________ ________ _________ _________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________ _________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________ _________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ ition _______ ition _______ uisition ____ uisition ____ ________ ________ _________ _________ ment ____ ment ____ __________ __________ Error Analysi Error Analysi ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ pto de Interlengu pto de Interlengu de una len de una len to del err to del err ________ ________ _________ _________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________ _________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________ _________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ ________ ________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __________ __________ s' ________ s' ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ a. El tratamiento a. El tratamiento Iván Matella Iván Matella ua extran ua extran r. r. ________ ________ _________ _________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________ _________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________ _________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ ________ ________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __________ __________ __________ __________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ del error. del error. nes’ Notes nes’ Notes 2 2 era. era. ____ 3 ____ 3 _____ 3 _____ 3 _____ _____ 33 _____ _____ 55 _____ 6 _____ 6 _____ _____ 66 _____ _____ 77 _____ _____ 88 _____ _____ 88 _____ _____ 99 ____ ____ 1010 ____ ____ 1010 ____ ____ 1010 ____ ____ 1111 ____ ____ 1111 ____ 12 ____ 12 ____ ____ 1212 ____ ____ 1313 ____ ____ 1313 ____ ____ 1414 ____ ____ 1414 ___ 16 ___ 16 ____ 16 ____ 16 ____ 17 ____ 17 ____ ____ 1818 ____ ____ 1818 ___ 20 ___ 20 ___ 23 ___ 23 ___ 24 ___ 24 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Q Q U

U E E D D

A

A P P

R

R O O H H

I

I B B I I D D

A A * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * L L A A I I M M P P R R E E S S I

I O O N N

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * D D E

E E E

S S T T E E D D O O C C U U M M E E N N T T O O * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

(3)

Topic 2:

Teorías generales sobre aprendizaje y la adquisición de una lengua extranjera. El concepto de Interlengua. El tratamiento del error.

Iván Matellanes’ Notes

3

1. General perspecti ves on SLA

1.1. Linguis tics

There are two major linguistic theories that count for the Acq of the SL: 1.1.1. Structuralism

Bloomfield’s work language (1933) stated than:

- Lg consists of externally conditioned habits, so learning a Lg consists of the acquisition of a new set of habits.

- Habits are acquired through the formation of a paradigm of response conditioned to a particular stimulus and then generalized to other similar stimuli (behaviorism).

- Learning a SL means displacing one set of habits or linguistic structure & replacing it with a new one.

Bloomfield sees the child as acquiring a word separately in comprehension and production, and only later connecting the two. This view sees children as learning to imitate the speech of adults. Bloomfield claims that children do not ever invent words but have an imperfect exposure to the correct range of meanings. Bloomfield's theories are testable, however: we are able to observe infants with their mothers and determine whether or not children imitate adult words with their own similar utterances. Unfortunately, like many language acquisition researchers of his time, Bloomfield tends to concentrate on early word use and pronunciation, and

neglects the acquisition of grammar. He has no theory that explains how syntax is acquired, but he does emphasise (possibly too enthusiastically) the role of correction by the parent. E.g. A response to "Daddy bringed it" would be "NO! Daddy brought it!"

Lado’s work linguistics across cultures (1957) introduced a new line of research based on structural contrasts between Lgs. Similar linguistic structures imply learning facility due to transfer from one system to another, while differences imply learning difficulty due to contrast between two different habits. This was the origin of the Contrastive analysis. CA is a branch of applied Linguistics introduced in the 1930's which is concerned with

Structuralism

1. Lg is acq of a new set of habits 2. Habits acquired through conditioned responses to stimulus 3. Learning a SL is replacing a set of habits for new ones. Structuralism 1st Lg Acq a) Children acquire words separately in comprehension & prod. b) Children imitate Adult s eech.

Similar linguistic

structures imply learning facility due to transfer from one system to

another, while differences imply learning difficulty Lado’s contrastive analysis c) Children do not invent words * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Q

U E D A

P R O H I B I D A * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * L A I M P R E S I O N * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * D E E S T E D O C U M E N T O * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

(4)

Topic 2:

4 "producing inverted (i.e. contrastive, not comparative) two-valued typologies (a CA is always concerned with a pair of languages), and founded on the assumption that languages can be compared". CA theory claimed that "speakers tend to hear another language and attempt to produce utterances in it in terms of the structure of their own language, thus accounting for their accent 1 in L2,". In SLA-oriented CA, comparable features of L1 and L2 are identified and described, and mismatches are identified that are likely to lead to error on the part of the learner; CA is said to be able to predict and diagnose errors. This application is based on the concept of linguistic transfer, which is said to happen when knowledge about one language is applied (correctly or not) to another and intuitively would seem to explain why language learners make the mistakes they do.

