http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lessons-Language-Learners-Cambridge-Teaching/dp/0521718147/ref=pd_sim_b_5
Product Description
Product Description
This edited collection provides a comprehensive overview of the area of sucessful language learning strategies and reviews the literature and research on this subject to date. The book provides a reference base, addresses theoretical issues and considers pedagogical implications. It identifies gaps in our current understanding and suggests useful research initiatives and it considers how all of this relates to successful language learning by unique individuals in a variety of situations. The book is divided into 2 sections: the first deals with learner variables and has chapters on such topics as age, culture, motivation, personality and aptitude. The second covers learning variables such as vocabulary, pronunciation, grammar, reading and listening. The writers include many well-established names such as Anna Chamot, Paul Nation and Andrew Cohen as well as some of the best representatives of the new generation of applied linguists.
Book Description
This book considers the strategies used by successful language learners, in the light of current thinking and research.
Monday, January 17, 2011
The Psychoolgy of the Language Learner Individual Differences by Zoltán Dörnyei
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Psychology-Language-Learner-Differences-Acquisition/dp/0805860185/ref=sr_1_10?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1295305575&sr=1-10
http://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume10/ej37/ej37r7/
This book follows the structure of the seminal book by Peter Skehan (1989), Individual Differences in Second Language Learning. The objective of Dörnyei’s book is to provide a single-authored monograph on language individual differences (ID) research. Based on this objective, the author provides a consistent and comprehensive review of the most up-to-date studies in this field. In doing so, he extends the traditional boundary of ID research and includes some important learner variables from other fields, such as psychology and sociology.
What I especially like about this book is that the author not only focuses on the field of second language acquisition (SLA), but he starts by discussing relevant ID concepts from their origins in psychology or sociology, and then zooms in on the SLA area. By doing so, the author successfully provides the reader with a clear understanding of the foundations of those conceptual frameworks and their development, and what the connections are between SLA and psychology or sociology, and between SLA and ID research.
The book is organized into eight chapters. The opening chapter is an introduction to the essential definition and taxonomy of individual differences. The author traces the beginning of ID research to the end of 19th century when individual differences were first investigated scientifically by Sir Francis Galton. The concept of ID is regarded as a loose notion, containing certain core variables and many optional ones. The core variables in ID research comprise personality, language aptitude, motivation, learning/cognitive styles, and learning strategies.
Following the thread of the core variables, the author elaborates on each of them individually in the next five chapters. Chapter 2 distinguishes personality from temperament and mood. Different instruments in the study of personality are discussed, including the “Big Five” model and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). From the relationship between personality and learning in general, Dörnyei moves on to discuss personality and language learning in particular. By dividing the studies into early studies, extraversion and introversion studies, studies that use MBTI, and other studies, the author shows connections within the progression that could shed light on the relationship between personality and language learning. Though at this stage in the research we can’t say that personality directly determines an individual’s academic success, it certainly is a potent mediating factor that should be examined more in ID research.
Language aptitude is the focus of Chapter 3. The author notes that, as a strong predictor of academic success, language aptitude has been widely studied from the beginning of the 1990s. The author elaborates on two widely used aptitude batteries: the Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT) and the Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery (PLAB). He then considers ongoing issues in language aptitude research: L1 aptitude, age, intelligence, teaching methods, and learning situations. Further, the author outlines some new research directions in language aptitude, namely, new aptitude instruments and new hypotheses. Examining the relationship between working memory (based on Baddeley’s 2003 study) and language aptitude is introduced as one of the most promising directions in language aptitude studies. Lastly, Dörnyei points out that combining aptitude measures with other ID variables as pioneered by Peter Robinson (1997) is another promising avenue in aptitude research.
