Ahmet Cihat Kapçık

ELT 5011

October 16, 2016

What is the role of “practice” in SLA theories? How do they view “practice”

differently?

This paper will analyze the role of “practice” in second language acquisition under the

precepts of six major theories, namely Behaviorism, Universal Grammar, Monitor Theory,

Cognitive Theory, Conversation Theories and Acculturation Theory.

While some emphasize the influence of practice in the language acquisition, others de-

emphasize it despite overlapping with the counterparts to some degree. I will analyze each

under separate titles:

1. Behaviorist Theory

Based on the stimulus and response notion of Ivan Pavlov, this theory gained credit in

language learning with the work of American psychologist Burrhus Frederic Skinner (1957),

who wrote Verbal Behavior (Brewster, Ellis & Girard, 2002). The theory emphasizes the

importance of repetition in order to obtain the desired outcome. When we relate it to language

development, we realize that caretakers’ speech (stimulus) is a requisite for the practice of

language (response) that is reinforced for its correct imitation (Lightbown and Spada 1998).

Behaviorists believe that this process ends up in habit formation, which is believed to be the

key process in language acquisition (Brewster et al., 2002).

With regard to the habit formation process linguists favoring behaviorism assert that practice

makes the language perfect; that is, learning takes place by imitating and repeating the speech
in the environment frequently (Mitchell & Myles, 2004). Therefore, practice obviously

matters in the accurate learning of language, which also minimizes the likelihood of error. It

can be seen in the form of drills.

Having a close relationship with the behaviorist theory, Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis

(CAH) claims that the easiness of learning a second language can be predicted from the

structural similarities and differences of the learner’s first language. Thus, the acquisition of

different structures is more difficult and necessitates more practice than that of similar ones.

For instance, in the research of Zdorenko and Paradis (2011) while learning English, Chinese

and Hindu/Urdu/Punjabi speakers omitted definite and indefinite articles, whereas Spanish-

and Arabic- speaking students transferred the rule of definite and indefinite articles to

English. The reason is that counterparts of English articles exist in Spanish and Arabic whilst

they do not in Chinese and Hindu/Urdu/Punjabi.

2. Universal Grammar Theory

American linguist Noam Chomsky (1959, as cited in Lightbown & Spada, 1998) developed

this theory in reaction to the behaviorist theory of language. Chomksy contradicted with the

behaviorist views by putting forward Language Acquisition Device (LAD), currently referred

to as Universal Grammar (UG). He argued that children are born with an innate faculty to

discover the rules of a language system, thus highlighting children’s minds are not blank

slates to be loaded solely by imitating language in their environment (Lightbown & Spada,

1998; Mitchell & Myles, 2004; Brewster et al., 2002).

UG takes into account the child’s creativity as a crucial part of L1, that is carried over to

second language learning (Brewster et al., 2002). With respect to the biologically granted

creativity, UG enables children to process all the language they hear and to produce self-
made meaningful and complex utterances (Brewster et al., 2002). Therefore, unlike the

behaviorist view neither parental correction/reinforcement nor practice is paramount in this

theory. To illustrate, think of newborn babies who automatically learn walking when the time

is due. This applies to language learning no matter what languages they are learning since

every child has the innate capacity to discover any languages either European or African in a

very fast way. They only need to have access to natural language, which serve as a trigger to

activate the LAD (Lightbown & Spada, 1998).

3. Monitor Theory

Monitor Theory is one of American linguist Stephen Krashen’s five basic hypotheses.

