The Input Hypothesis

• Concerned with how learners go from one

developmental stage to another developmental sage.

• Postulates that humans acquire language in only one

way – by understanding messages, or receiving
‘comprehensible input’……. . We move from i, our
current level, to i +1, the next level along the natural
order, by understanding input containing i +1.
(Krashen. 1985)
 Input Hypothesis

How do we acquire language?

 Input Hypothesis

How do we move from one stage to another?

 Input Hypothesis

If an acquirer is at "stage 4", how can he

progress to "stage 5"?
 Input Hypothesis

More generally, how do we move from stage i,

where ‘i’ represents current competence, to i
+ 1, the next level?
 Input Hypothesis
In response to the questions above, Input
Hypothesis states that :
A necessary (but not sufficient) condition
to move from stage i to stage i + 1 is that
the acquirer understand input that
contains i + 1, where "understand" means
that the acquirer is focussed on the
meaning and not the form of the message.
 Input Hypothesis

In other words, we acquire, only when we

understand language that contains
structure that is "a little beyond" where we
are now.
• How is this possible?

• How can we understand language that

contains structures that we have not yet
acquired?
 Input Hypothesis
The answer is :
• we use more than our linguistic competence
to help us understand.
• We also use context, our knowledge of the
world, our extra-linguistic information to help
us understand language directed at us.
 Input Hypothesis
• As Hatch (1978a) has pointed out, our
assumption has been that we first learn
structures, then practice using them in
communication, and this is how fluency
develops. The input hypothesis says the
opposite. It says we acquire by "going for
meaning“ first, and as a result, we acquire
structure!
Parts (components) of Input Hypothesis:

(1) The input hypothesis relates to acquisition,

not learning.
(2) We acquire by understanding language that
contains structure a little beyond our current
level of competence (i + 1). This is done with
the help of context or extra-linguistic
information.
 Input Hypothesis

(3) When communication is successful, when

the input is understood and there is enough of
it, i + 1 will be provided automatically.
 Input Hypothesis

(4) Production ability emerges. It is not taught

directly.
 The Input Hypothesis
Two outcomes of the Input Hypothesis :
• Speaking is a result of acquisition not its cause. Speech
cannot be taught directly but emerges on its own as a
result of building competence via comprehensible input.
• If input is understood, and there is enough of it, the
necessary grammar is automatically provided. The
language teacher need not attempt deliberately to teach
the next structure along the natural order – it will be
provided in just the right quantities and automatically
reviewed if the students receives a sufficient amount of
comprehensible input.
 Input Hypothesis
Evidences supporting Input Hypothesis
 Caretaker speech
 Simple codes
 The silent period and L1 influence
 Input Hypothesis
Implications
 While teaching L2, acquisition should be the
goal of teaching and learning.

 Input should be comprehensible to the learners

 Understanding meaning should be given priority

to learning rules at the outset of the course.