Session 3_VP_20240903 2.pdf

Lecture 3 Language Development II: Second Language Acquisition Dr. Vanessa Pang What is Second Language Acquisition? Second Language Acquisition (SLA) refers both to: Ø1. the study of individuals and groups who are learning a language subsequent to learning their first one as young children, an...

Lecture 3 Language Development II: Second Language Acquisition Dr. Vanessa Pang What is Second Language Acquisition? Second Language Acquisition (SLA) refers both to: Ø1. the study of individuals and groups who are learning a language subsequent to learning their first one as young children, and Ø2. the process of learning that language. The additional language is called a second language (L2), even though it may actually be the third, fourth, or tenth to be acquired. What is Second Language Acquisition? The scope of SLA includes “informal L2 learning” but takes place in naturalistic contexts, e.g., when a child from Japan is brought to the US and “picks up” English in the course of playing and attending school with native English-speaking children without any specialized language instruction. can be both formal ~ but HK is only learning “Formal learning” occurs, for example, when a high school student in England takes a class in French.  what does L2 core to know ? ① exactly this knowledge? How does the learner acquire ② learners more successful then others ? are some ③ Why Types of bilingualism 1. Simultaneous bilingualism Children acquiring two languages prior to age 3 is termed simultaneous bilingualism (Baker, 1996; Goodz, 1994). This type of bilingualism is usually found in homes where parents speak two (or more) languages. E G Cantonese. father > - child mother expose English two at same time 2. Successive bilingualism Successive bilingualism refers to instances in which children acquire their second language after age 3. In many respects, second language acquisition in successive bilingualism resembles first language development. Language is acquired through actively hypothesizing rules, analyzing language patterns, making errors and revising the rules. Factors influencing second language acquisition Learner characteristics: Age the better ? Is earlier Cognitive abilities - Forspeech-sound to develop if nettice-like promociation 6 But of , expose before Personality age. they merture children need to be cognitively to understand concept (semantic Motivation enough For example hate and. sorrow learning. , Self-confidence are cognitively fully For adult they , understand vocabulary learning. developed to L1 language competencies L1 & L2 Transfer If child does better. influence for in 21 , them here positive Cantonese 22 learning. For example , suc in and apply to 22 English learning (syntatic and morphological levels) Linguistic input: Social setting: Amount and quality of target L2 learner’s role in setting language (Comprehensible Presence of concrete referents input) Source of L2 language model family someone serve as language model Source: Otto, B. (2014). Language development in early childhood for 12 learner education (4th ed.). New Jersey: Merrill/Prentice Hall. Chapter 4 Consequences of Bilingualism Cognitive advantages of bilingualism Task 1: Watch the video “Why being bilingual is good for your brain?”. Complete Task 1 and upload your answers to the Moodle link Task 1. Cognitive advantages of bilingualism Constant need/practice to switch between two languages results in: 1. Enhanced metalinguistic awareness etcal its clogical) l More awareness of the linguistic structures both Critical Area Hypothese : Use & R e.g., nouns, verbs, adjectives, sentence order bias less emotional demtic - - delay Alzemer a for most five years etc. - Streneendusatea engage 2. Enhanced executive function l Problem-solving abilities (think out of the box) l Switch between tasks, multi-tasking l Focusing while filtering irrelevant information, focus attention l A healthier brain, more complex, more flexible, more actively engaged Cognitive and Linguistic Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Linguistic and Cognitive Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Like all theories of language acquisition, both linguistic and cognitive approaches are intended to account for the ability of human learners to acquire language within a variety of social and instructional environments.  Language gene? Innatism same as nation Noam Chomsky (1928 - ) MIT Linguistic Approach to Second Language Acquisition Innatism, as a linguistic approach to language acquisition, argued that human species are biologically endowed with the basics of grammar knowledge prior to any experience. The human mind has a language-dedicated module, where language learning and language use are handled. Language Acquisition Device (LAD) contains the principles which are offer best universal to all human languages (i.e., Universal Grammar – UG). perspective > - understand to siz too This approach takes language form as the subject matter. White (2003a) and other linguists have argued that UG offers the best perspective from which to understand second language acquisition. Linguistic Approaches to second language acquisition Native-speaker grammars are constrained by built-in universal linguistic principles, known as Universal Grammar (UG). Non-native grammars will be referred to as interlanguage grammars (Nemser, 1971 and Selinker, 1972). L2 learner language is systematic and that the errors produced by learners do not consist of random mistakes but, rather, suggest rule-governed behaviour. Such observations led to the proposal that L2 learners, like native speakers, represent the language that they are acquiring by means of a complex linguistic system. 22 = 11 VG interlanguage Cognitive Approaches: Many Sub-Branches Connectionism Brian Michael Nick Ellis MacWhinney Tomasello Cognitive processes – Fluency and automaticity: ACT Model (John Anderson), – Information-processing approaches (Barry McLaughlin) Metacognitive and cognitive strategies – Michael O’Malley, Anna Uhl Chamot Cognitive linguistics Cognitive Approach to Second Language Acquisition Cognitive psychologists argue that there is no need to hypothesize that humans have a language specific- LAhmosky , module in the brain or that ‘acquisition’ and ‘learning’ are distinct mental processes. General theories of learning can account for: a. the gradual development of complex syntax; and b. learners’ inability to spontaneously use everything they know about a language at a given time. Cognitive Approach to Second Language Acquisition Connectionism, a framework to the general study of memory and learning, is a sub-branch of cognitive approaches. It assumes that aspects of language are sensitive to frequency of usage and humans are sensitive to E.Gvocabulary S My t > - : frequencies of events in their identify the word "Monkey" and experience. serious implication of teaching= imitate repeat reinforcement - positive un it , , Behaviorist ! Therefore, language learners can · Teacher to classroom transform theories practices extract patterns from the complex linguistic input to create and G In E. : a sto come input strengthen associations. Implication : teacher provide materials to allow learner to extract patterns the input (linguistically from :without article article and. roun the to create, strengthe association Research evidenced. Similarities of Cognitive and Linguistic Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Both approaches: assumes predispositions of the brain: not language acquisition device, but a cognitive function to look for associations between elements and create links between them. On the table not at the table look at the psychological aspects of language acquisition. (expose t E.G pp ) : Differences between Cognitive and Linguistic Approaches to Second Language Acquisition 1. Connectionists, unlike innatists, see no need to hypothesize the existence of a neurological module dedicated exclusively to language education, but can be explained in terms of learning in general. 