Krashen argues that acquisition will take place stutomatically if earners. The beginning-langoage eacher provides coment via sual aids pictures and objects and discussion of falar cop ies.
Moreover, no all comprehended input reaches the LAD. What counter arguments can you think of? TESOL IF removal from the input oF sre tures and fecal ents the earner ds no understand is what involved in making spovch comprehensible, how lacs the learner ever advan? One way 38 Kashen, Hatch and bers have argu. Snfimarion and comprehension checks and clacaion weaves Feo pices of ever suggest tha his thin way of mak inginpatcompecensible the most mpnant ad os whe ted of all.
Ineractional modifications in other words, ae pervasive, Seconds interactional mic tion refund in NS-NNS conversation even he np ma ications are ot or are few and minor Why does Long claim that simplified input of the kind found lu foreigner tall dics mot assist acqusition? What evidence does hoe gine tr suppart this cain? Can you thik of any Can yore comsteuct a bref example af NS-NNS tellastrate bow the meractionlstrnctive of 2 fs mule nsing one of the devices or exam, cantons tion checks that Long mets?
Oxford Universiey Press s, pages Whereas Krashen sees no role for speaking in 1. In other words, under some iecumstanees, the activity of producing the target language may prompt second language learners to consciously tecogige seme Df their linguistic problems; it may bring tw their attention something they need to discover abwut their L2 Swain roy This may trigger engninive processes which mighe generate fn rustic knowledge thae is new for learners, or which comvalidice Their existing knowledge Swain and Lapki yuh A second way in which produ lang ge may serve the te learning process is through hypothesms testing, That fe acing output is one way of testing aby pothesis about com ei formedness.
Lantolf and G. Appel eds. His research draws on Vygotsky's ideas about the role of inteypersonal interaction in learning sce page 48 in the Survey. Each student appsars to control only a apocific aspect fof the desired construction, Speaker 1, for extmple, prod.
Newbury House , pages Kellerman considers tw» constraints on language transfer. Farlier 1 suggested that any occurrence of linguistic equivalence between 11 and 12, whieh thus provides the potential for trans fer berween 1. This text discusses differnt usta relating to the role of comscinnsness in 12 acpnton ne of dhe mare controversial ies in app Bere assng On the onc han there are many ho bce Prat raditional form of this views no cursent theary posits the Soma lg kag.
Which position is compatible with a Vygotskian theory of L2 acquisition? Which positon: ddo you shink Swain adopts? Hos might these ten types of transfer be distinguished? Thar isto sa, there is prohably not just one sensitive period for SLA, hut several fone for phonology, one for moepho-yntsx, and. UG is a claim abour knowledge in a particular domain, a claim that out knowledge of language is constrained by certain abstract but crucial principles. Therefore, the potential availahlity of UG in 12 acquisition mase be investigated within this same dornsin.
If UG is no longer available to adults, and second language acai sition proceeds by means of general coitive abilities, L2 ler ets shoud not be ale w work aut abstract properties of the 12 whidh are underdetermined hy the anpur Jata. Where the inpur is insulfciently precise co allow 12 learners to indave "he eelevant properties of che grammar, they should ot be able to achieve full success. Thus, one form of evidence for the hypothesis that UG operates mt L2 acquisition will be evidence that L2 learners in fact attain the kind of complex snd subele knowledge which is atibutable to UG, However, LI knowledge isa confounding fctor.
I a partic ular principle of UG operates im both the Ll and 12, and if 2 learners show evidence of observing this principle, this could be aetibted to transfer of LT knosvledg.
Can yon give examples? Why are these not suficient t demonstrate the nonexistence of UG L2 acquisition? Falwaed Ard , poe 97 Skehan argues that different types uf agage apttede may be ineulved i different types of laegnage process.