Krashen (1982) makes a distinction between acquisition and learning by proposing that

acquisition is a subconscious process that results in fluent language, whereas learning is a

conscious process that results in accurate language (Mitchell & Myles, 2004). This implies

that learning has the role of editing and monitoring the language that the acquired system has

produced (Lightbown & Spada, 1998). This theory evidently shifts the focus from the

acquisition that is the result of natural interaction to learning which is the outcome of

classroom experience where learners focus on form and familiarizes themselves with the

linguistic norms of the target language (Mitchell & Myles, 2004). Therefore, because the

language to be edited comes naturally through interaction (comprehensible input) practice

does not take place in this process. In other words, as Krashen places little importance on

skills building which is a conscious process with loads of practice on meaning and form,

practice takes place in the edition of the produced language with the purpose of increasing

accuracy by diminishing mistakes in the language. He additionally argues that overuse of

Monitor yields non-fluent language whilst underuse of it leads to inaccurate language

(Mitchell & Myles, 2004).

4. Cognitive Theory

Cognitive psychologists believe that in order to understand the second language acquisition

process we need to understand how the human brain processes information. Being one of the

leading proponents of this theory, McLaughlin (1987, 1990, as cited in Mitchell & Myles,

2004) proposed information processing model to explain the second language learning. He

views the SLL as the acquisition of a complex cognitive skill (Mitchell & Myles, 2004) and

asserts two notions are the bases of cognitive theory: automatization and restructuring. The

former has two types: controlled or automatic. In controlled processing the learners constrain

the language to the short-term memory whilst in automatic type the knowledge is stored in

the long-term memory through repeated activation.

When it comes to the role of practice, learning is considered as the movement from controlled

to automatic processing through practice (repeated activation) (Mitchell & Myles, 2004).

Cognitive psychologists in general argue that learners are able to use particular parts of their

knowledge through experience and practice without being aware of it. Therefore, practice

plays a crucial role in this theory. Nevertheless, learners have been witnessed to use some

knowledge that cannot be explained by automatization through practice, which is explained

by “restructuring” (Lightbown & Spada, 1998). Similarly, in Anderson’s (1983, as cited in

Mitchell & Myles, 2004) Active Control Theory (ACT) practice leading to automatization

plays a key role by enabling declarative knowledge in spite of having contrasting notions

such as memory types.

Having said that, this relatively new theory cannot easily estimate what structures will be

automatized through practice and what will be restructured, which makes it incomplete

(Lightbown & Spada, 1998).

5. Conversation Theory

Conversation theory is widely associated with Gordon Pask who put forward this theory in

1970s. The theory places the following concepts in the central of its philosophy: speaking,

scaffolding, feedback and negotiation. It is posited that speaking takes place through the

participation in verbal or non-verbal second language conversations. The higher- proficiency

level learners assist the lower-level ones in maintaining the conversation, which is defined as

scaffolding. Feedback is necessary both on meaning and form to inhibit errors. Lastly,

negotiation of meaning helps learners understand the language usage.

Given all these theory-related concepts, practice takes place in verbal or written

correspondences, thus making “practice” a key part of language acquisition. Without practice

the other principles i.e. scaffolding, negotiation and feedback would find no input to discuss

because they are all dependent on conversation.

6. Acculturation Theory

Firstly proposed by Schumann in 1970s Acculturation theory approaches the SLA from a

fundamentally different perspective. According to the principles of this model acculturation is

regarded as causal variable of second language acquisition. In other words if the learners

acculturate (assimilate to the culture of the language), they will surely learn; if not, they will

not learn the language (Gass & Selinker, 2008). Mitchell and Myles (2004) also highlights

that once the learners feel themselves closer to the culture of the language, they will

acculturate and the learning will be more successful.

That being so this theory puts more emphasis on social life so that the learners get

acculturated. Practice is definitely considered to be a part of acculturation in this process.

 References

Brewster, J., Ellis, G., & Girard, D. (2002). The primary English teacher’s guide. Penguin

English Guide

Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition: An introductory course.

New York and London: Routledge

Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1998). How languages are learned: Oxford University Press.

Mitchell, R. & Myles, F. (2004). Second language learning theories: Hodder Arnold

Zdorenko, T., & Paradis, J. (2012). Articles in child L2 English: When L1 and L1 acquisition

meet at the interface. First Language 32(1/2), 38-62. doi:10.1177/0142723710396797