Second Language Acquisition Behaviorism Second Language applications mimicry

Second Language Acquisition

Behaviorism ¡ Second Language applications: mimicry and memorization - Audiolingual * emphasized on mimicry and memorization * students learned dialogues and patterns by heart

Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH) ¡ First language = target language ↓ acquire TL with ease ¡ First Language different from TL ↓ difficult to acquire TL BUT not all the errors predicted by CAH done by the learners when producing TL -

Many of the actual errors are not predictable ¡ Some characteristics of the simple structures they use are very similar across learners from a different backgrounds (with 1 ST Language different from one to another) ¡ The influence of the learner’s first language may not be because of the transfer of habits. ¡

Innatist Perspective ¡ - Universal Grammar UG is the right explanation for second language acquisition (Lidya White, 2003) UG fails to explain how the second language is acquired by learners who have passed the critical period (Vroman, 1983; Schachter, 1990)

¡ - Vivian Cook (2003) There is a “logical problem” of a second language acquisition Learners know more about the language they have learned (more than the amount of input that they receive)

More interested in the language competence of advanced learners with complex knowledge of grammar than simple language of beginners. ¡ More interested in investigating whether the COMPETENCE underlying the performance of the advanced learners resembles the competence of the native speakers. ¡

Second Language Applications ¡ Krashen’s ‘Monitor Model’ 5 hypotheses: 1. Acquisition-learning hypothesis -acquire vs. learn 2. Monitor hypothesis - acquires system spontaneous language use. -learned system acts as an editor or ‘monitor’ ¡

3. Natural Order Hypothesis - Second language acquisition unfolds in predictable sequences 4. Input Hypothesis - One is exposed to language that is comprehensible and that contains i + 1 - i = level of language already acquired, +1 language that is juts a step beyond that level.

5. Affective Filter Hypothesis Barrier that prevents learners from acquiring language even when appropriate input is available. ‘Affect’: feelings, motives, needs, attitudes, emotional states. Critics against Krashen: 1. Cannot be tested by empirical research 2. Difficult to differentiate acuired and learned