You are on page 1of 3

Theory or Study.. According to the Whorfian Hypotheses that relate to the effect of language on thought and culture.

Less controversial is the effect of culture or society regarding to the effect of L2 on the L1. Language can be stirred by the physical environment which is in the context of lexical items and colour terminology. The second factor is the social environment which is the kinship and the third factor is the values of society which is the taboo or euphemisms. The effects of L2 on L1 in the Malaysian environment is that we can see is the language loss of L1. Here, several causes was able to be identify as the causes of L1 which is the Heritage language loss. The devaluing of the primary language in the community was a major cause. It is also referred as to living in a metropolitan area where the mix of Malaysia culture was degraded to describe the social conditions under which children were expected to retain their home language.

According to Spence-Oatey (2000:4), 'culture is a fuzzy set of attitudes, beliefs, behavioral conventions, and basic assumptions and values that is shared by a group of people, and that influences each member's behavior and each member's interpretations of the meanings of other people's behavior'. 'Culture' in language teaching and learning is usually defined pragmatically as a/the culture associated with a language being learnt. According to Wong-Fillmore (1991) conducted one of the early studies by examining language shift among language-minority children. Kouritzin (1997, 1999) conducted a qualitative study that explored questions about how and why language loss happen, what are the ages that most susceptible, the short and long term effects and the connections of loss to those who experience it. According to Verhoeven and Beschoten (1986; cited in Kouritzin, 1999), first language loss may refer to lack of the first language development, delayed first language development or a progressive loss of previously-acquired language ability. Other terms that often associated with this issue are subtractive bilingualism (W. Lambert, 1981) or lack of development of the first language; seniilingualism (Cummins, 1994;Paclheco, 1983), or deficiency in both first

and second languages; and additive bilingualism, referring to the successful development of two languages. According to Kouritzins study, the role of school and the lack of prestige and or the rejection of the first language and culture by the dominant community. Another cause seems to be the language shift in the home. The older children always tend to pick up the L2 in school and start speaking it to their younger siblings. According to Kouritzin (1997, 1999) notes that some students had older siblings who were proficient in the home language, but communicated only in English meanwhile other authors have given accounts of similar cases (see Chumak-Horbatsch, 1999; Pan & Berko-Gleason, 1986; Thomas & Cao, 1999) Language Deficit Theory which generally focuses on the work of Basil Bernstein (1973). The theory refers to linguistic incompetence. Linguistic incompetence is a reality for babies and young children which are acquiring the first language, as well as speakers who are in the process of learning a second or another language with regard to the language. Identity as a term which can be used to reference how a person understands his or her relationship to the world, how that relationship is constructed across time and space, and how the person understands possibilities for the future (Ricento 898). However, it seems proper to look further into this complex notion, its origin and relation to the social context in which a person finds himself/herself and, finally, its role in second language learning. Ricento gives a historical background to the relation between second language acquisition and identity Tajfels theories on how social identity was based on a persons membership of a group where he/she gets his emotional needs met. Drawing on this theory other researchers, namely Giles and Johnson, viewed language as a prominent marker of group membership and social identity (Ricento 896). As a consequence, change of group membership could involve some kind of linguistic adaptation. Another concept commonly used in SLA research was established by John Schumann, and is that of social distance, which refers to the degree of similarity between two cultures (Ricento 897). According to this theory, the degree of similarity would indicate with what difficulty a person would acquire a foreign language, depending on his/her own cultural background and the target language culture.

Gardner and Lamberts theories on motivation (which will be further dealt with in the following chapter) also suggested a connection between language learning and identity where learners are thought to be more likely to acquire the target language if they also identify with the target language culture (Ricento 897). Ricento brings up the complication of this theory since it partly suggests an abandonment of ones own culture, and since it also becomes even more problematic in a multicultural context. Tornberg states that school and teaching in general can be considered a culture producing institution and how the notion of culture for a long time within language teaching has been connected to nationality, as well as how pupils when they have studied a language, also have studied the culture of that language. (Tornberg 48).