You are on page 1of 39

언어의 이해

Topic: Second Language Acquisition

Reading: Hummel Ch. 4


Review

2
Error analysis
 Goal: Identify and explain errors
 Error Analysis Process:
◼ Collect production data
◼ Identify errors
◼ Classify errors
◼ Quantify errors
◼ Analyze the source of errors
◼ Remediation
Error Analysis
 Sources of errors
◼ Interlingual: Errors caused by interference from
the L1
 L1-based

 Influence of contrastive analysis


◼ Intralingual: Errors caused by developmental
sequences in the L2
 Independence of L1 (developmental errors)
 Influence of morpheme order studies
Problems of error analysis
 Total reliance on errors (not the whole picture)
 Ignore co-occurrence of errors
 Difficulty classifying errors into types
 Difficulties identifying source of errors
◼ “The man gave her a flowers.”
 oversuppliance of the indefinite article?
 oversupplicance of plural –s?
 undersuppliance of a quantifying phrase (e.g., a bunch
of?)
Interlanguage
 Transitional language system constructed by
learner at each point in development toward
TL (Selinker, 1972)
 Synthesis of L1, L2, additional elements
Rationale for positing the existence of
Universal Grammar
 Poverty of the stimulus/Plato’s problem
◼ How is it that we come to have such complex
linguistic systems based on the input we are
exposed to?
◼ The answer: The knowledge we need already
exists in our minds
What is Universal Grammar?
 Innate linguistic capacity for language
◼ Not a general cognitive capacity responsible for other
domains of human perception (linguistic specific ability)
Krashen’s ‘Monitor Model’
 Motivation-influenced by Chomsky's theory
 What is the set of Krashen’s five hypotheses?
The Monitor Model (Krashen, 1982)
 Model of second language learning
 Five hypotheses
◼ Acquisition-learning hypothesis
◼ Natural order hypothesis
◼ Monitor hypothesis
◼ Input hypothesis
◼ Affective filter hypothesis
Acquisition-learning hypothesis
 Two means of developing L2 knowledge
◼ Acquisition
 Similar to L1 language learning
 Subconscious process
 Used to produce language
◼ Learning
 Knowing about a language (the rules, etc.)
 Conscious process
 Used to check language for accuracy
 Learned knowledge can never become acquired
knowledge
Natural order hypothesis
 Elements of language are acquired in a
predictable order
◼ Regardless of instruction
◼ Result of the acquired system, not learned system
Monitor hypothesis
 Learned system checks and alters output of the
acquired system
Input hypothesis
 Acquisition takes place by learners receiving
comprehensible input
◼ i + 1 activates the innate mental structure responsible for
(L1 and L2) acquisition
Affective filter hypothesis
 Raised affective filter prevents input from passing
through; lowered filter necessary for acquisition

 Filter responsible for individual variation in


acquisition outcomes
◼ Not present/used in children in L1 acquisition
Monitor Model—critiques
 Acquisition-learning hypothesis
 Natural order hypothesis
 Monitor hypothesis
 Input hypothesis
 Affective filter hypothesis
Krashen’s ‘Monitor Model’
 1.The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis
◼ What is the difference between the two?
 2. The Monitor Hypothesis
◼ When do we use the monitor? What types of activities?
 3. The Natural Order Hypothesis
◼ How are predictable sequences related?
 4. The Input Hypothesis
◼ What is Comprehensible Input?
 5. The Affective Filter Hypothesis
◼ What is the Affective Filter?
Krashen’s ‘Monitor Model’
 1.The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis
◼ What is the difference between the two?
 2. The Monitor Hypothesis
◼ When do we use the monitor? What types of activities?
 3. The Natural Order Hypothesis
◼ How are predictable sequences related?
 4. The Input Hypothesis
◼ What is Comprehensible Input?
 5. The Affective Filter Hypothesis
◼ What is the Affective Filter?
Role of Interaction in Learning L2
 In your opinion, what features of interaction
lead to language learning?
Cognitive interaction-related SLA
theories/concepts
 Input vs. intake
 Negotiation of meaning
 Interaction hypothesis
 Noticing hypothesis
 Output hypothesis
 Corrective/negative feedback
 Recasts
 Uptake
 Output- modified output
 Declarative knowledge vs. procedural knowledge
Input
 Input vs. intake (Corder, 1967)
◼ Input—what’s available to the learner
◼ Intake—what the learner actually takes in or
internalizes
Input
 What’s the nature of the input that L2 learners
receive?