Edgar Rodriguez. Parcel Unik. Oki Nafian. Vanessa Arellano. Anneleen Malesevic. Siti Meisaroh. Marius Sorin. Lorena Cartagena Montelongo. Mihai Ant. Cal Varium. El Eme. Estudios Interculturales. Daina Karo. Wayra BA. More From Gilberto Maldonado. Gilberto Maldonado.
Marianella Morante Avila. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics R. Hudson - Sociolinguistics-Cambridge University Press Rupsi Kumar. Jessa Mae Mangubat. Daark Staar. Teresa Zohrob. Lorena Valderrama. Popular in Second Language Acquisition. Ana C. Neves - Portuguese as an Additional Language. Maxwell Miranda. Paulo Do Vale. Maria Helena. Niar Gusrianti Usman. That is, learners use their knowledge of the L2 differently in different situations.
For example, when learners are under pressure to communicate instantly, they will not have time to maximize their existing knowledge and are likely to produce errors that would not occur in situations when they have the opportunity to monitor their output more carefully. Language- learner language also varies according to the linguistic context. That is, learners produce errors in one type of sentence but not in another. For example, errors in the third person singular of the English Present Simple Tense may not occur in sentences consisting of a single clause e.
A full account of contextual variability needs to consider both types. The notion of a 'natural' route of development and the notion of contextual variation need to be reconciled. If learners vary in their use of a L2, in what sense is it possible to talk about a general developmental route? How can there be an invariaqle route if language-learner language is inherently variable?
In many respects this is the single most important issue in SLA research. It is considered in Chapter 4. Individual learner differences Variability in language-learner language is the result not only of contextual factors. It also occurs because of individual differences in the way learners learn a L2 and the way they use their L2 knowledge. It is probably accurate to say that no two learners learn a L2 in exactly the same way. The learner factors that can influence the course of development are potentially infinite and very difficult to classify in a reliable manner.
SLA research has examined five general factors that contribute to individual learner differences in some depth. These are age, aptitude, cognitive style, motivation, and personality. A question that has aroused considerable interest is whether adults learn a L2 in the same way as children.
A common-sense approach to this issue suggests that adult and child SLA are not the same. Adults have a greater memory capacity and are also able to focus more easily on the purely formal features of a language.
The comparison of child and adult SLA needs to be undertaken in two parts. First it needs to be shown whether the learning route differs. Is there a 'natural' route for adults and a different one for children? The commonly held view that children are more successful learners than adults may not be substantiated by empirical research.
Finally, it is possible that no significant differences exist in either route or rate. Aptitude is to be contrasted with intelligence. The latter refers to the general ability that governs how well we master a whole range of skills, linguistic and non-linguistic. Aptitude refers to the special ability involved in language learning. The effects of aptitude have been measured in terms of proficiency scores achieved by classroom learners. A number of studies e. Learner motivation and needs have always had a central place in theories of SLA.
Learners who are interested in the social and cultural customs of native speakers of the language they are learning are likely to be successful.
Similarly when learners have a strong instrumental need to learn a L2 e. Conversely, learners with little interest in the way of life of native speakers of the L2 or with low instrumental motivation can be expected to learn slowly and to stop learning some way short of native speaker competence.
The role of motivation has been extensively examined in the work of Gardner and Lambert in the context of bilingual education in Canada and elsewhere. A full explanation of the role played by motivation and needs requires an account of how these affect the process of learning. Such an explanation has been provided by Dulay and Burt They propose that the learner has a 'socioaffective filter' which governs how much of the input gets through to the language processing mechanisms.
As a result of conscious or unconscious motives or needs, attitudes or emotional states, the learner is 'open' or 'closed' to the L2. This results in what Selinker has called fossilization.. What kind of personality is most successful in '. Are extroverts more successful than introverts because they are prepared to take more risks and try to get more exposure to the L2?
What role does inhibition play in SLA? There are few clear answers. Similarly research has not been able to show that cognitive style 'the way we learn things in general and the particular attack we make on a problem'-Brown a: 89 affects learning in any definite way.
