Teacher Training Course

Last Updated: August 2014

Module 1
Lesson 4: Second Language Learning and Acquisition
Summary

Is learning a second language like learning a first?

According to linguists (i.e. scientists who engage in the scientific study of human language) there is an important
distinction between language acquisition and language learning.
Children acquire their mother tongue through interaction with their parents and the environment that surrounds them.
Their need to communicate prepares the way for language acquisition to take place. Experts suggest that there is an
innate capacity in every human being to acquire language. By the time a child is five years old, s/he can express ideas
clearly and almost perfectly from the point of view of language and grammar. Although parents never sit with children
to explain to them how the language works, their utterances show a superb command of intricate rules and patterns
that would drive an adult crazy if s/he tried to memorize them and use them accurately.
It is generally assumed that children learn to pronounce speech sounds by imitation from adult models.
When it comes to second language learning in children, you will notice that this happens almost identically to their first

se
language acquisition. And even teachers focus more on the communicative aspect of the language rather than on just

ur
rules and patterns for the children to repeat and memorize. In order to acquire language, the learner needs a source of
20 inin lo
Co
natural communication.
The emphasis is on the text of the communication and not on the form. Young students who are in the process of
ra ng
14 g
acquiring a second language get plenty of on the job practice. They readily acquire the language to communicate
rT eA

with classmates. In short, there is a tendency for second language teachers to be quite aware of the importance of
communication in young learners and their inability to memorize rules consciously (although they will definitely acquire
he Th

them through a hands-on approach just as they did with their mother tongue).

Chronological age and second language acquisition.

According to some researchers, the defining difference between a first language (L1) and a second language (L2) is the
ac

age at which the language was learned. For example, Eric Lenneberg used second language to mean a language
consciously acquired or used by its speaker after puberty. In most cases, people never achieve the same level of
Te

fluency and comprehension in their second, third and other languages as in their first language. These views are closely
associated with the Critical Period Hypothesis.
In acquiring an L2, Hyltenstam (1992) found that around the age of 6 and 7 seemed to be a cut-off point for bilinguals
to achieve native-like proficiency. After that age, L2 learners could get near-native-like-ness but their language would,
while consisting of very few actual errors, have enough errors that would set them apart from the L1 group. The
inability of some of the subjects to achieve native-like proficiency must be seen in relation to the age of onset (AO).

The effect of teaching on acquisition

Learners' most direct source of information about the target language is the target language itself. When they come
into direct contact with the target language, this is referred to as "input." When learners process that language in a
way that can contribute to learning, this is referred to as "intake."
Generally speaking, the amount of input learners convert to intake is one of the most important factors affecting their
learning. However, it must be at a level that is comprehensible to them.

Teacher Training Coordination

 Teacher Training Course
Last Updated: August 2014

Differences between language learning and language acquisition.

The clear understanding of the differences between acquisition and learning makes it possible to investigate their
interrelationships as well as the implications for the teaching of languages.
First, we ought to consider that languages, in general, are complex, arbitrary, irregular phenomena, full of ambiguities,
in constant random and uncontrollable evolution. Therefore, the grammatical structure of a language may be too
complex and abstract to be categorized and defined by rules.
Krashen admits that the knowledge obtained through formal study (language learning) can serve to monitor speaking.
Krashen, however, does not specify the language that would be the object of study, but he was probably using the
study of Spanish as the basis for his inferences and conclusions because it is the dominant foreign language in the
United States, and particularly in the state of California, where Professor Krashen lives and works.

4.5 Language Acquisition: Stephen Krashens Theory.

The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis

The Acquisition-Learning distinction is the most fundamental of all the hypotheses in Krashen's theory and the most

se
widely known among linguists and language practitioners.

ur
According to Krashen there are two independent systems of second language performance: 'the acquired system' and
20 inin lo
'the learned system'. The 'acquired system' or 'acquisition' is the product of a subconscious process very similar to the

Co
process children undergo when they acquire their first language. It requires meaningful interaction in the target
ra ng

language - natural communication - in which speakers are concentrating not on the form of their utterances, but on the
14 g
rT eA

communicative act.
The 'learned system' or 'learning' is the product of formal instruction and it comprises a conscious process which
results in conscious knowledge 'about' the language, for example knowledge of grammar rules. According to Krashen
he Th

'learning' is less important than 'acquisition'.

The Monitor Hypothesis

The Monitor hypothesis explains the relationship between acquisition and learning and defines the influence of the
latter on the former. The monitoring function is the practical result of the learned grammar. According to Krashen, the
ac

acquisition system is the utterance initiator, while the learning system performs the role of the 'monitor' or the
Te

'editor'. The 'monitor' acts in a planning, editing and correcting function when three specific conditions are met: that
is, the second language learner has sufficient time at his/her disposal, he/she focuses on form or thinks about
correctness, and he/she knows the rule.
It appears that the role of conscious learning is somewhat limited in second language performance. According to
Krashen, the role of the monitor is - or should be - minor, being used only to correct deviations from 'normal' speech
and to give speech a more 'polished' appearance.
Krashen also suggests that there is individual variation among language learners with regard to 'monitor' use. He
distinguishes those learners that use the 'monitor' all the time (over-users); those learners who have not learned or
who prefer not to use their conscious knowledge (under-users); and those learners that use the 'monitor'
appropriately (optimal users). An evaluation of the person's psychological profile can help to determine to what group
they belong. Usually extroverts are under-users, while introverts and perfectionists are over-users. Lack of self-
confidence is frequently related to the over-use of the 'monitor'.

