allchapter.docx

Chapter 1: Introducing Second Language Acquisition Key words: second language acquisition (SLA), Second language (L2), target language, informal L2 learning, formal L2 learning, linguistic competence, linguistic performance, first language, native language, mother tongue, primary language, simultane...

Chapter 1: Introducing Second Language Acquisition Key words: second language acquisition (SLA), Second language (L2), target language, informal L2 learning, formal L2 learning, linguistic competence, linguistic performance, first language, native language, mother tongue, primary language, simultaneous multilingualism, sequential multilingualism. Three basic questions to answer and explore: What is Second Language Acquisition (SLA)? What does the scope of SLA cover? any phenomena involved in learning an L2 Second Language Acquisition (SLA) refers both to the study of individuals and groups who are learning a language after learning their first one as young children, and to the process of learning that language. Second Language (L2): The additional language one acquires is called a second language (L2), even though it may actually be the third, fourth, or tenth to be acquired. It is also commonly called a target language (TL), which refers to any language that is the aim or goal of learning. Informal L2 learning vs. Formal L2 learning: The scope of SLA includes informal L2 learning that takes place in naturalistic contexts, formal L2 learning that takes place in classrooms, and L2 learning that involves a mixture of these settings and circumstances Acquire vs. learn When you were still a very young child, you began acquiring at least one language (L1). Without thinking much about it (i.e., unconscious/very little awareness). Learning is through school and is a mixture of formal and informal settings, whereas acquiring is more natural and informal. Example: Informal: a newly born child from Japan is brought to the USA/an adult immigrant. Read more on page (2) Formal: high school student from UK takes a class in English A combination of both: a student from USA takes Chinese classes in Beijing while also using the language outside of class Three basic questions to answer in order to best understand the process of SLA: (1) What exactly does the L2 learner come to know? (2) How does the learner acquire this knowledge? (3) Why are some learners more successful than others? Hard to agree on an answer for each question. SLA is complex and many exciting mysteries remain. Different researchers come from different academic disciplines (Linguistics, psychology, sociology, sociopsychology) different theories and research methods. Ultimately, a satisfactory account of SLA must integrate these multiple perspectives. Still, exploring these questions has potentially great practical value to anyone who learns or teaches additional languages. (more on page 3) What is a first language (L1)? What is a second language (L2)? What is a foreign language? What is a library language? What is an auxiliary language? What is language for specific purposes? Why we have these different distinctions according to the function the L2 will serve in our lives? These differences may determine the specific areas of vocabulary knowledge we need, the level of grammatical complexity we have to attain, and whether speaking or reading skills are more important. (More on page 4) Diversity in learning and learners. What are the circumstances under which SLA takes place? What is learned in acquiring a second language and how it is learned? Does the learning situation involve informal exposure to L2, formal instruction in school, or both? Also, what are the factors affecting the status of both languages (L1 & L2) and learners? Ex. Social, cultural, and economic factors. How diversity in learning and learners is unpacked? (More on page 5) Key Terms: Linguistic Competence vs. Linguistic Performance Linguistic competence is the grasp of grammatical rules, i.e. the speaker's knowledge of the language, which enables them to recognize grammatical mistakes. Linguistic performance refers to the actual, real use of language. First Language/native language/primary language/mother tongue (L1) a roughly synonymous set of terms that refer to languages which are acquired during early childhood - normally beginning before the age of about three years - and that they are learned as part of growing up among people who speak them. Simultaneous bilingualism or multilingualism vs. sequential bilingualism or multilingualism: Acquisition of more than one language during early childhood is called simultaneous multilingualism and results in more than one "native" language for an individual, whereas sequential multilingualism refers to learning additional languages after L1 has already been established. Chapter 2: Multilingualism/bilingualism, Monolingualism Multilingual competence, Monolingual competence, Learner language, Positive transfer, Negative transfer, Fossilization, Poverty-of-the stimulus Multilingualism  Refers to the ability to use two or more languages. Occurs in every country. Monolingualism Refers to the ability to use only one.  Motivation to add a second language:  Invasion or conquest of one's country by speakers or another language. A need or desire to contact speakers of other languages. Immigration to a country. Adoption of religious beliefs and practices. A need or desire to pursue educational experiences. A desire for occupational or social advancement. An interest in knowing more about other cultures. The numbers of L1 and L2 speakers of different languages can only be estimated. 1. Linguistic information is often not officially collected.  2. Answers to questions seeking linguistic information may not be reliable.  3. There is a lack of agreement on the definition of terms and on criteria for identification.  The nature of language learning Phonemes: difference sounds of a language.  The role of natural ability~ Humans are born with a natural ability to learn a language.  Children begin to learn their L1 at the same age.  Children master the basic phonological and grammatical operations in their L1.  Children can understand and create novel utterances.  There is a cut-off age for L1, beyond which it can never be complete.  Acquisition of L1 is not simple a facet of general intelligence. Child grammar: It is possible to systematically describe the kinds of utterances a child can produce or understand at a given maturational level.  The effects of age in both L1 and L2 can be explain by the Critical Period Hypothesis.  The role of social experience The language was to be used near them and with them.  Appropriate social experience, including L1 input and interaction is necessary for acquisition.  Mother's talk is the most important source of early language input.  Social interactions.  The logical problem of language learning. 1. Children's knowledge of language goes beyond what could be learned from the input they receive.  2. Constraints and principles cannot be learned.  