One of the major problems of investigating both personality and cognitive style is the lack of testing instruments that can reliably measure different types. Chapter 5 considers individual learning approaches and also the role of age, aptitude, cognitive style, motivation, and personality. The role of the input It is self-evident that SLA can take place only when the learner has access to L2 input.
This input may be in the form of exposure in natural settings or formal instruction. It may be spoken or written. A central issue in SLA is what role the input plays. Early theories of SLA, based on the notion of habit formation through practice and reinforcement, emphasized the importance of the input.
The whole process of learning could be controlled by presenting the L2 in the right-sized doses and ensuring that the learner continued to practise until each feature was 'overlearned' i. Learning a L2 was like any other kind of learning. It consisted of building up chains of stimulus-response links which could be controlled and shaped by reinforcement. In this Behaviourist view of learning there was little room for any active processing by the learner.
Language learning-first or second-was an external not an internal phenomenon. In the. This could best be explained by hypothesizing a set of mental processes inside the learner's mind which were responsible for working on the input and converting it into a form that the learner could store and handle in production. Chomsky's mentalist view of language learning emphasized what he called the learner's 'language acquisition device' and played down the role of the linguistic environment.
Input served merely as a trigger to activate the device. A major issue in SLA, therefore, is whether the input shapes and controls learning or is just a trigger. Currently, there is considerable interest in the input, which is directed both at discovering how native speakers talk to L2 learners and what part is played in SLA by the way they talk.
The research is beginning to show that mere exposure to the L2 is not enough. Learners appear to need L2 data that are specially suited to whatever stage of development they are at. There is somewhat less agreement, however, about precisely what constitutes an optimal input. Learner processes Learners need to sift the input they receive and relate it to their existing knowledge.
How do they do this? There are two possible explanations. They may use general cognitive strategies which are part of their procedural knowledge and which are used in other forms of learning.
These strategies are often referred to as learner strategies. Alternatively they may possess a special linguistic faculty that enables them to operate on the input data in order to discover the L2 rules in maximally efficient ways.
This linguistic faculty is referred to as Universal Grammar. Tarone distinguishes three sets of learner strategies. There are learning strategies. These are the means by which the learner processes the L2 input in order to develop linguistic knowledge. Learning strategies can be conscious and behavioural e. The second type consists of production strategies. These involve learners' attempts to use the L2 knowledge they have already acquired efficiently, clearly, and with minimum effort.
Examples are the rehearsal of what should be said and discourse planning, working out a way of structuring a series of utterances. The third type is communication strategies.
Like production strategies, these are strategies of use rather than of learning, although they can contribute indirectly to learning by helping the learner to obtain more input. Communication strategies consist of learners' attempts to communicate meanings for which they lack the requisite linguistic knowledge. Learners, particularly in natural settings, constantly need to express ideas which are beyond their linguistic resources.
They can either give up and so avoid the problem, or try to find some way around it. Typical communication strategies are requests for assistance e. The investigation of learner strategies has a central place in SLA. The current reconsideration of the importance of the linguistic environment has not meant a return to Behaviourist views. Rather, it emphasizes the relationship between the input and internal processing in order to. An optimal input is one that learners can handle by means of learning strategies.
Learners adjust the strategies they use to suit the type of input they are getting. Learners can also attempt to control the type of input they are exposed to through the use of production and communication strategies. Input, learner strategies, and output are all interrelated in a highly complex manner. Learner strategies cannot be observed directly. They can only be inferred from language-learner behaviour. Inevitably the literature on learner strategies is speculative and rather theoretical.
It is a bit like trying to work out the classification system of a library when the only evidence to go on consists of the few books you have been allowed to take out.
Early studies of learner strategies were based on Error Analysis. The data were isolated learner utterances. Later research recognized the importance of using continuous stretches of discourse in order to identify how the learner negotiates meaning in collaboration with his or her interlocutor.