2. Connectionists assume that language acquisition is about language use, whereas innatists only look at language form (syntax). Need to provide input to children language acquistion is about language ragmatic connectionism innatism about syntax > - semantic Morphene  Cognitive and Linguisitic Approaches to Second Language Acquisition 3. While innatism argues that the environment make only a basic contribution, like most cognitive psychologists, connectionists also assume that what learners need to know is essentially available in the language they are exposed to. spoken in environment home school ? : , They attribute greater importance to the role of the environment than to any specific innate knowledge in the learner. ↳ provide language for environment language use Quit : 15 (lecture 1) 17/9 milestore leathe 2 - language - Lectant Role of input, output and interaction Input  How do second language learners process input? Group discussion 1. What is the role of input in second language acquisition? 2. Is it necessary for second language acquisition? Sufficient? Efficient? What is input? Is it important? Input refers to the language that is available to a learner through any medium (from listening or reading, for example, or through gestures in the case of signed languages) (Mackey, 2012). In all approaches to SLA, input is recognized as an essential basic component in the learning process (Mackey, 2012). Gass (1997) described input as “the single most important concept of second language acquisition”. Therefore, the importance of the role of input in second language acquisition cannot be disputed (Nassaji & Fotos, 2011). Role of input Krashen’s (1978) influential Input Hypothesis had suggested that Second Language Acquisition was primarily driven by exposure to sufficient amounts of comprehensible input. The comprehension of language at a slightly more advanced level than one’s own would lead automatically to acquisition. Roles of input and output Swain (1985) argued that immersion programs in Canada had demonstrated that comprehensible input alone was insufficient to ensure that learners achieved high levels of grammatical and sociolinguistic competence. She advanced the Comprehensible Output Hypothesis as a complement to Krashen’s Input Hypothesis. Roles of input and output Swain’s (1985) famous study of French immersion programmes led to her claim that comprehensible input alone can allow learners to reach high levels of comprehension. But their proficiency and accuracy in production will lag behind, even after years of exposure. Swain’s argument was that we must give more attention to output, but what took greater hold was the view that we need to “notice” formal features of the input. Roles of input and interaction Within the interaction approach, proposals surrounding the functions and benefits of input have centered around the idea that interlocutors’ modifications serve the important purpose of making language more comprehensible and usable for learning. Long, M. Interaction Hypothesis Roles of input and interaction Despite the clear necessity of input, it is not assumed to be sufficient for SLA on its own; rather, the ways in which learners interact with input and their interlocutors are at the heart of the interaction approach. Researchers examining input and interaction from a sociocultural perspective have argued for the value of scaffolding as a means by which more expert interlocutors can support learners socially, cognitively and affectively during conversation.  Roles of input and interaction Long’s (1983) Interaction Hypothesis Roles of input, output and interaction In conclusion, it is indisputable that input plays a major role in L2 acquisition. However, it is also clear that input alone cannot explain L2 acquisition. Acquisition is not driven by input alone but that output and the ways in which learners interact with input and their interlocutors also contribute. Reference Bley-Vroman, R. (1990). The logical problem of foreign language learning. Linguistics Analysis, 20(1-2), 3-47. Ellis, Nick C. (1996). Sequencing in SLA: phonological memory, chunking, and points of Order. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(1), 91-126. Ellis, Nick C. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing: a review with implications for theories of implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(2), 143-88. Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition / Rod Ellis (2nd ed., Oxford applied linguistics). Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. Gass, S., Behney, J. & Plonsky, L. (2013). Second language acquisition: An introductory course (4th edition). New York/London: Routledge. Gass, S. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner / Susan M. Gass. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum. Reference Goldschneider, J. M., & Dekeyser, R. M. (2001). Explaining the “natural order of L2 morpheme acquisition” in English: a meta-analysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning, 51(1), 1-50. Hatch, E.and J. Wagner-Gough. (1976). Explaining sequence and variation in second language acquisition. Language Learning (Special issue), 4:39-47. Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: issues and implications. London: Longman. Lightbown, P. & Spada, N. (2006). How languages are learned (3rd edition.) Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nassaji, H., & Fotos, Sandra. (2011). Teaching grammar in second language classrooms: Integrating form-focused instruction in communicative context / Hossein Nassaji and Sandra Fotos (ESL and applied linguistics professional series). New York: Routledge. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative Competence: Some roles of Comprehensible Input and Comprehensible Output in its Development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253), Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Schachter, J. (1990). On the issue of completeness in second language acquisition. Second language research, 6(1), 93-124. VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction in second language acquisition / Bill VanPatten. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex Pub. White, L. (1987a). Against comprehensible input: the input hypothesis and the development of second-language competence. Applied Linguistics, 8(2), 95-110.