3. Universal patterns of development cannot be explained by language-specific input.  We master our first language effortlessly is almost as we do it by a default process; we can't say the same for L2, in which a more complex series of steps take place to acquire the new language. Learning how L1 and L2 are acquired is very interesting and necessary. We need to be able to identify the different frameworks of the study of a second language acquisition. This way, we are going to be able to discuss the best course for our students to develop and master their L2. Chapter 3 The linguistics of second language acquisition The Nature of Language Most linguists would agree that all naturally occurring languages are: Systematic. Symbolic. Social. Systematic: Elements are in regular patterns of relationships. Unconscious rules or principles Understand the principles They consist of recurrent elements which occur in regular patterns of relationships. All languages have an infinite number of possible sentences, and the vast majority of all sentences which are used have not been memorized. They are created according to rules or principles which speakers are usually unconscious of using – or even of knowing – if they acquired the language(s) as a young child. Although we use the same stock of words over and over, it is safe to assume that, for instance, most of the particular combinations of words making up the sentences in a daily newspaper have never been used before. How, then, do we understand them? We can do so because we understand the principles by which the words are combined to express meaning. Even the sounds we produce in speaking, and the orders in which they occur, are systematically organized in ways that we are totally unaware of. Symbolic. Sequences do not inherently prossess meaning. The meanings of symbols come through the agreement of speakers. It is meaningful for the speakers who use or say that language. Social Reflects the society that uses it. The only way to learn that language is to use it with others. No standard to judge which language is more effective for communication than another. Use language to communicate, to categorize and catalogue the objects, events, and processes. Levels of knowledge which every L1 and L2 learner must acquire. Divided but in actual use all levels must interact and function simultaneously: lexicon (vocabulary) word meaning pronunciation (and spelling for written languages) grammatical category (part of speech) possible occurrence in combination with other words and in idioms phonology (sound system) speech sounds that make a difference in meaning (phonemes) possible sequences of consonants and vowels (syllable structure) intonation patterns (stress, pitch, and duration), and perhaps tone in words rhythmic patterns (pauses and stops) morphology (word structure) parts of words that have meaning (morphemes) inflections that carry grammatical information (like number or tense) prefixes and suffixes that may be added to change the meaning of words or their grammatical category syntax (grammar) word order agreement between sentence elements (as number agreement between subject and verb) ways to form questions, to negate assertions, and to focus or structure information within sentences nonverbal structures (with conventional, language-specific meaning) facial expressions spatial orientation and position gestures and other body movement discourse ways to connect sentences, and to organize information across sentence boundaries structures for telling stories, engaging in conversations, etc. scripts for interacting and for events All of this knowledge about language is automatically available to children for their L1 and is somehow usually acquired with no conscious effort. Completely comparable knowledge of L2 is seldom achieved Early approaches to SLA Contrastive Analysis (Robert Lado) Definition: An approach to the study of SLA and it involves predicting and explaining learner problems based on comparing L1 and L2 with each other to determine similarities and differences. Goal: Pedagogical in nature? to increase efficiency in L2 teaching and testing. Make learning and teaching more efficient. Assumptions: learning a language is like learning a habit. Language acquisition involves habit formation in a process called Stimulus-Response-Reinforcement (S-R-R); We have a stimulus/ an input (Language), we imitate and repeat the language and the response is reinforced. “Practice makes perfect” There will be transfer in learning Transfer in SLA: the transfer of elements acquired (or habituated) in L1 to the target L2. positive (or facilitating) when the same structure is appropriate in both languages (both Arabic and English have the definite article “al” and “the” respectively.Therefore ,the Arabic learners are expected to use the English article “the” correctly in expressions such as “the boy” ,”the girl” and so forth) negative (or interference) when the L1 structure is used inappropriately in the L2 ([b] for /p/ by Arabic speakers) This means that the easiest L2 structures (and presumably first acquired) are those which exist in L1 with the same form, meaning, and distribution and are thus available for positive transfer; any structure in L2 which has a form not occurring in L1 needs to be learned. What does the process of CA then involve? All structures? It involves describing L1 and L2 at each level, analysing roughly comparable segments of the languages for elements which are likely to cause problems for learners. This information provides a rationale for constructing language lessons that focus on structures which are predicted to most need attention and practice, and for sequencing the L2 structures in order of difficulty. Challenges & Limitations of the CA approach: Was not adequate for the study of SLA in part because it cannot explain the logical problem of language learning that was addressed in Chapter 2 (how learners know more than they have heard or have been taught) CA analyses were not always validated by evidence from actual learner errors. Many of the L2 problems which CA predicts do not emerge. Error Analysis (Pit Corder) Definition: Another approach to SLA and it focuses on learners’ creative ability to construct language. It is based on the description and analysis of actual learner errors in L2, rather than on linguistic structures attributed to native speakers of L1 and L2 (as in CA) Goal: Description and analysis of actual learner errors in L2 Assumptions that made it spread widely and replace CA: errors provide evidence of the system of language which a learner is using at any particular point in the course of L2 development, and of the strategies or procedures the learner is using in his “discovery of the language.” (not just predictions as in CA) errors are windows into the language learner’s mind. (underlying rules not surface-level forms as in CA) Errors are a sign that the learner is (perhaps unconsciously) exploring the new system rather than just experiencing “interference” from old habits. (not interference as in CA) The procedure for analysing learner errors: Collection of a sample of learner language. Most samples of learner language which have been used in EA include data collected from many speakers who are responding to the same kind of task or test (as in Morpheme Order Studies, which are discussed below). Some studies use samples from a few learners that are collected over a period of weeks, months, or even years in order to determine patterns of change in error occurrence with increasing L2 exposure and proficiency. Identification of errors. This first step in the analysis requires determination of elements in the sample of learner language which deviate from the target L2 in some way. Corder distinguishes between systematic errors (which result from learners’ lack of L2 knowledge) and mistakes (the results from some kind of processing failure such as a lapse in memory), which he excludes from the analysis. Description of errors. For purposes of analysis, errors are usually classified according to language level (whether an error is phonological, morphological, syntactic, etc.), general linguistic category (e.g., auxiliary system, passive sentences, negative constructions), or more specific linguistic elements (e.g., articles, prepositions, verb forms). Explanation of errors. Accounting for why an error was made is the most important step in trying to understand the processes of SLA. Two of the most likely causes of L2 errors are interlingual (“between languages”) factors, resulting from negative transfer or interference from L1 and intralingual (“within language”) factors, not attributable to cross-linguistic influence. Intralingual errors are also considered developmental errors and often represent incomplete learning of L2 rules or overgeneralization of them. Evaluation of errors. This step involves analysis of what effect the error has on whomever is being addressed: e.g., how “serious” it is, or to what extent it affects intelligibility, or social acceptability (such as qualifying for a job). In the example I gave of the Korean L1 speaker making errors in a letter to me, the errors are not serious at all. We are friends, and the ungrammaticality of many of her sentences has no bearing on the social relationship; furthermore, there is no resulting misinterpretation of meaning. Challenges & Limitations of the EA approach: EA continues as a useful procedure for the study of SLA, but a number of shortcomings have been noted and should be kept in mind. These include: Ambiguity in classification: It is difficult to say, for instance, if a Chinese L1 speaker who omits number and tense inflections in English L2 is doing so because of L1 influence (Chinese is not an inflectional language) or because of a universal developmental pro- cess (also present in L1 acquisition) which results in simplified or “telegraphic” utterances. Lack of positive data. Focus on errors alone does not necessarily provide information on what the L2 learner has acquired (although I have inferred from the examples, I gave above what the Korean L1 speaker/writer has learned about English auxiliary verbs and articles); further, correct uses may be overlooked. Potential for avoidance. Absence of errors may result from learners’ avoidance of difficult structures, and this will not be revealed by EA (e.g., Chinese and Japanese L1 speakers make few errors in English L2 relative clauses because they avoid using them). Influence of L2 curricula. Some L2 teachers attribute the variation in student errors to the natures of students’ prior L2 learning experiences: e.g., whether it was informal or formal in nature, and if formal, whether grammar versus communicative activities or written versus oral skills dominated. Even when very similar approaches to teaching are represented in these experiences, teachers and textbooks may have included different content, different emphases, and different sequencing. These and other possible curricular variables may have a significant influence on subsequent student errors, although most have received little attention in research that tries to explain why some learners are more successful than others. Interlanguage (Larry Selinker) Definition: The intermediate states (or interim grammars) of a learner’s language as it moves toward the target L2. Goal: to place emphasis on the IL itself as a third language system in its own right which differs from both L1 and L2 during the course of its development. An interlanguage has the following characteristics/assumptions: Systematic. At any particular point or stage of development, the IL is governed by rules which constitute the learner’s internal grammar. These rules are discoverable by analysing the language that is used by the learner at that time – what he or she can produce and interpret correctly as well as errors that are made. Dynamic. The system of rules which learners have in their minds changes frequently, or is in a state of flux, resulting in a succession of interim grammars. Variable. Although the IL is systematic, differences in context result in different patterns of language use. Reduced system, both in form and function. The characteristic of reduced form refers to the less complex grammatical structures that typically occur in an IL compared to the target language (e.g., omission of inflections, such as the past tense suffix in English). The characteristic of reduced function refers to the smaller range of communicative needs typically served by an IL (especially if the learner is still in contact with members of the L1 speech community). Differences between IL development and L1 acquisition by children: There are different cognitive processes involved in IL development Language transfer from L1 to L2 Transfer of training, or how the L2 is taught Strategies of second language learning, or how learners approach the L2 materials and the task of L2 learning Strategies of second language communication, or ways that learners try to communicate with others in the L2 Overgeneralization of the target language linguistic material, in which L2 rules that are learned are applied too broadly. (Overgeneralizations include some of the intralingual or developmental errors which were illustrated in the previous section.) The strong likelihood of fossilization for L2 learners – the probability that they will cease their IL development in some respects before they reach target language norms Challenges & Limitations of the IL approach: This approach has been highly productive in the study of SLA. It is generally taken for granted now, although controversies remain concerning its specific nature The endpoint of IL is difficult to identify with complete certainty since additional time and different circumstances might always trigger some resumption in learning. Identification of fossilization IL development before reaching target language norms. Should individuals be considered “fossilized” in L2 development because they retain a foreign