Stephen Krashen’s

Language Acquisition Theory

About 25 years ago, a psychologist named Stephen
Krashen transformed language teaching. He had
been developing his ideas over a number of years,
but several books he published in the 1980s
received widespread acceptance.

acquisition is the unconscious mind related activity that occurs when the language is used in conversation. Krashen embodies the following hypotheses in his theory: .STEPHEN KRASHEN’S LANGUAGE ACQUISITION THEORY This theory states that acquisition and learning are two separate processes. Learning is to know about a language formal knowledge.

Much has been made of Krashen's theory of second language acquisition. • the input hypothesis. which consists of five main hypotheses: • The acquisition learning hypothesis • the monitor hypothesis. and • the affective filter hypothesis. • the natural order hypothesis.youtube.com/watch?v=NiTsduRreug&feature=rel ated . http://www.

This theory is at the core of modern language acquisition theory. and is perhaps the most fundamental of Krashen's theories on second acquisition. . there are two independent ways to develop our linguistic skills: acquisition and learning.According to Krashen’s acquisition-learning hypothesis.

One is unaware of the process as it is happening and when the new knowledge is acquired. This process is similar to the process that children undergo when learning their native language. during which the acquirer is focused on meaning rather than form.  Acquisition requires meaningful interaction in the target language. the acquirer generally does not realize that he or she possesses any new knowledge. .  According to Krashen.Acquisition  Subconscious process where individual is not aware. both adults and children can subconsciously acquire language. and either written or oral language can be acquired.

is a conscious process. New knowledge or language forms are represented consciously in the learner's mind. .Learning Learning a language. is less effective than acquisition. Language learning involves formal instruction. on the other hand. and according to Krashen. frequently in the form of language "rules" and "grammar" and the process often involves error correction. much like what one experiences in school.

Milagro Azofeifa y Gabriela Serrano for Educational Purposes . radio) Picking up words SLA Learning Conscious by instructors Correct errors Knowing about Grammar rules Material created by Sonia Albertazzi.The Acquisition – Learning Distinction Acquisition Sub-conscious by environment (Ex: games. Movies.

Limited Comprehension. Very good comprehension. Simple sentences.Natural Order: Natural progression/order of language development exhibited by infants/young children and/or second language learners (child or adult). Increased comprehension. Complex errors in speech. Level IV: Intermediate Fluency Stage. . More complex sentences. One/two-word response. Level II: Early Production Stage. no verbal production. Level III: Speech Emergence Stage. Level l: Pre-Production Stage (Silent Period): Minimal comprehension. Some errors in speech.

Monitor Learning (as opposed to acquisition) serves to develop a monitor. This might inhibit language acquisition. As a corollary to the monitor hypothesis. particularly at the early stages of language development. . language acquisition instruction should avoid emphasis on error correction and grammar.an error detecting mechanism that scans utterances for accuracy in order to make corrections.

According to Krashen. for the Monitor to be successfully used. three conditions must be met: . The monitoring function is the practical result of the learned grammar.The Monitor hypothesis explains the relationship between acquisition and learning.

resulting in the production and exchange of less information. The acquirer must be focused on correctness: He or she must be thinking about form. Having time to use the monitor: The speaker is then focused on form rather than meaning. and it is difficult to focus on meaning and form at the same time. .The acquirer/learner must know the rule: This is a very difficult condition to meet because it means that the speaker must have had explicit instruction.

such as while writing.Due to these difficulties. . Krashen recommends using the monitor at times when it does not interfere with communication.

motivation. but non-causal. The affective filter is a screen of emotion that can block language acquisition or learning if it keeps the users from being too self-conscious or too embarrassed to take risks during communicative exchanges The Affective Filter hypothesis. embodies Krashen's view that a number of 'affective variables' play a facilitative.Affective Filter: Optimal input occurs when the "affective filter" is low. These variables include: confidence and anxiety. self- . role in second language acquisition.

Low motivation. . Krashen claims that learners with high motivation. and debilitating anxiety can combine to 'raise' the affective filter and form a 'mental block' that prevents comprehensible input from being used for acquisition. when the filter is 'up' it impedes language acquisition. In other words. and a low level of anxiety are better equipped for success in second language acquisition. a good self-image. self-confidence. low self-esteem.

. self-confidence. and a low level of anxiety are better equipped for success in second language acquisition.Krashen claims that learners with high motivation. a good self-image.

THE INPUT HYPOTHESIS We acquire language only when we understand language that contains structure that is “a little beyond” where we are now. Milagro Azofeifa y Gabriela Serrano for Educational Purposes . Material created by Sonia Albertazzi. This is possible because we use more than our linguistic competence to help us understand.

In addition. 4. Independence: The social psychological and cultural differences are accepted and enjoyed (ibid. New cultural cues are misread and withdrawal and depression can occur. And the person is able to function in both the old and the new culture. the Cultural Adaption / Cultural Shock cycle for students. relaxed and confident. 5. isolation and loneliness.culturality. Re-integration: The new cues are re-integrated but even though the individual has an increased ability to function in the new culture. he has achieved bi. 2.). 3. upon introducing themselves to a new language and its culture is to experience the following: 1.Honeymoon: The sojourner is intrigued by the differences she or he perceives and is excited about everything. is able to deal with them and therefore feels more self-assured. Autonomy: The person is able to see the differences between the two cultures in a more objective way. he rejects it and experiences anger and resentment and acts hostile and rebellious. Disintegration: The differences between the cultures lead to confusion. .

Input/instruction that is just above the students' abilities. repetition). modified (paraphrasing. Input + 1/Zone of Proximal Development. collaborative/interactive and multimodal. . This is possible because we use more than our linguistic competence to help us understand.THE INPUT HYPOTHESIS Input needs to be comprehensible. Instruction that is embedded in a meaningful context. We acquire language only when we understand language that contains structure that is “a little beyond” where we are now.

It also states that speaking fluency cannot be taught directly. Early speech will come when the acquirer feels “ready:” accurate.The input hypothesis says that we acquire by “going for meaning” first. The best way to teach speaking. on its own. . It emerges over time. is simply to provide comprehensible input. It is typically not grammatically Accuracy develops over time as the acquirer hears and understands more input. we acquire structure. and as a result. according to this view.

Stephen D.  Prentice-Hall International.  Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Krashen.BIBLIOGRAPHY Krashen. 1987.  Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning.  Prentice-Hall International. 1988. Stephen D. Aparts taken from the presentation of: SONIA ALBERTAZZI MILAGRO AZOFEIFA GABRIELA SERRANO .