The Natural Order Hypothesis

The Natural Order Hypothesis suggests that, just as there is a natural sequence in the way children pick up their own
first language, with certain grammatical morphemes being acquired before others, so there is for second languages.
At the moment, we may say that there are strong reasons to believe that there is indeed some kind of an order in the
acquisition of certain grammatical morphemes, but not of all.

Teacher Training Coordination

 Teacher Training Course
Last Updated: August 2014

There is perhaps a stronger case to be made out for the existence of 'developmental sequences'. This refers not to the
fact that one morpheme comes before or after another, but that a certain rule is acquired gradually, that the learner
makes certain predictable mistakes at each stage in the learning process, and that these mistakes follow a similar order
whatever the mother tongue of the learner.
Let's see how the negation is put in place by learners of English as an L2. What we see here is that, like the child
learning her mother tongue, the adult L2 learner will produce utterances that he has never heard from her teacher or
from a native speaker. Instead, they build up their mastery of the negation through consecutively using a series of self-
generated rules, many of which display a similar simplification and over-generalisation to that used by the child. Thus,
first attempts at negation would be:
No very good.
No like it.
Then the learner moves on to place the negative inside the utterance:
I not want to.
He no can speak.
She don't come.
In a third phase, the learner attaches the negation to modal verbs, although without necessarily analysing the

se
utterances:
I can't play this one.

ur
I won't go.
20 inin lo
Co
Then in a final phase, negation follows fully English rules, although mistakes may occur in tense uses.
ra ng

Individual learners may go through the phases more or less quickly, and some never reach the final phase at all. In this
14 g
case, we often speak about 'fossilization' - for some reason or other, the learner makes no further progress. In fact,
rT eA

this may be seen as a perfectly rational judgment on the part of the learner, who decides that any further investment in
perfecting his grasp of the L2 will not pay sufficient dividends in added communicative and social power.
he Th

The errors that the student makes are a natural part of the learning process. Krashen implies that there is very little
that we can do other than encourage the learner to form his own hypotheses and to continue along the 'natural
pathway' to mastery - or at least to the level of master which satisfies him. However, other observers have noted that
classroom teaching may help the learner go through each stage in the process rather more quickly, even if it cannot
enable him to beat the system.
ac

This implies that it can only be done through a rigorous identification of the present needs of the student - it is no good
Te

trying to get the learner to correct errors which are as yet beyond his competence. The teacher needs to work in
concert with the learner to determine what features should be worked on, and to make the learner conscious of the
hypotheses and strategies that he uses in communicative situations.

The Input Hypothesis

The Input hypothesis is Krashen's attempt to explain how the learner acquires a second language. In other words, this
hypothesis is Krashen's explanation of how second language acquisition takes place. So, the Input hypothesis is only
concerned with 'acquisition', not 'learning'. According to this hypothesis, the learner improves and progresses along
the 'natural order' when he/she receives second language 'input' that is one step beyond his/her current stage of
linguistic competence. For example, if a learner is at a stage 'i', then acquisition takes place when he/she is exposed to
'Comprehensible Input' that belongs to level 'i + 1'. Since not all of the learners can be at the same level of linguistic
competence at the same time, Krashen suggests that natural communicative input is the key to designing a syllabus,
ensuring in this way that each learner will receive some 'i + 1' input that is appropriate for his/her current stage of
linguistic competence.

The Affective Filter Hypothesis

Finally, the fifth hypothesis, the Affective Filter hypothesis, embodies Krashen's view that a number of 'affective
variables' play a facilitative, but non-causal, role in second language acquisition. These variables include: motivation,
self-confidence and anxiety. Krashen claims that learners with high motivation, self-confidence, a good self-image, and
Teacher Training Coordination
 Teacher Training Course
Last Updated: August 2014

a low level of anxiety are better equipped for success in second language acquisition. Low motivation, low self-esteem,
and debilitating anxiety can combine to 'raise' the affective filter and form a 'mental block' that prevents
comprehensible input from being used for acquisition.

The Role of Grammar in Krashen's View

According to Krashen, the study of the structure of the language can have general educational advantages and values
that high schools and colleges may want to include in their language programs. It should be clear, however, that
examining irregularity, formulating rules and teaching complex facts about the target language is not language
teaching, but rather is "language appreciation" or linguistics.
The only instance in which the teaching of grammar can result in language acquisition (and proficiency) is when the
students are interested in the subject and the target language is used as a medium of instruction. Very often, when this
occurs, both teachers and students are convinced that the study of formal grammar is essential for second language
acquisition, and the teacher is skilful enough to present explanations in the target language so that the students
understand. In other words, the teacher talk meets the requirements for comprehensible input and perhaps with the
students' participation the classroom becomes an environment suitable for acquisition. Also, the filter is low in regard
to the language of explanation, as the students' conscious efforts are usually on the subject matter, on what is being

se
talked about, and not the medium.
This is a subtle point. In effect, both teachers and students are deceiving themselves. They believe that it is the subject

ur
matter itself, the study of grammar, that is responsible for the students' progress, but in reality their progress is
20 inin lo
Co
coming from the medium and not the message. Any subject matter that held their interest would do just as well.
ra ng
14 g
rT eA

References
he Th

Crystal, David The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Krashen, Stephen D. Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Prentice-Hall International, 1987.
Krashen, Stephen D. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Prentice-Hall
International, 1988.
ac
Te

Teacher Training Coordination