The most serious arguments against CA were that its foundations were in

structuralism and behavioralism, which had begun to lose favour.

Furtheremore, CA was not an effective method for predicting errors that learners actually make. Briere (1966) reported on an experiment in which American students were played non-English sounds from Arabic, Vietnamese,

and French and asked to reproduce them. While there were some cases of clear L1 transfer, Briere found that in other cases the students approximated one non-English sound with another (/r/ for /fl/), which would not be predicted by CA. Furthermore, it was observed that some of the non-English sounds were easier than others for the American students to learn (Briere gives the example of a voiceless non-aspirated fortis dental stop as being easier than the dentalized version), a phenomenon for which CA does not provide an explanation

1_{where accent refers not only to phonological accent, but to all elements in the presentation of}

speech that mark the speaker as foreign (Ferguson, 1989, p.82)

There are some problems with CA Hypothesis:

1. Error s occur that are not due to L 1.

2. Errors don’t occur when they are

predicted.

3. Paradigm shift from behaviorist to

mentalist views in linguistics.

3.1. Errors in child language part of rule formation and not part of child’s linguistic environment. 3.2. Imitatio n and reinforcement/correcti on don’t seem to be important to Lg acquisition. CA theory claimed: Speakers tend to hear another Lg & attempt to produce utterances in it in terms of the structure of their own MT.

CA is said to be able to predict and diagnose errors based on the concept of linguistic transfer * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Q

U E D A

(5)

Topic 2:

5

1.1.2. Cognitivism

Chomsky’s syntactic Structures (1957) supported Lg creativity against behaviourist positions. He developed a transformational-generative grammar & introduced new concepts in Lg structure:

- The distinction between an infinite external behaviour (performance) and a finite internal set of rules (competence)2. Thanks to this innate set of rules, a human being can create an infinite number of sentences from a finite number of rules.

- The existence of a specific cognitive mechanism for Lg acquisition: the

Language Acquisition device (LAD). The LAD is an innate device, just dedicated to Lg acquisition and only human beings have such a device. The child’s mind is a black box whose internal workings cannot be inspected. Into it go the Lg data, out of it comes grammatical competence, Ss. The child LAD takes an input & produces output. If smthing is found in the output that cannot be derived from the input, it must have come from the LAD itself .

- The presence of rules that are shared by all Lgs & consist of a set of parameters. This set of parameters constitutes a model of Universal Grammar (UG).

Let us look more closely at how children Acq settings for Parameters.

- The parameters in the child’s mind can be thought of as on/off switches, each to be turned to suit the Lg that is heard. So, Acq the grammar of UK means setting all the UG parameters in the UK way.

- Children learn either from positive evidence3 & from indirect negative evidence4.

- Hearing a few sentences is enough to set the parameter one way or another.

2_{What speakers know (}_competence_{) against what speakers actually do on some particular}

occasions (performance)

3_{Occurrence of particular sentences in the speech children hear tells them which sort of Lg they}

are encountering.

4_{The fact that certain forms}_{do not occur}_{in the sentence the children hear may be enough to}

set a parameter.

Cognitivism

-Infinite external behaviour (performance) and a finite set of rules (competence)

-Specific cognitive mechanism for Lg Acquisition: LA D. Genetically conditioned: innate Species conditioned: Human beings

- Rules that are shared by all Lgs & consist of a set of parameters: Universal grammar .

a) parameters in the child’s mind can be thought of as on/off switches, each to be turned to suit the Lg that is heard.

b) Children learn either from both:

Positive evidence: What the children actually hear Indirect negative evidence: What children do no t hear. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Q

U E D A

(6)

Topic 2:

6 We can distinguish 3 logical possibilities for parameters:

1. The switch is in a neutral position; F. ex.: the child is equally prepared for pro-drop5 or non-pro-drop.

2. The switch is set in one direction; F.ex.: The switch is set to non-pro-drop.

3. The switch is set in the contrary direction; F.ex.: The switch is set to pro-drop, the reverse position.

The discussion of Acq is no longer concerned with what happens in one Lg; The interest lies in finding how the child’s UG can cope equally well with diff Lgs.