Chapter 4 is about motivation. Three important phases of L2 motivation research are identified: the social psychological period, led by the work of Gardner and his associates in Canada; the cognitive-situated period, characterized by work drawing on cognitive theories in educational psychology; and the process-oriented period, initiated by Dörnyei and his colleagues in Europe over the past five years and focusing on motivational change. Subsequently, newer concepts such as group dynamics, demotivation, motivational self-regulation, and the neurobiology of motivation are described to indicate that external forces (e.g., group norms) or internal forces (e.g., self-regulational strategies), may result in either motivating or demotivating effects. “Self-motivation” is analyzed and the “L2 Motivational Self System”, a new paradigm, is presented as an integration of the concepts of possible and ideal selves, terms borrowed from personality psychology.
Learning styles are discussed in company with cognitive styles in Chapter 5. Drawing on the work of Riding (2000), the author states that confusing labels, ineffective measurement instruments, lack of distinction between style and other constructs (e.g., personality) make the research on learning style and cognitive style a “quagmire” (p. 120). Dornyei tries to at least clarify the difference between learning style and cognitive style using colors as an analogy. He states that “cognitive styles can be seen as equivalents of the colors proper, whereas learning styles are the manifestations of the colors in the real world” (p. 160). Regardless of its complexity, learning style/cognitive style, as the research review in this chapter demonstrates, is a variable too important to be ignored in ID studies. Dornyei illustrates such importance by presenting the basic tenets of two learning style models, Riding’s and Kolb’s (1999), and in L2 studies, field dependence/independence (FD/I). I found this chapter’s section on practical implications most appealing. The author’s descriptions of six possible style conflicts and six possible ways of using learner style in the classroom demonstrate very well the practical side of this theoretically blurry concept.
As in the motivation chapter, learning strategies are highlighted in Chapter 6, along with a relevant new concept, student self-regulation. Different from previous chapters, the introduction from general psychology is understated; more attention is paid to learning strategies used in L2 studies. Readers interested in L2 learning strategies will find this chapter handy for accessing a series of strategy inventories from previous research. Self-regulation is elaborated as a concept more robust than the “surface manifestations” (p. 195) of strategies in previous research, more robust because dynamic and process-oriented. The brief introduction to self-regulation in educational psychology provides some foundation for researchers inclined to examine students proactively applying learning tactics or skills.
Chapter 7 is a discussion of less-researched learner characteristics also regarded as important in the ID research picture: anxiety, self-esteem, creativity, willingness to communicate (WTC), and learner beliefs. I especially welcomed the inclusion of this chapter, as it opens a big window onto future research into these less prominent variables that may also significantly impact second language acquisition. The last chapter is a brief summary of three themes of future ID research in the L2 field: (1) a better understanding of the situated nature of L2 learning, (2) possible optimal combinations of the complex theoretical models that contain different ID variables, and (3) the connection of ID variables with specific SLA processes.
This book is a substantial resource because, in thoroughly reviewing the literature, Dornyei provides succinct summaries of many prominent instruments used to measure different ID variables. The Psychology of the Language Learner also helps to furnish teachers and researchers with tools required for investigating ID variables further and suggestions for how they might be contextualized. Not until the the last chapter did I encounter anything needing to be strengthened. Compared with the extensive reviews offered in the previous chapters, a stronger conclusion, one making clearer links among individual-difference variables, would provide a more systematic and conclusive overview of the psychology of language learners. Also, as in Skehan’s (1989) book, a section that delineates the interactions of different ID variables would give readers a better understanding of the complicated phenomenon of ID variables in L2 acquisition.
The breadth of perspectives in this book is wide enough to offer not only an updated ID paradigm for SLA, but also a critical review of the recent development and expansion of the core variables within individual-learner differences. I believe this book would appeal to graduate students and professionals in the fields of linguistics, psychology, and education. It should also serve as a comprehensive reference book for second/foreign language teachers who aim to understand the psychology behind students’ acquiring a second language.
Reference
Skehan, P. (1989). Individual Differences in Second-language Learning. London: Edward Arnold.
Ying Zheng
Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Psychology-Language-Acquisition-Applied-Linguistics/dp/019442197X/ref=sr_1_12?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1295060922&sr=1-12
http://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume10/ej37/ej37r7/
This book follows the structure of the seminal book by Peter Skehan (1989), Individual Differences in Second Language Learning. The objective of Dörnyei’s book is to provide a single-authored monograph on language individual differences (ID) research. Based on this objective, the author provides a consistent and comprehensive review of the most up-to-date studies in this field. In doing so, he extends the traditional boundary of ID research and includes some important learner variables from other fields, such as psychology and sociology.
