Second language learning as an academic subject or a

different mechanism
Nowadays, a mass appeal has been sighted towards second language learning. Some people think
of L2 learning as an academic subject, so they pay attention to the rules of grammar and
vocabulary. According to others, second language learning is not an academic subject but it is
connected with communication and also it is an inborn ability that has its own place in the human
brain. These two arguments have raised an issue in the field of linguistics for L2 learning.

Introduction

In recent years, the biggest part of the global population does not only speak their mother
tongue, but they are also users of a second language for different reasons (occupational reasons,
hobby etc.). It is important to understand first that, the term L2 learning is used for both
“foreign“languages and a second language, spoken in the surrounding community. Due to this
mass appeal of second language learning, a huge debate has taken place of whether second
language learning is like any other academic subject or whether it is a totally different process.
This issue still remains unresolved due to the fact that both sides base their arguments on
theories that are well grounded, as my paper will attempt to show. The paper is organized as
follows: In the first section I will present the arguments that support the idea that second
language learning is an academic subject and in the second section I will talk about the ones who
are against to this idea.

L2 Learning as an academic subject

Bley Vroman (1989) reports that second language learning “differs in degree of success in the
character and uniformity of system”. This theory is reflected in the grammar translation method
of teaching a second language. This method originated from teaching Latin (Yule, 2016). In
particular, this model focuses on the translation of texts, grammar and the learning of
vocabulary. Students are “exposed” in vocabulary lists and grammar theory through series of
exercises. Also, Yule (2016) states that memorization and written language are encouraged a lot.
There is no focus on listening and speaking in this method because it is used mostly for academic
subjects.

Negative sides of Grammar translation method

It is legitimate to speculate that, one of the goals through this method is to get high grades at
school. Apart from that, this method “leaves students quite ignorant of how the language might
be used in everyday conversation” (Yule, 2016), they are unable to use their knowledge in
everyday life and they get confused when they leave school, since they pay attention more to
grammatical rules and in the development of their writing skills. Moreover, this method has a
teacher-centred character. To make it clear, individuals are directed by the teachers and this does
not allow them to search and choose their own way of learning. So, probably L2 learning might
not be just another academic subject.

L2 learning treated a distinct mechanism

Based on this inefficiency of the grammar translation method, many linguists are against to
the idea of exchange rate between academic subject and L2 learning and claim that second
language learning is not an academic subject. Moreover, autonomy of language is one more
evidence for this idea. According to this theory, part of the human brain is devoted in language
learning. In addition to that, Fromkin, Rodman and Hayms (2010) affirms that, humans “are born
with the ability to acquire a language”, which means that individuals are able to learn a language
just by listening and without any instruction. Last but not least, if we take into consideration the
fact that a second language is impossible to be learned with only general cognitive strategies, we
will understand that it is not an academic subject (Vroman, 1989).

Communicative Approaches

According to research conducted by Yule (2016), communicative approaches go against “the

artificiality of pattern-practice” (Yule, 2016). In particular, individuals pay more attention to the
different uses of language rather than in the structure. Through this approach L2 learning is
treated as a result of communication in everyday life and not as an academic subject and need to
be placed in a broader sociocultural context, which includes participants, behaviors and beliefs
(Richards & Rodgers, 1986). Lastly, it seems that in communicative approach, language is a
system of expressing meaning and its structure reflects its communicative uses (Richards &
Rodgers, 1986).

Conclusion

The main purpose of the study was to present the two approaches that exist for the L2
learning and that all methods of teaching reflect a theory of learning. One part of the study
described L2 learning as an academic subject, which can be acquired with the same methods as
any other subject. On the second part of the paper L2 learning was depicted as a theory of
communication and as an inborn ability for human. In the first section a second language can be
acquired through teaching like any other academic subject. Unfortunately, through this process,
the knowledge of individuals is associated only with grammar and vocabulary. On the other hand,
in the second section, second language learning is a result of communication, as shown in
communicative approaches. It may be true that L2 learning can be considered as an academic
subject but it is also true that it is more a tool for communication rather than something that can
be taught at school. So, individuals should probably focus more in their everyday life communion.

References

Bley-Vroman, R. (1989). The Logical Problem of Foreign Language Learning. University of Hawaii.
Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Bley-
Vroman/publication/240412239_The_Logical_Problem_of_Foreign_Language_Learning/links/556
71a8008aeccd777378100/The-Logical-Problem-of-Foreign-Language-Learning.pdf

Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., Hyams, N. (2010). An Introduction to Language. University of Carolina,
Los Angeles. Michael Rosenberg

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (1986). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. United
Kingdom. Cambridge University Press

Yule, G. (2016). The Study of Language. United Kingdom. Cambridge University Press.