In this way the interrelationship between input, internal processing, and output can be more clearly witnessed. It has already been noted that Chomsky's view of language learning is mentalist; that is, he emphasizes the contribution of the learner, rather than that of the environment.
Chomsky is also specific about the nature of the learner's contribution. Although he does not rule out the possibility that the language processing of the young child may ultimately be explained in terms of general cognitive development, he believes that it can be best explained in terms of an independent language faculty. That is, Chomsky claims that language acquisition is primarily the result of mental mechanisms that are specifically linguistic. What does this linguistic faculty consist of?
Chomsky describes it as a 'language acquisition device' that contains a knowledge of linguistic universals. These are innate and provide the child with a starting point for acquiring the grammar of the language he or she is exposed to. Chomsky believes that natural languages are governed by highly abstract and complex rules that are not immediately evident in actual utterances or, as Chomsky calls it, 'surface structure'.
If the child were totally reliant on the data available in the input, he would not be able to acquire these rules. Therefore, the child must possess a set of innate principles which guide language processing. These principles comprise Universal Grammar-the linguistic features and processes which are common to all natural languages and all language learners. Chomsky's 'language acquisition device' operates in Ll acquisition. However, the idea' that there is an independent linguistic faculty which determines SLA is tenable.
Recently it has been explored as the Universal Hypothesis. This is based on the notion of 'core' rules that are to be found in all natural languages. The Universal Hypothesis states that L2 learners find it easier to learn 'core' rules than language-specific rules. It has also been suggested that the effects of Ll transfer may be restricted to non-core features. That is, if learners discover that a L2 rule is not in agreement with a universal rule, they will seek to interpret that rule in terms of the equivalent rule in their Ll.
Learner strategies are examined in Chapter 7. The role of formal instruction From the teacher's point of view, the role that formal instruction plays in SLA is of central importance. It has been left to the end because it is an issue that is related to many of the issues discussed in the previous sections.
It must be considered in two parts - the effect that instruction has on the route of learning and the effect that it has on rate of learning. There has been little direct study of either of these aspects, largely because of the pedagogic assumption that it is possible to determine both route and rate through teaching. Earlier it has been pointed out that learners may pass through a relatively invariable route in acquiring linguistic competence in a L2.
This may be the result of the operation of universal learning strategies which are part of the human faculty for language. Alternatively it may be the result of exposure to particular kinds of input which models at different stages of development just those features which the learner is ready to acquire. If SLA is the result of some kind of 'language acquisition device', which is triggered off only by the linguistic environment, then the learner must be credited with his or her own 'syllabus' which is more or less immune to influence from the outside.
If, however, SLA is the result of attending to those features that are frequent and salient in the input, then the possibility arises that there is more than one 'syllabus' for SLA and that a specially constructed input, such as that provided by formal instruction, can influence the order in which the grammar of a L2 is acquired.
The few studies of the effects of formal instruction on the develop- mental route suggest that the 'natural' route cannot be changed. These are not conclusive, however. Formal instruction can take many different forms and it is possible that the route of development is amenable to influence by certain methods but not by others. The research undertaken so far may not have investigated the right methods in the right conditions. It is also possible that the 'natural' route reflects a particular type of language use-free, spontaneous conversation-and will be found whenever this is investigated.
Such a view is in accordance with what is known about contextual variability in SLA. Formal instruction may help learners to perform in some types of situation but not in others. Irrespective of whether formal instruction affects the order of learning, it may enhance SLA by accelerating the whole process. Learners who receive formal instruction may learn more rapidly than those who do not.
The experience of countless classroom learners testifies to this. Even if the L2 knowledge derived from formal instruction is not immediately available for use in spontaneous conversation a common enough experience , it soon becomes serviceable once the learner has the opportunity to use the L2 in this kind of communication.
Formal instruction can have a powerful delayed effect. There is also some research that suggests that formal instruction speeds up SLA. The role of instruction in SLA, a controversial area subject to much speculation, is considered in Chapter 9.