accent, for instance, in spite of productive fluency in other aspects of the target language? (One thinks of Arnold Schwarzenegger, US motion picture actor and politician, who retains a strong Austrian-German accent, or of many faculty members and students who are identifiably nonnative speakers of English although they speak and write fluently in this language – often even more fluently than many native speakers. There is also the issue of what the concept of “target language” entails as the goal of SLA. whether “progress” should be measured against native-speaker norms Monitor Model (Stephen Krashen) Definition: A collection of five hypotheses about how the L2 code is acquired. The hypotheses forming the model are the following: Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis. There is a distinction to be made between acquisition and learning. Acquisition is subconscious and involves the innate Language Acquisition Device which accounts for children’s L1. Learning is conscious and is exemplified by the L2 learning which takes place in many classroom contexts. Monitor Hypothesis. What is “learned” is available only as a monitor, for purposes of editing or making changes in what has already been produced. Natural Order Hypothesis. We acquire the rules of language in a predictable order. Input Hypothesis. Language acquisition takes place because there is comprehensible input. If input is understood, and if there is enough of it, the necessary grammar is automatically provided. Affective Filter Hypothesis. Input may not be processed if the affective filter is “up” (e.g., if conscious learning is taking place and/or individuals are inhibited). Challenges & Limitations of the MM approach: what constitutes comprehensible input? the claimed distinction between learning and acquisition are vague and imprecise, and because several of its claims are impossible to verify Krashen’s model had a major influence on language teaching, including avoidance of the explicit teaching of grammar in many hundreds of classrooms. Despite the debate we have just reviewed among proponents of different approaches, there was widespread consensus on some important points. These include: What is being acquired in SLA is a “rule-governed” language system. Development of L2 involves progression through a dynamic interlanguage system which differs from both L1 and L2 in significant respects. The final state of L2 typically differs (more or less) from the native speakers’ system. How SLA takes place involves creative mental processes. Development of both L1 and L2 follows generally predictable sequences, which suggests that L1 and L2 acquisition processes are similar in significant ways. Why some learners are more (or less) successful in SLA than others relates primarily to the age of the learner. CHAPTER 4 The psychology of Second Language Acquisition Part1: KEY TERMS Lateralization Critical Period Hypothesis Information Processing (IP) Controlled processing Automatic processing Restructuring Input Output U-shaped development Assumption: Particular locations in the brain may be specialized for language functions Paul Broca observed that an area in the left frontal lobe (Broca’s area) appeared to be responsible for the ability to speak and noted that an injury to the left side of the brain was much more likely to result in language loss than was an injury to the right side. Wernicke (1874) further identified a nearby area which is adjacent to the part of the cortex that processes audio input (auditory cortex) (Wernicke’s area) as also being central to language processing. for the vast majority of individuals, language is represented primarily in the left half (or hemisphere) of the brain within an area (including both Broca’s area and Wernicke’s area) around the Sylvian fissure (a cleavage that separates lobes in the brain). Some exceptions have been found, but Subsequent research has shown that many more areas of the brain are involved in language activity than was thought earlier: Communicative functions each hemisphere of the brain is primarily specialized in language activity is not localized, but core linguistic processes are typically housed in the left hemisphere. The typical distribution of primary functions is probably due to the left hemisphere’s being computationally more powerful than the right and therefore better suited for processing the highly complex elements of language. Such specialization of the two halves of the brain is known as lateralization Lenneberg (Critical Period Hypothesis) proposed that children had only a limited number of years during which they could acquire their L1 flawlessly even if they suffered brain damage to the language areas; brain plasticity in childhood would allow other areas of the brain to take over the language functions of the damaged areas, but beyond a certain age, normal language would not be possible. brain plasticity is the ability of the brain to modify its connections or re-wire itself. As the brain matures, it has less plasticity: i.e., one area of the brain becomes less able to assume the functions of another in the event it is damaged. The initial questions on how the brain might be organized for multiple languages arose from observing differing patterns for the recovery of languages following brain damage in multilinguals. Most individuals lose or recover multiple languages equally, but some recover one before the other, and some never recover use of one (either L1 or L2). These findings suggest that two or more languages may be represented in somewhat different locations in the brain and/or have different networks of activation. In spite of many years of research, some questions remain unanswered or answers remain controversial. In part this is because study has generally involved limited numbers of subjects and there is considerable individual variation in how the brain is “wired”; Still, there are a number of findings using brain-imaging technology which shed increasing light on the representation and organization of multiple languages in the brain. In what follows, We are going to review Specific questions which have been explored along with a brief summary of results from some of the research conducted on them. 1. How independent are the languages of multilingual speakers? There is no single answer to this question, both because there appears to be considerable individual variation among speakers, and because there are very complex factors which must be taken into account. It seems reasonable to conclude, however, that multiple language systems are neither completely separate nor completely fused. Researchers suggested a three-way possibility for how languages relate in an individual’s mind, which are called coordinate, compound, and subordinate bilingualism. Coordinate refers to parallel linguistic systems, independent of one another; An extreme case of coordinate bilingualism would be the rare individual who has learned two or more languages in different contexts and is not able (even with conscious effort) to translate between them. compound to a fused or unified system; More common would be compound bilingualism, believed by many to characterize simultaneous bilingualism in early childhood (before the age of three years), and subordinate to one linguistic system accessed through another. and subordinate bilingualism, believed to result from learning L2 through the medium of L1 (as in grammar-translation approaches to foreign language instruction). 