22
Negotiation for meaning
 Instances in conversation when participants
need to interrupt the flow of the conversation
in order to understand what the conversation
is about. (G&S: pp. 318-319)
Negotiation for Meaning
1. T: And when do you speak English with your host
siblings?
2. S: Host siblings, what’s that?
3. T: Siblings means brothers and sisters.
4. S: Oh, un, when?
5. T: Yeah, do you speak English with your host brothers
and sisters?
6. S: Mm, yup, of, of course
 Intervening research
◼ Schmidt’s noticing hypothesis (1990)
◼ Swain’s output hypothesis (1985)
Noticing hypothesis (Schmidt, 1995)
 To learn any aspect of the L2, learners need to
notice the relevant material in the linguistic
data afforded by the environment
 Noticing does not itself result in acquisition,
but it is the essential starting point
Noticing hypothesis (Schmidt, 1995)
 Noticing
◼ refer to the process of bringing some stimulus into focal
attention
◼ E.g., When one notices the odd spelling of a new
vocabulary word (Schmidt, 1994, p. 17)
Output Hypothesis
 Output (1985, 1993, 1995)
◼ Language production forces learners to move from
comprehension (semantic use of language) to
syntactic use of language.
 Unlike comprehension, production requires full syntactic
processing
 Cognitive, social & linguistic demands can push output to
higher levels
◼ Modified output-pushing learners to produce more
target-like output
Updated Interaction Hypothesis
◼ The interaction approach explains language learning
“… through…
that negotiation of meaning, and especially negotiation work that triggers
interactional
 Input adjustments by the NSoforlanguage
+ production more competent interlocutor
+ noticing offacilitates
language
acquisition because it connects input, learner internal capacities, particularly
features (e.g., through feedback)
selective attention, and output in productive ways.”
What does Interaction Involve?

Output
Input
Noticing
Interaction features
(feedback/negotiation
for meaning

Language Learning
What does interaction involve?
 Input: language that a learner is exposed to (i.e.,
from reading or listening or visual language)
◼ Adjustments during interaction (i.e., modified
interaction)
 Simplification
 Elaboration
What does interaction involve?
 Output: Language production forces learners
to move from comprehension (semantic use of
language) to syntactic use of language.
◼ Swain’s Output Hypothesis (1985, 1993, 1995)
◼ Modified output-pushing learners to produce
more target-like output
 Learner: what happen for the boat?
 NS: what?
 Learner: what’s wrong with the boat (McDonough, 2005)
What does interaction involve?
 Interactional features
◼ Negotiation for meaning
 Instances in conversation when participants need to interrupt
the flow of the conversation in order to understand what the
conversation is about.
◼ Oral corrective feedback
 Response that learners receive regarding the language they
produce
 Helps to make problematic aspects of learners’ interlanguage
salient and give them additional opportunities to focus on
their production or comprehension
 Often focuses on accuracy development
How interaction brings about
learning
 Through interaction learners’ attentional
resources are directed to problematic aspects
of knowledge or production
◼ Learners may notice that what she/he says differs
from what a native speaker says (noticing the
gap; Schmidt & Frota, 1986)
◼ Interaction may direct learner’s attention to
something new
Corrective feedback
◼ Response that learners receive regarding the
language they produce
Declarative Knowledge vs. Procedural
Knowledge
Declarative Knowledge vs. Procedural
Knowledge
 Declarative knowledge
◼ Knowledge about facts and things (knowledge
that)-e.g., word knowledge
◼ Flexible-can be used in different task types
 Procedural Knowledge
◼ Knowledge about how to perform various cognitive
activities (knowledge how)-e.g., sequencing
information (playing tennis, processing sentences)
◼ Skill-specific
Developing Procedural Knowledge
 Strong interface position (DeKeyser)

Declarative knowledge→ Procedural knowledge → Automatization

 Skill-specificity of L2 knowledge (DeKeyser, 1997)


The power of practice:
Proceduralization & automaticity
 Proceduralization / Automatization:
Knowledge “that” (declarative/explicit)

Knowledge “how” (procedural/implicit)
 Involves speed-up + restructuring

You might also like