What I especially like about this book is that the author not only focuses on the field of second language acquisition (SLA), but he starts by discussing relevant ID concepts from their origins in psychology or sociology, and then zooms in on the SLA area. By doing so, the author successfully provides the reader with a clear understanding of the foundations of those conceptual frameworks and their development, and what the connections are between SLA and psychology or sociology, and between SLA and ID research.
The book is organized into eight chapters. The opening chapter is an introduction to the essential definition and taxonomy of individual differences. The author traces the beginning of ID research to the end of 19th century when individual differences were first investigated scientifically by Sir Francis Galton. The concept of ID is regarded as a loose notion, containing certain core variables and many optional ones. The core variables in ID research comprise personality, language aptitude, motivation, learning/cognitive styles, and learning strategies.
Following the thread of the core variables, the author elaborates on each of them individually in the next five chapters. Chapter 2 distinguishes personality from temperament and mood. Different instruments in the study of personality are discussed, including the “Big Five” model and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). From the relationship between personality and learning in general, Dörnyei moves on to discuss personality and language learning in particular. By dividing the studies into early studies, extraversion and introversion studies, studies that use MBTI, and other studies, the author shows connections within the progression that could shed light on the relationship between personality and language learning. Though at this stage in the research we can’t say that personality directly determines an individual’s academic success, it certainly is a potent mediating factor that should be examined more in ID research.
Language aptitude is the focus of Chapter 3. The author notes that, as a strong predictor of academic success, language aptitude has been widely studied from the beginning of the 1990s. The author elaborates on two widely used aptitude batteries: the Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT) and the Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery (PLAB). He then considers ongoing issues in language aptitude research: L1 aptitude, age, intelligence, teaching methods, and learning situations. Further, the author outlines some new research directions in language aptitude, namely, new aptitude instruments and new hypotheses. Examining the relationship between working memory (based on Baddeley’s 2003 study) and language aptitude is introduced as one of the most promising directions in language aptitude studies. Lastly, Dörnyei points out that combining aptitude measures with other ID variables as pioneered by Peter Robinson (1997) is another promising avenue in aptitude research.
Chapter 4 is about motivation. Three important phases of L2 motivation research are identified: the social psychological period, led by the work of Gardner and his associates in Canada; the cognitive-situated period, characterized by work drawing on cognitive theories in educational psychology; and the process-oriented period, initiated by Dörnyei and his colleagues in Europe over the past five years and focusing on motivational change. Subsequently, newer concepts such as group dynamics, demotivation, motivational self-regulation, and the neurobiology of motivation are described to indicate that external forces (e.g., group norms) or internal forces (e.g., self-regulational strategies), may result in either motivating or demotivating effects. “Self-motivation” is analyzed and the “L2 Motivational Self System”, a new paradigm, is presented as an integration of the concepts of possible and ideal selves, terms borrowed from personality psychology.
Learning styles are discussed in company with cognitive styles in Chapter 5. Drawing on the work of Riding (2000), the author states that confusing labels, ineffective measurement instruments, lack of distinction between style and other constructs (e.g., personality) make the research on learning style and cognitive style a “quagmire” (p. 120). Dornyei tries to at least clarify the difference between learning style and cognitive style using colors as an analogy. He states that “cognitive styles can be seen as equivalents of the colors proper, whereas learning styles are the manifestations of the colors in the real world” (p. 160). Regardless of its complexity, learning style/cognitive style, as the research review in this chapter demonstrates, is a variable too important to be ignored in ID studies. Dornyei illustrates such importance by presenting the basic tenets of two learning style models, Riding’s and Kolb’s (1999), and in L2 studies, field dependence/independence (FD/I). I found this chapter’s section on practical implications most appealing. The author’s descriptions of six possible style conflicts and six possible ways of using learner style in the classroom demonstrate very well the practical side of this theoretically blurry concept.