2. How are multiple language structures organized in relation to one another in the brain? Are both languages stored in the same areas? Again, there is considerable variation among speakers. For at least some multilinguals, it appears that L1 and L2 are stored in somewhat different areas of the brain, but both are predominantly in (probably overlapping) areas of the left hemisphere. However, the right hemisphere might be more involved in L2 than in L1. 3. Does the organization of the brain for L2 in relation to L1 differ with age of acquisition, how it is learned, or level of proficiency? The answer is probably “yes” to all three AoA: Research reported more right-hemisphere involvement for individuals who acquire L2 between ages nine and twelve than for those who acquire L2 before age four. How it is learned: The variation in right hemisphere involvement may be due to the lack of a single route to L2 knowledge: second languages may be learnt by many means rather than the single means found in L1 acquisition and, consequently, may have a greater apparent hemispheric spread level of proficiency: Because they have more experience with interpreting and producing two languages, perhaps “early bilinguals intensify or accelerate the automatization of language processes 4. Do two or more languages show the same sort of loss or disruption after brain damage? When there is differential impairment or recovery, which language recovers first? early hypothesis was that in cases of such brain damage, the last-learned language would be the first lost, the next-to-the-last learned the second to be lost, and so forth, with L1 the last to remain; recovery was speculated to be L1 first. significant factor in initial recovery is which language was most used in the years prior to the incident which caused the damage, whether this is L1 or L2. shows that not only can different languages be affected differentially by brain damage, but different abilities in the same language may be differentially impaired: e.g., syntax versus vocabulary, production versus comprehension, or oral versus written modality. These observations have possible implications for claims that different elements of language are located in separate parts of the brain. Part2: Learning processes Information Processing (IP) Approaches based on IP are concerned with the mental processes involved in language learning and use. Information Processing has three stages, as shown in Table 4.2 on page 79 (adapted from Skehan 1998). Input for SLA is whatever sample of L2 that learners are exposed to, but it is not available for processing unless learners actually notice it: i.e., pay attention to it. Then it can become intake. It is at this point of perception of input where priorities are largely determined, and where attentional resources are channelled. Output for SLA is the language that learners produce, in speech/sign or in writing. Restructuring: L2 development cannot be characterized as a seamless continuum along which new forms are added to old, but as a partially discontinuous plane along which there is regular systemic reorganization and reformulation. A related type of evidence is found in U-shaped development: i.e., learners’ use of an initially correct form such as plural feet in English, followed by incorrect foots, eventually again appearing as feet. In this case, feet is first learned as an unanalyzed word, without recognition that it is a combination of foot plus plural. The later production of foots is evidence of systemic restructuring that takes place when the regular plural -s is added to the learner’s grammar. Feet reappears when the learner begins to acquire exceptions to the plural inflection rule. Researchers need to control variables in order to predict outcomes in different learning circumstances. Differences in learners In Chapter 3, we considered the basic question of why some L2 learners are more successful than others from a linguistic perspective Here we address this question from a psychological perspective, focusing on differences among learners themselves. The differences we explore here are age, sex, aptitude, motivation, cognitive style, personality, and learning strategies. Age Some of the advantages which have been reported for both younger and older learners are listed in Table 4.3. (88) children have only a limited number of years during which normal acquisition is possible. Beyond that, physiological changes cause the brain to lose its plasticity, or capacity to assume the new functions that learning language demands. While “brain plasticity” is listed as a younger learner advantage in Table 4.3, older learners are advantaged by greater learning capacity, including better memory for vocabulary. Greater analytic ability might also be an advantage for older learners, at least in the short run, since they are able to understand and apply explicit grammatical rules. one reason younger learners develop more native-like grammatical intuitions is that they are in a non- analytic processing mode. This calls for another qualification: younger learners are probably more successful in informal and naturalistic L2 learning contexts, and older learners in formal instructional settings. Other advantages that younger learners may have are being less inhibited than older learners, and having weaker feelings of identity with people (other than close family or caregivers) who speak the same native language. Children are also more likely to receive simplified language input from others, which might facilitate their learning Other advantages that older learners may have include higher levels of pragmatic skills and knowledge of L1, which may transfer positively to L2 use; more real-world knowledge enables older learners to perform tasks of much greater complexity, even when their linguistic resources are still limited. Sex There do appear to be some sex differences in language acquisition and processing women out- perform men in some tests of verbal fluency females seem to be better at memorizing complex forms, while males appear to be better at computing compositional rules Other differences may be related to hormonal variables: higher androgen level correlates with better automatized skills, and high estrogen with better semantic/interpretive skills higher levels of articulatory and motor ability have been associated in women with higher levels of estrogen during the menstrual cycle. Aptitude The assumption that there is a talent which is specific to language learning. The following four components underlying