This serves to draw together the various components considered in the discussion of the key areas. The framework posits a number of interrelated factors.
These are: 1 Situational factors 2 Input 3 Learner differences 4 Learner processes 5 Linguistic output. Each of these factors is considered briefly below, together with some ideas on how they interrelate. The situation and the input together constitute the linguistic environment in which learning takes place.
Two major types of acquisition can be identified in respect of environmental factors-naturalistic SLA and classroom SLA. A key issue is the extent to which the process of SLA is similar or different in the two environments. Key issues Within each general situational type a host of 'micro' situations can be identified, according to who the interlocutors are, the context of interaction e.
The linguistic product is likely to vary situationally. Does it merely activate the learning process or does it structure it? There is now considerable research to show that native-speakers adapt their speech to suit the level of the L2 learners they are talking to. Another important issue, then, is what part these adaptations play in facilitating learning.
The key ones are age, aptitude and intelligence, motivation and needs, personality and cognitive style. Another type of difference lies in the learner's Ll. The role that the L1 plays in SLA was a dominant issue in much of the research that took place in the late s and early s.
It was motivated by the need to submit the Contrastive Analysis hypothesis to an empirical test. Cognitive learner processes can be divided into three categories - learning strategies are used to internalize new L2 knowledge; production strategies are the means by which the learner utilizes his or her existing L2 knowledge; and communication strategies are employed when there is a hiatus caused by the need to communicate a message for which the learner lacks L2 resources.
These strategies are general in nature and mediate between the linguistic input and the language the learner produces. Linguistic processes involve universal principles of grammar with which the learner is innately endowed. They provide the learner with a starting point.
The task is then to scan the input to discover which rules of the target language are universal and which are specific.
The learner uses his or her knowledge of the L2 in predictable ways, but not in the same way in every context. The linguistic output is developmental. It changes as the learner gains more experience of the language.
That is, that all learners pass along a more or less invariable route. The linguistic output is the main source of information about how a learner acquires a L2. In particular the errors that learners make give clues concerning the strategies they employ to handle the joint tasks of learning and using a L2.
In order to account for the complexity of SLA, it is necessary to consider all the factors discussed above. For the sake of convenience the issues reflected in the overall framework will be treated separately in the chapters that follow. They are all interrelated, however. A theory of SLA is an attempt to show how input, internal processing, and linguistic output are related.
Chapter 10 examines a number of different theories of SLA and concludes with a series of hypotheses about the five factors that comprise the overall framework. Further reading Most of the published work on second language acquisition is addressed to highly specific issues, or alternatively it projects a particular view of the process of acquisition.
There are few overviews written from an objective standpoint. A good starting point is an article by J. Richards and G. The authors examine seven basic questions about SLA, which cover much of the same ground as this chapter.
Another helpful overview article is 'Second language learning: a psycholinguistic perspective', by V. Cook considers how the learner develops a knowledge of a L2, and then examines the contribution of learner and situational factors. A rather different overview is presented by H.
Brown places SLA in a wider context by examining what language is and the different schools of linguistics, psychology, and education which have influenced SLA enquiry. This would be useful for readers who approach SLA without a background in these other areas. Introduction It is a popular belief that second language acquisition SLA is strongly influenced by the learner's first language Ll. The clearest support for this belief comes from 'foreign' accents in the second language L2 speech of learners.
When a Frenchman speaks English, his English sounds French. The learner's Ll also affects the other language levels - vocabulary and grammar. This is perhaps less immediately evident, but most language learners and teachers would testify to it. It is also a popular belief that the role of the Ll in SLA is a negative one. That is, the Ll gets in the way or interferes with the learning of the L2, such that features of the Ll are transferred into the L2.
