P. 1
Second Language Acquisition(CPH)

Second Language Acquisition(CPH)

|Views: 2|Likes:
Published by Sylvaen Wsw
SLA
SLA

More info:

Categories:Types, Reviews
Published by: Sylvaen Wsw on Jun 06, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

06/06/2013

pdf

text

original

The Definition of Language

• A language is considered to be a system of communicating with other people using sounds, symbols and words in expressing a meaning, idea or thought. This language can be used in many forms, primarily through oral and written communications as well as using expressions through body language.

• Communication of thoughts and feelings through a system of arbitrary signals, such as voice, sounds, gestures, or written symbols. • Such a system, including its rules for combining its components such as words.

• Such a system as used by a nation, people, or other distinct community, often contrasted with dialect. • Body language; kinesics • Verbal communication

The Definition of Critical Period
• It is a term used in biology to refer to a limited phase in the development of an organism during which a particular activity or competency must be acquired if it is to be incorporated into the behavior of that organism.

Strong version • It may imply that even if language acquisition begins within the critical period it does not continue beyond the end of that period. .

. and that beyond a certain point language learning potential declines markedly even if it does not disappear entirely.weak version • The earlier language learning begins after the onset of the critical period the more efficient it will be.

158). . Between the ages of two and three years language emerges by an interaction of maturation and selfprogrammed learning (p.Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH) • Lenneberg (1967) interprets critical period is to be seen as beginning around this age of two years: Language cannot begin to develop until a certain level of physical maturation and growth has been attained.

.• Current evidence suggests that there is no stage in the infant‟s development when language is not in the process of being acquired.

• The shared activity commences as soon as the child emerges from the womb. .• The general notion that caregiver-child shared activity prepares the ground for and is continuous with the development of linguistic interaction incontrovertible.

beginning. the stage at which childhood is ending and adolescence. with the onset of puberty. .The end of the critical period • The age most posited as the upper limit of the critical period is the early teens.

• Taking the examples of „Genies‟ case and a wild boy of Victor‟s case. • Genie was physically punished by the father if she made any sounds. The mother was forbidden to . the father and older brother never spoke to Genie although they barked at her like dogs. According to the mother.

As far as syntax is concerned. 1974). (Fromkin et al. . her phonological development approximated to that of normal children. Genie learned to combine words in three-and four-word strings and to produce negative sentences.• spend more than a few minutes with Genie during feeding. Nevertheless.

parallelled that of normal English-speaking children.• Broadly. her progress in the acquisition of language though slower than is usual. . She can actually understand and produce speech. whereas Victor‟s communication through language was all but confined to the written medium.

• Genie‟s language development has been interpreted as evidence both for and against the critical period hypothesis. • Genie represents a case of first-language acquisition after the critical age of puberty. .

• To be sure. her development is laborious and incomplete. but the similarities between it and normal acquisition outweigh the differences. • Penfield & Roberts (1959) report that children are normally able to re-learn language when injury or disease damages speech areas in the dominant .

whereas speech recovery in adults is much more problematic.• Hemisphere. such transfers do not seem to occur in the case of adults. . and that whereas in young children the speech mechanism is frequently transferred with complete success from the injured dominant hemisphere to the healthy minor hemisphere.

.• Lenneberg‟s conclusion is that the relevant neurological development must be completed by around age five. almost unnoticed fashion as long as one lives and is interested in new things. • Vocabulary development continues in a natural.

. is susceptible to an alternative interpretation. which comes from the language development of deaf children.• The evidence most frequently cited in support of the claim that a critical period of „language readiness‟ begins around age two.

• Other evidence strongly indicates that language acquisition is a continuous process which begins at birth. . • First language acquisition continues well into adulthood and even. into middle and old age. at least in some of its aspects.

the notion that language learning capacity peaks early in childhood and thereafter declines.e. i. .• With regard to the weaker version of the critical period hypothesis.

The Monitor Hypothesis 3. The Natural Order Hypothesis 4.Krashen‟s Five Hypotheses • • • • • 1. The Affective Filter Hypothesis . The Input Hypothesis 5. The Acquisition-learning Hypothesis 2.