this talent and constitute the bases for most aptitude tests: Phonemic coding ability is the capacity to process auditory input into segments which can be stored and retrieved. Inductive language-learning ability accounts for further processing of the segmented auditory input by the brain to infer structure, identify patterns, make generalizations grammatical sensitivity accounts for further processing of the segmented auditory input by the brain to recognize the grammatical function of elements, and formulate rules. Associative memory capacity is importantly concerned with how linguistic items are stored, and with how they are recalled and used in output. Associative memory capacity determines appropriate selection from among the L2 elements that are stored, and ultimately determines speaker fluency. Motivation It is variously defined, but it is usually conceived as a construct which includes at least the following components Significant goal or need Desire to attain the goal Perception that learning L2 is relevant to fulfilling the goal or meeting the need Belief in the likely success or failure of learning L2 Value of potential outcomes/rewards The most widely recognized types of motivation are integrative and instrumental. Integrative motivation is based on interest in learning L2 because of a desire to learn about or associate with the people who use it Instrumental motivation involves perception of purely practical value in learning the L2, such as increasing occupational or business opportunities, enhancing prestige and power, accessing scientific and technical information, or just passing a course in school. Cognitive style Cognitive style refers to individuals’ preferred way of processing: i.e., of perceiving, conceptualizing, organizing, and recalling information. Categories of cognitive style are commonly identified as pairs of traits on opposite ends of a continuum; individual learners are rarely thought to be at one extreme or the other but are located somewhere along the continuum between the poles. Some of the traits which have been explored are listed in Table 4.4. (p. 93) Another partially related dimension is preference for deductive or inductive processing. Deductive (or “top-down”) processing begins with a prediction or rule and then applies it to interpret particular instances of input. Inductive (or “bottom-up”) processing begins with examining input to discover some pattern and then formulates a generalization or rule that accounts for it, and that may then in turn be applied deductively. Personality Speculation and research in SLA has included the following factors, also often characterized as endpoints on continua, as shown in Table 4.5. (p.95) Anxiety has received the most attention in SLA research, along with lack of anxiety as an important component of self-confidence. Anxiety correlates negatively with measures of L2 proficiency including grades awarded in foreign language classes, meaning that higher anxiety tends to go with lower levels of success in L2 learning. In addition to self-confidence, lower anxiety may be manifested by more risk-taking or more adventuresome behaviours. Learning strategies learning strategies: i.e. the behaviors and techniques they adopt in their efforts to learn a second language. A typology of language-learning strategies which is widely used in SLA (p. 97) Metacognitive strategies are those which attempt to regulate language learning by planning and monitoring; cognitive strategies make use of direct analysis or synthesis of linguistic material; social/affective strategies involve interaction with others. Metacognitive: e.g. previewing a concept or principle in anticipation of a learning activity; deciding in advance to attend to specific aspects of input; rehearsing linguistic components which will be required for an upcoming language task; self-monitoring of progress and knowledge states. Cognitive: e.g. repeating after a language model; translating from L1; remembering a new word in L2 by relating it to one that sounds the same in L1, or by creating vivid images; guessing meanings of new material through inferencing. Social/affective: e.g. seeking opportunities to interact with native speakers; working cooperatively with peers to obtain feedback or pool information; asking questions to obtain clarification; requesting repetition, explanation, or examples. What must L2 learners know? What is linguistic competence from a social perspective? What does it involve? What is a language community? What are the two levels of context that affect language learning? What are the microsocial factors? What are the different contextual dimensions that lead to L2 variations? What is accommodation theory? Explain the nature of input modifications? Explain the nature of interactional modifications? Social Contexts of SLA When we talk about what is being acquired in SLA, it is not enough just to talk about the language itself. We must also include the social and cultural knowledge embedded in the language being learned, that is required for appropriate language use. What must L2 learners know? Categorizing objects & events and expressing experiences in a different ways. Understanding their own role Understanding others’ roles as members of communities w/ sociopolitical bounds. From a social perspective, the notion of linguistic competence which was introduced in Chapter 1 is inadequate to account for what is being acquired in any language that is going to be used for communicative purposes. Researchers made a critical observation that speakers who can produce any and all of the grammatical sentences of a language means they have developed linguistic competence And this will build a sense of belonging to that language community. Communicative Competence “what a speaker needs to know to communicate appropriately within a particular language community” (Saville-Troike 2003). Language Community.. A group of people who share knowledge of a common language. It involves knowing: 1. vocabulary, phonology, grammar & other aspects of linguistic structure. 2. When to speak (or not), what to say to whom, and how to say it appropriately in any given situations. 