In fact, the process of SLA is often characterized in popular opinion as that of overcoming the effects of Ll, of slowly replacing the features of the Ll that intrude into the L2 with those of the target language and so of approximating ever closer to native-speaker speech. Corder a has referred to this view of SLA as a 'restructuring process'. It is a view that is based on a theory of general learning, as will be explained in the next section. If in popular opinion the Ll interferes with the acquisition of the new language system, how does SLA research characterize the role of the mother tongue?
The research literature reveals considerable disagree- ment about how pervasive the Ll is in SLA. On the one hand the popular belief is given support: Taking a psychological point of view, we can say that there is never peaceful co-existence between two language systems in the learner, but rather constant warfare, and that warfare is not limited to the moment of cognition, but continues during the period of storing newly learnt ideas in memory. Marton On the other hand, the popular belief is rejected and the role of the Ll, if not denied totally, is at least minimized In order to understand why there is such disparity regarding the role of the Ll, it is necessary to examine the evolution of 'the notion of interference' that Felix talks about.
This will involve tracing its origins in behaviourist learning theory, its development in terms of the Contrastive Analysis hypothesis, and the theoretical and empirical attack on this hypothesis which followed. This chapter will follow these developments, reflecting the historical shifts of direction that have taken place over the last thirty years or so.
It will conclude with an account of the current reappraisal of 'interference', which once again seeks to allocate an important role in the Ll in SLA.
Current developments will be considered further in Chapter 8. Behaviourist learning theory In order to understand the early importance that was attached to the role of the first language, it is necessary to understand the main tenets of behaviourist learning theory. Up to the end of the s, views of language learning were derived from a theory of learning in general. There were few studies of SLA based on the actual language that learners produced, and few attempts to examine the process of SLA empirically before this.
The dominant school in psychology, which informed most discussions of language learning, was behaviourism. Two key notions can be identified in these discussions: 'habits' and 'errors'. Habits Behaviourist psychology set out to explain behaviour by observing the responses that took place when particular stimuli were present. Different stimuli produced different responses from a learner.
These responses could be haphazard in the sense that they could not be predicted , or they could be regular. The association of a particular response with a particular stimulus constituted a habit, and it was this type of regular behaviour that psychologists such as Watson or Skinner set out to investigate.
They wanted to know how habits were established. Behaviourist psychologists attributed two important characteristics to habits. The first was that they were observable. As Watson argued, the true basis for psychological enquiry existed only in objects that could be touched and actions that could be observed. Watson denied the existence of internal mental processes, dismissing them as 'superstition' and 'magic'. The second noteworthy characteristic was that habits were automatic.
That is, they were performed spontaneously without awareness and were difficult to eradicate unless environmental changes led to the extinction of the stimuli upon which they were built. The role of the -first language A habit was formed when a particular stimulus became regularly linked with a particular response. There were various theories about how this association could take place.
In the classical behaviourism of Watson, the stimulus was said to 'elicit' the response. That is, the presence of the stimulus called forth a response. If the stimulus occurred sufficiently frequently, the response became practised and therefore automatic. In the neo-behaviourism of Skinner a rather different account of how habits developed can be found. Skinner played down the importance of the stimulus, on the grounds that it was not always possible to state what stimulus was responsible for a particular response.
Instead he emphasized the consequences of the response. He argued that it was the behaviour that followed a response which reinforced it and thus helped to strengthen the association. The learning of a habit, then, could occur through imitation i. Theories of habit formation were theories of learning in general. They could be and were applied to language learning. In L1 acquisition children were said to master their mother tongue by imitating utterances produced by adults and having their efforts at using language either rewarded or corrected.
In this way children were supposed to build up a knowledge of the patterns or habits that constituted the language they were trying to learn. It was also believed that SLA could proceed in a similar way. Imitation and reinforcement were the means by which the learner identified the stimulus-response associations that constituted the habits of the L2. Language learning, first and second, was most successful when the task was broken down into a number of stimulus-response links, which could be systematically practised and mastered one at a time.