The Acquisition Learning Hypothesis – applicable to the process of: Internalizing new L2 knowledge (acquisition vs.1. learning) Storing such knowledge (acquired knowledge for automatic processing and learnt knowledge for controlled processing) Using in actual performance (acquired knowledge as the major source of initiating both the comprehension and production of utterances) *learnt knowledge for use only by the Monitor .

in acquiring their first language.• The Acquisition-learning Hypothesis: *Acquisition is a „subconscious process identical in all important ways to the process children utilize. .

• *Learning is a conscious process that results in “knowing about” language (1985). • Acquisition comes about through meaningful interaction in a natural communication setting. .

The Monitor Hypothesis • The Monitor Hypothesis states that „Learning has only one function. . and that is as a Monitor or editor‟ and that learning comes into play only to „make changes in the form of our utterance.

• Krashen‟s position is that conscious knowledge of rules does not help acquisition. but only enables the learner to „polish up‟ what has been acquired through communication. .

form-focused. user’s knowledge of the rule *Editing (by ‘feel’) can take place using ‘acquired’ competence (but not developed). albeit optional. .3. Has limited function in language performance even with adults Conditions for its use: sufficient time. The Monitor Hypothesis – the device that learners use to edit their language performance Utilizes ‘learnt knowledge by acting upon and modifying utterances generated from ‘acquired’ knowledge either before or after the utterance.

a second language performer needs to have sufficient time.three conditions for monitor use • (1) Time: In order to think about and use conscious rules effectively. .

time is not enough.• (2) Focus on form: To use monitor effectively. . The performer must also be focused on form. or thinking about correctness.

6). and we know that even the best students do not learn every rule they are exposed to (Krashen. . 1982.• (3) Know the rule: We can be sure that our students are exposed only to a small part of the total grammar of the language. p.

.Three types of Monitor users • Over-users: These are people who attempt to monitor all the time. performers who are constantly checking their output with their conscious knowledge of the second language.

Under-users are typically uninfluenced by error correction. even when conditions allow it. or if they have learned. prefer not to use their conscious knowledge. .• Under-users: These are performers who have not learned. can selfcorrect only by using a „feel‟ for correctness.

p.(1982.19-20) . where it might interfere….• The optimal users: Performers who use the monitor when it is appropriate and when it does not interfere with communication. Many optimal users will not use grammar in ordinary conversation.

1). some rules tending to come early and others late (Krashen. 1985. p. .3. The Natural Order Hypothesis • The hypothesis states that we acquire the rules of language in a predictable order.

2. But when the task requires or permits the use of metalinguistic knowledge. When the learner is engaged in natural communication tasks. . a different order will emerge. The Natural Order Hypothesis .learners may follow a more or less invariant order in the acquisition of formal grammatical features Affirms that grammatical structures are ‘acquired’ in a predictable order. he will manifest the standard order.

4. our current level. . by understanding input containing i+1 (Krashen. to i+1. or by receiving „comprehensible input‟… We move from i. p. the next level along the natural order. The Input Hypothesis • This hypothesis states that humans acquire language in only one way—by understanding messages. 1985. 2).

4.e. . Input Hypothesis – ‘acquisition’ takes place as a result of the learner having understood input that is a little beyond the current level of his competence (i. the i + 1 level ) Input that is comprehensible to the learner will automatically be at the right level.

. The Affective Filter Hypothesis • According to this hypothesis. comprehensible input may not be utilized by second-language acquirers if there is a „mental block‟ that prevents from them fully profiting from it.5.

. if the filter is up. needs. and emotional states.• The affective filter acts as a barrier to acquisition: If the filter is „down‟. attitudes. • The filter is that part of the internal processing system that subconsciously incoming language based on what psychologists call „affect‟: the learner‟s motives. the input is blocked and does not reach the LAD. the input reaches the LAD and becomes acquired competence.

• It determines how fast a learner can acquire a language. • It determines which part of the language will be attended to first. • It determines when the language acquisition efforts should cease. .• It determines which language models the learner will select.

how affective factors relate to SLA and the ground of the Acculturation Model As proposed by Dulay and Burt (1977). The Affective Filter Hypothesis . and how much input is converted into intake. It’s affective as its strength is determined based on: motivation self-confidence anxiety state .5. the filter controls how much input the learner comes into contact with.

or Universal Grammar. to a degree.Universal Grammar (UG) • The Chomskyan generative grammar approach assumes that the first-language learner comes to the acquisition task with innate. . specifically linguistic. biologically determined and specialized for language learning. • The claim is that certain principles of the human mind are. knowledge.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->