1.2. Sociolinguistics:

Language is one of the most powerful emblems of social behaviour. In the normal transfer of information through language, we use language to send

vital social messages about who we are, where we come from, and who we associate with. It is often shocking to realize how extensively we may judge a person's background, character, and intentions based simply upon the person's language, dialect, or, in some instances, even the choice of a single word. Given the social role of language, it stands to reason that one strand of language study should concentrate on the role of language in society. Sociolinguistics has become an increasingly important and popular field of study, as certain cultures around the world expand their communication base and intergroup and interpersonal relations take on escalating significance. Three approaches to Sociolinguistics must be considered here:

1.2.1. The Labov ian paradigm

William Labov has been more influential than any other researcher in establishing the notion that Lg varies systematically in accordance with social characteristics of the speaker. Labov’s theories are based on five axioms:

5_{Pro-drop: In some Lgs, the subject (small-pro) can be omitted. English, for example, is a}

non-pro-drop Lg, because the subject must be present always in a sentence.

c) 3 logical possibilities for parameters settings:

Neutral position

One direction

Contrary direction

Sociolinguistics

We use Lg to send vital social messages about who we are, where we come from, and who we associate with. William Labov * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Q

U E D A

(7)

Topic 2:

7 1. Style shifting: Speakers are able to shift their style in order to

converge or diverge with their interlocutors.

2. Attention to style shifting is necessary to achieve the goals of convergence or divergence. Otherwise …

3. The vernacular (default style) is the style a speaker turns to when

s/he is not paying attention to style shifting.

4. Formality is a determinant factor in style shifting. The more formal a conversation is, the more the speakers try to converge in style.

5. A good amount of data is necessary in order to establish relevant

style shifting.

As a poststructuralist approach Labov's approach demonstrates a new way of doing research on language: the combination of structural elements with sociological features, but ignoring the statics of structuralism. His way to describe language change is independent of the variable of time; it refers to simultaneously existing differences in one language and searches for reasons why one speaker uses a certain variety.

L. Dickerson extended Labov’s claims for L1 to the L2 situation. She claimed that:

- There are NO single style speakers.

- The dimension of attention operates whether the Lg is native or non-native.

- The style where there is the least amount of attention to speech is the vernacular. When attention is focused on speech, we get the

superordinate style. The vernacular is the more regular & systematic, the superordinate is the least regular and systematic.

1.2.2. Speech acco mmo dation t heory (SAT).

SAT explains motivations underlying shifts in people's speech styles during social encounters (e.g., convergence 6 vs. divergenc e7), and some of the social consequences arising from them. One of the first theoretical discussions of the relevance of SAT to SLA was offered by Beebe

6_{Speakers adjust their speech to accommodate it to the speech of the interlocutor(s)} 7_{Speakers adjust their speech to become less similar to the speech of the interlocutor(s)}

a) Style shifting in order to converge or diverge with their interlocutors

b) Att ent io n to style shifting is necessary

c) vernacular is the style a speaker turns to when s/he is not paying attention d) Formality is a determinant factor in style shifting e) good amount of data is necessary to shift style

Extended Labov claims: - No single style speakers. - Dimension of attention works in non-native Lgs. - Vernacular vs. superordinate style. Speech accommodation theory:

SAT explains motivations underlying shifts in people's speech styles during social encounters (convergence vs.

divergence), and some of the social consequences arising from them

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Q

U E D A

(8)

Topic 2:

8 and Giles (1984). They discuss learning as occurring when the learner converges toward the NS’s speech in order to achieve certain communicative effects or gain social approval from the NS. These concepts of SAT have been adopted in a few interlanguage pragmatics studies.

Accommodative shifts toward L2 norms of speaking, however, are not always considered desirable by the learner, especially when it comes to pragmatic behaviour that reflects their beliefs about who they are. In this respect, Giles and Byrne’s (1982) Intergroup Theory (IT) of SAT offers a useful framework for understanding how such factors facilitate or impede NS proficiency in an L2. According to IT, a learner who perceives using an L2 as a betray to his/her ethnic identity is not likely to achieve NS proficiency of the TL. On the other hand, a learner who regards L2 learning as additive and who has integrative motivation and positive attitudes towards the outgroup culture is more likely to achieve NS proficiency

not only in vocabulary and grammar but also in sociolinguistic mastery of the L2. Therefore, maximal convergenc e, Giles’ (1979) term, is not achieved in many cases of adult pragmatic acquisition because adults tend to have two competing socio-psychological needs: the need to become proficient in the L2 versus the need to mark their own ethnic identity by preserving some of the L1 privilege features. Consequently, most adult learners develop a unique intercultural system to resolve this conflict.