Irrespective of whether the type of learning behaviour described by psychologists working within the frameworks provided by Watson and Skinner actually occurred, habit-formation theory dominated discussion of both first and second language acquisition up to the s. One of its major attractions was that it provided a theoretical account of how the learner's Ll intruded into the process of SLA.
In other words, in addition to offering a general picture of SLA as habit-formation, it also explained why the L2 learner made errors. Errors According to behaviourist learning theory, old habits get in the way of learning new habits.
The notion of interference has a central place in behaviourist accounts of SLA. Interference was the result of what was called proactive inhibition. This is concerned with the way in which previous learning prevents or inhibits the learning of new habits. In SLA it works as follows. Where the first and second language share a meaning but express it in different ways, an error is likely to arise in the L2 because the learner will transfer the realization device from his first language into the second.
Learning a L2 involves developing new habits wherever the stimulus-response links of the L2 differ from those of the LL In order to develop these new habits, the learner has to overcome proactive inhibition. Of course, not all the patterns or habits of the Ll are different from those of the L2. It is quite possible that the means for expressing a shared meaning are the same in the first and second language.
For example, the idea of being cold, which is a shared meaning between English and German, is also expressed using identical formal devices - 'Ich bin kalt' is analogous with 'I am cold'. In cases such as this it is possible to transfer the means used to realize a given meaning in the Ll into the L2.
When this is possible, the only learning that has to take place is the discovery that the realization devices are the same in the two languages. The learner does not need to overcome proactive inhibition by mastering a different realization device. Behaviourist learning theory predicts that transfer will take place from the first to the second language. Trans fer will be negative when there is proactive inhibition. In this case errors will result. Transfer will be positive when the first and second language habits are the same.
In this case no errors will occur. Thus differences between the first and second language create learning difficulty which results in errors, while the similarities between the first and second language facilitate rapid and easy learning. In behaviourist accounts of SLA, errors were considered undesirable. They were evidence of non-learning, of the failure to overcome proactive inhibition. Some language teaching theorists even suggested that there was a danger of errors becoming habits in their own right if they were tolerated.
Brooks , for instance, wrote: 'Like sin, error is to be avoided and its influence overcome.. However, as errors were the result of the negative transfer of first language habits i. Errors, according to behaviourist theory, were the result of non-learning, rather than wrong learning.
To this end attempts were made to predict when they would occur. By comparing the learner's native language with the target language, differences could be identified and used to predict areas of potential error. In this way classroom practice could be directed on the problem areas in order to help the learner overcome the negative effects of first language transfer.
Having examined the main principles of behaviourist learning theory as it was applied to SLA, it is time to consider the means that were used to predict potential errors. These were contained in the procedure known as Contrastive Analysis. Contrastive Analysis Contrastive Analysis was rooted in the practical need to teach a L2 in the most efficient way possible. As Lado , one of the prime movers of Contrastive Analysis, makes clear, 'The teacher who has made a comparison of the foreign language with the native language of the students will know better what the real problems are and can provide for teaching them'.
The origins of Contrastive Analysis, therefore, were pedagogic. This was reflected in comparisons of several pairs of languages by scholars in the United States, all directed at establishing the areas of learning difficulty that were likely to be experienced by English speakers learning other languages. In addition to these pedagogically oriented studies, there have been a number of more theoretical contrastive studies carried out in Europe, some of which have not been concerned with SLA at all.
Clearly Contrastive Analysis is an area of considerable theoretical interest for general linguistics, but I shall concern myself only with those studies that are concerned with SLA. Contrastive Analysis had both a psychological aspect and a linguistic aspect.
The psychological aspect was based on behaviourist learning theory, and the linguistic aspect, in the first place at least, on structuralist linguistics. The psychological aspect of Contrastive Analysis The psychological rationale takes the form of the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis. Author : Lyle F. Author : Jack C. These are then examined in terms of second language acquisition. Author : William C.
0コメント