3. The social & cultural knowledge which enable speakers to use and interpret linguistic forms. Within the definition of communicative competence, then, the content of “what a speaker needs to know,” as well as judgments of relative success in attaining that knowledge, depend on the social context within which he or she learns and is using the language. Two levels of context affecting language learning Microsocial factors the potential effects of different surrounding circumstances. Macrosocial factors relates SLA to broader cultural, political, and educational environments. Microsocial factors 1. L2 variation 2. Input & interaction 3. Vygotsky’s Socialcultural Theory 1. L2 Variation One defining characteristic of L2 learner language is that it is highly variable. Some of the variability is due to changes that occur in what learners know and can produce as they progressively achieve higher levels of L2 proficiency. However, there is also considerable variation in learners’ L2 production at every stage along the way that we can attribute in large part to their social context. Which variable feature (vocabulary, phonology, morphology, syntax, discourse) depends largely on the communicative contexts in which it has been learned and is used. Some relevant contextual dimensions are: Communicative contexts 1. Linguistic contexs 2. Psycological contexts 3. Microsocial contexts 1. Linguistic contexs elements of language form & function associated w/ the variable element. Ex: coming vs. comin’ the phonological variable [ŋ] in coming is more likely to be used before a word which begins with a back consonant or before a pause, and the variable [n] in comin’ is more likely before a front consonant. The part of speech can also be a relevant linguistic context, with pro- duction of [ŋ] most frequent in one-syllable nouns such as ring or song, and [n] in the progressive form of verbs, as in I’m workin’. 2. Psychological contexts factors associated w/ the amount of attention which is being given to language form during production, the level of automaticity versus control in processing, or the intellectual demands of a particular task. for instance, the copula of That is a nice car may be produced during a formal second language lesson or in a writing exercise but omitted in informal conversation even at the same point of L2 development. Ex: This is a nice car. 3. Microsocial contexts Features of situation & interaction which relate to communicative events within which language is being produced, interpreted, & negotiated. This includes: Level of formality Participants’ relationship to one another If the interaction is public or intimate Linguistic & Psychological Perspectives Interest Variation that occurs in learners’ language as they develop increasing competence over a period of time is of particular interest from linguistic and psychological perspectives, as it reflects a developmental continuum. Variation that occurs in different contexts at a single point in time is of more interest from a social perspective, as it often corresponds to informal–formal features associated with linguistic register. Variation that occurs in learners’ language as they develop increasing competence over a period of time Developmental continuum Social Perspective Interest Variation occurs in different contexts at a single point in time. Correspond to informal-formal features associated w/ linguistic register. A substantial amount of research on the effect of microsocial contexts has been based on the framework of Accommodation Theory. Accommodation Theory Speakers change their pronunciation & even grammatical complexity of sentences they use to sound more like whomever they’re talking to. Native speakers tend to simplify their language when they’re talking to an L2 learner who is not fluent. L2 learners may require somewhat different varieties of the target language when they’ve different friends. 2. Input & Interaction Within the linguistic approaches discussed in Chapter 3, for instance, followers of behaviorist learning theories consider input to form the necessary stimuli and feedback which learners respond to and imitate; followers of Krashen’s Monitor Model consider comprehensible input not only necessary but sufficient in itself to account for SLA; Within the psychological approaches discussed in Chapter 4, those working from an IP framework consider input which is attended to (i.e. intake) as essential data for all stages of language processing; Within the social approaches surveyed in this chapter, some researchers also consider input primarily as “data” for essentially innate linguistic and/or cognitive processes, but others claim a more important role for input in determining what features of language are learned, and how. Social approaches also consider the nature and role of interaction in acquisition, and ways in which it is helpful – and perhaps necessary – for the development of advanced levels of L2 proficiency. From a social perspective, interaction is generally seen as essential in providing learners with the quantity and quality of external linguistic input which is required for internal processing, in focusing learner attention on aspects of their L2 which differ from target language norms or goals, and in providing collaborative means for learners to build discourse structures and express meanings which are beyond the current level of their linguistic competence. Nature of input modifications Language addressed by L1 speakers to L2 learners frequently differs in systematic ways from language addressed to native or very fluent speakers. In speech, the modified variety is called foreigner talk; it has the characteristics listed in Table 5.1 Utterances by native speakers to language learners are grammatical, simplified input may omit some obligatory elements. ___you like it? Nature of interactional modifications Along with input, social interaction is also essential for L1 acquisition: no children can learn their initial language by merely listening to tape recordings, radio broadcasts, or television programs. In contrast, many L2 learners do acquire at least some level of competence without interacting face to face with speakers of the target language, and for at least some highly motivated and/or talented learners, that level may be very high. Other types of interaction which can enhance SLA include feedback from NSs which makes NNSs aware that their usage is not acceptable in some way, and which provides a model for “correctness.” to achieve full native competence, corrective feedback is common in L2 and may indeed be necessary for most learners to ultimately reach native-like levels of proficiency when that is the desired goal. Negative feedback to L2 learners may be in the form of direct correction, including explicit statements like That is the wrong word; directives concerning what “cannot” or “must” be said; and explanations related to points of grammar and usage. Or the negative feedback may come as indirect correction, which may include several interactional modification forms Intake to cognitive processing We have already emphasized that language input may “go in one ear and out the other,” and it contributes to acquisition only if it is “let in” to the mind for processing: i.e. if it becomes intake. According to claims made in the Interaction Hypothesis, the modifications and collaborative efforts that take place in social interaction facilitate SLA because they contribute to the accessibility of input for mental processing: “negotiation for meaning, and especially negotiation work that triggers interactional adjustments by the NS or more competent interlocutor, facilitates acquisition because it connects input, internal learner capacities, particularly selective attention, and output in productive ways Some learners are more successful than others includes the degree of access to social experience which allows for negotiation of meaning & corrective feedback. An alternative view of the role of interaction in SLA is based on Sociocultural (S-C) Theory 3. Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory A key concept in this approach is that interaction not only facilitates language learning but is a causative force in acquisition; further, all of learning is seen as essentially a social process which is grounded in sociocultural settings. According to S-C Theory, learning occurs when simple innate mental activities are transformed into “higher-order,” more complex mental functions. This transformation typically involves symbolic mediation, which is a link between a person’s current mental state and higher-order functions that is provided primarily by language. This is considered the usual route to learning, whether what is being learned is language itself or some other area of knowledge. The results of learning through mediation include learners’ having heightened awareness of their own mental abilities and more control over their thought processes. So far we are using the term “interaction” to mean interpersonal interaction: i.e. communicative events and situations which occur between people. One important context for symbolic mediation is such interpersonal interaction between learners and experts (“experts” include teachers and more knowledgeable learners). This is an area of potential development, where the learner can achieve that potential only with assistance. According to S-C Theory, mental functions that are beyond an individual’s current level must be performed in collaboration with other people before they are achieved independently. One way in which others help the learner in language development is through scaffolding. This includes the “vertical constructions” mentioned above as a type of modified interaction between NSs and NNSs, in which experts commonly provide learners with chunks of talk that the learners can then use to express concepts which are beyond their independent means. This type of mediation also occurs when teachers collaborate in constructing language by providing help to a student when performing a task. In addition to interpersonal interaction, S-C Theory requires consideration of intrapersonal interaction: i.e. communication that occurs within an individual’s own mind. This is also viewed by Vygotsky as a sociocultural phenomenon. One type of intrapersonal interaction that occurs frequently in beginning stages of L2 learning – and in later stages when the content and structure of L2 input stretches or goes beyond existing language competence – makes use of L1 resources. This takes place through translation to oneself as part of interpretive problem-solving processes. Yet another type (which was of particular interest to Vygotsky) is private speech. This is the self-talk which many children (in particular) engage in that leads to the inner speech that more mature individuals use to control thought and behavior. Private speech by these children provides good evidence that even when they were not interacting with others, they were not merely passively assimilating L2 input; they were using intrapersonal interaction in an active process of engagement with the input they heard, practicing to build up their competence. Audible private speech may continue among adult learners in specialized, social settings where imitation or other controlled response to linguistic input is considered “normal” behavior. A low level of muttering is frequently heard in language laboratories where learners wearing headphones practice alone in cubicles, A common intrapersonal activity that is closely related to private speech is “private writing,” in which individuals record language forms and other meaningful symbols on paper in order to help store items in memory, organize thought, solve problems, or such, without intent to communicate with others. (Journaling) What do Linguistic, psychological, and social perspectives on SLA address? What questions does each address? What exactly does the L2 learner come to know? How does the learner acquire L2 knowledge? Why are some learners more successful than others? We would not consider the final state of L2 development to be completely “native”. Why so? What implications for L2 learning and teaching do our findings about SLA suggest? L2 Learning and teaching While there are some significant differences of opinion, and while there is much yet to discover, there is also much that we now know about SLA from simply exploring the basic what, how, and why questions that we have been considering through-out this book. Linguistic, psychological, and social perspectives on SLA all address these basic what, how, and why questions, but as we have seen through-out the chapters, they have each tended to focus primarily on one question over the others. For our chapter today, we will give greatest weight to linguistic contributions in answer to what, to psychological contributions in answer to how, and to social contributions in answer to why. What exactly does the L2 learner come to know? Page 184 How does the learner acquire L2 knowledge? Page 186 Why are some learners more successful than others? Page 187 Approaching near-native competence The judgment that L2 learners have approached or achieved “near-native” or “native-like” competence means that there is little or no perceptible difference between their language performance and that of native speakers. Because one’s L2 system is never exactly the same as the native speaker’s, most of us would not consider the final state of L2 development to be completely “native”, although we may allow for some rare exceptions. Implication for L2 learning and teaching Although we have seen that knowledge of L2 goes well beyond what can be consciously learned and taught, we have also seen that (unlike L1) L2 acquisition usually requires intentional effort, and that a number of individual and social factors strongly affect ultimate outcomes. We can not control most of these factors, but recognizing them can contribute to efficiency and effectiveness in second language development. As a starting point, our findings about SLA suggest the following general guidelines for L2 learning and teaching: Consider the goals that individuals and groups have for learning an additional language. Set priorities for learning/teaching that are compatible with those goals. Approach learning/teaching that are compatible with an appreciation of the multiple dimensions that are involved: linguistic, psychological, and social. Understand the potential strengths and limitation of particular learners and contexts for learning, and make use of them in adapting learning/teaching procedures. Be cautious in subscribing to any instructional approach which is narrowly focused or dogmatic. There is no one “best” way to learn or teach a second language. Recognize achievement in incremental progress. And be patient. Learning a language takes time