1.2.3. Motivati on.

1.2.3.1. Definit ion of Mot ivatio n

Gardner defined motivation in his social-psychological model as “the combination of effort plus desire to achieve the goal of learning the language plus favourable attitude toward learning the language”. It is an inner state or condition that power up behaviour and gives it direction, a desire that energizes and directs goal-oriented behaviour, an influence of needs and desires on the intensity and direction of behaviour, and the arousal, direction, and persistence of behaviour. But it also concerns the reasons or

Intergroup theory (IT): learner who perceives using an L2 as a betray to his/her ethnic identity is not likely to achieve NS proficiency of the TL

On the contrary, learner who has integrative motivation and positive attitudes towards the outgroup culture is more likely to achieve NS

proficiency

Maximal convergence is not achieved because of two competing socio-psychological needs: Become proficient in the L2 Their own ethnic identity Motivation: Combination of effort plus desire plus favourable attitude toward learning the language * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Q

U E D A

(9)

Topic 2:

9 goals that underlie their involvement in academic activities. Although students may be equally motivated, the source of their motivation may be different.

1.2.3.2. Intrin sic and Extri nsic Moti vation

In general, motivation can be considered as either intrinsic (behavioural, needs) or extrinsic (cognitive and humanistic, reinforcement). Intrinsic motivation is generally possessed by people having personal interest(s) in doing something and helping to set their goals. People are intrinsically motivated not because accomplishing the activity they do brings a reward, but because doing the activity itself is a reward. Mark Lepper notes that a student with intrinsic motivation participates in his/her learning “for its own sake, for the enjoyment it provides, the learning it permits, or the feelings of accomplishment it evokes.” The feelings of competence and self-determination are significant factors of intrinsic motivation.

Extrinsic motivation, on the other hand, derives from an

anticipation of rewards such as praise, awards, prizes, and evaluation, and fear for punishment. An extrinsically motivated student do the activity “in order to obtain some reward or avoid some punishment external to the activity itself”, and this kind of motivation “refers to learning situations where the reason for doing a task is something other than an interest in the task (or broader learning endeavour) itself . In addition, undertaking the task may be something the person feels pressured to do rather than genuinely wants to do”. There are some negative aspects of extrinsic motivation. Deci and Ryan state that learners will lose motivation and reason to do something when rewards are no longer available, and that giving external rewards to them previously with intrinsic motivation can harm the good effect of it. However, researches show that extrinsic motivation is effective for those with no motivation, and when it is a positive feedback.

Comparing these two types of motivation in a classroom, it becomes clear that intrinsic motivation produces more potential benefits than does the extrinsic. Intrinsically motivated students tend to try harder and think more deeply. It is also found by researchers that they tend to prefer Comprehensible input (i+1 ) when others tend to choose easier tasks.

- Intrinsic motivation: Personal interest(s) in doing something - Extrinsic motivation: Derives from an anticipation of external rewards

Learners will probably lose motivation when rewards are no longer available

- Extrinsic mot ivation: Derives from an anticipation of external rewards * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Q

U E D A

(10)

Topic 2:

10 1.2.3.3. Motivation in SLA

The most dominant work in SLA studies of motivation has been done by Gardner and his associates. In his socio-cultural approach, attitudes play an important role. He stated that “motivation to learn a second language is influenced by group related and context related attitudes, integrativeness and attitudes toward the learning situation respectively”. A person who has positive attitudes to the target culture and people is thus considered well-motivated. In general, Gardner’s model of integrative/instrumental motivation precisely describes the particular features of motivation in SLA.

1.2.3.4. Integrative Motivation.

Gardner’s idea was developed from Mower’s idea that to be like a valued person is important in individual development. Gardner and Lambent described the motivation as wanting to be respected and identified in a foreign setting, to be like the foreign people, to understand the culture and participate in it, and called this concept “integrative motivation”.

Integrative motivation is basically a motivation to be a member of a target society in a foreign setting but it also includes a motivation coming from just an interest or a favourable feeling to a target culture or people. McDonough noted that there are two types of integrative motivation; “assimilative motivation”, strong motivation to “belong” to the target group, and “affiliative motivation”, weak motivation and a desire for wider social contact with target language speakers. Dickinson notes that Learners who are integratively motivated seems to have a strong intrinsic motivation to learn a language.

1.2.3.5. Instrum ental Moti vation

Gardner and Lambert described “instrumental motivation” as a

motivation to acquire some advantages by learning a second language. A learner with instrumental motivation regards language as an instrument to get a reward. Though “instrumental motivation” also influences second language learning, to the extent that an instrumental motive is tied to a specific goal, its influence tends to be maintained only until that goal is

Motivation in SLA Integrative motivation is basically a motivation to be a member of a target society. Integrative motivation is basically a motivation to be a member of a target society. Assimilative motivation. Affiliative motivation Instrumental motivation: Motivation to acquire some advantages by learning a SL. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Q

U E D A