As in the motivation chapter, learning strategies are highlighted in Chapter 6, along with a relevant new concept, student self-regulation. Different from previous chapters, the introduction from general psychology is understated; more attention is paid to learning strategies used in L2 studies. Readers interested in L2 learning strategies will find this chapter handy for accessing a series of strategy inventories from previous research. Self-regulation is elaborated as a concept more robust than the “surface manifestations” (p. 195) of strategies in previous research, more robust because dynamic and process-oriented. The brief introduction to self-regulation in educational psychology provides some foundation for researchers inclined to examine students proactively applying learning tactics or skills.
Chapter 7 is a discussion of less-researched learner characteristics also regarded as important in the ID research picture: anxiety, self-esteem, creativity, willingness to communicate (WTC), and learner beliefs. I especially welcomed the inclusion of this chapter, as it opens a big window onto future research into these less prominent variables that may also significantly impact second language acquisition. The last chapter is a brief summary of three themes of future ID research in the L2 field: (1) a better understanding of the situated nature of L2 learning, (2) possible optimal combinations of the complex theoretical models that contain different ID variables, and (3) the connection of ID variables with specific SLA processes.
This book is a substantial resource because, in thoroughly reviewing the literature, Dornyei provides succinct summaries of many prominent instruments used to measure different ID variables. The Psychology of the Language Learner also helps to furnish teachers and researchers with tools required for investigating ID variables further and suggestions for how they might be contextualized. Not until the the last chapter did I encounter anything needing to be strengthened. Compared with the extensive reviews offered in the previous chapters, a stronger conclusion, one making clearer links among individual-difference variables, would provide a more systematic and conclusive overview of the psychology of language learners. Also, as in Skehan’s (1989) book, a section that delineates the interactions of different ID variables would give readers a better understanding of the complicated phenomenon of ID variables in L2 acquisition.
The breadth of perspectives in this book is wide enough to offer not only an updated ID paradigm for SLA, but also a critical review of the recent development and expansion of the core variables within individual-learner differences. I believe this book would appeal to graduate students and professionals in the fields of linguistics, psychology, and education. It should also serve as a comprehensive reference book for second/foreign language teachers who aim to understand the psychology behind students’ acquiring a second language.
Reference
Skehan, P. (1989). Individual Differences in Second-language Learning. London: Edward Arnold.
Ying Zheng
Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Psychology-Language-Acquisition-Applied-Linguistics/dp/019442197X/ref=sr_1_12?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1295060922&sr=1-12
Zoltan Doeryei
http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=ntt_athr_dp_sr_1?_encoding=UTF8&search-alias=books-uk&field-author=Zolt%C3%A1n%20D%C3%B6rnyei
This review is from: The Psychology of Second Language Acquisition (Oxford Applied Linguistics) (Paperback)
There is much food for thought here. Unlike most books, I am reading this one for the second time. The field is clearly still in a state of development. Promising though.
Synopsis. The first 127 pages are background information. Useful for people like myself who are not specialists.
The rest of the book descibes the patchwork of theories and schools that try to descibe the processes involved in language acquistion.
The style is scholarly. I would recommend it not only to academics, but also to those who are seriously involved in language learning. There are however no easy, formulaic answers here.
other books by same author:
1. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methodologies (Oxford Applied Linguistics) by Zoltan Dörnyei (Paperback - 19 Jul 2007)
2.The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition (Second Language Acquisition Research) by Zoltan Dörnyei (Paperback - 11 Jan 2006)
3.Questionnaires in Second Language Research: Construction, Administration and Processing (SLA Research: Theoretical & Methodological Issues) by Zoltan Dörnyei (Paperback - 31 Jul 2007)
4.Motivtional Strategies in the Language Classroom (Cambridge Language Teaching Library) by Zoltan Dörnyei (Paperback - 27 Sep 2001)
5.Teaching and Researching: Motivation (Applied Linguistics in Action) by Dr Zoltán Dörnyei and Dr Ema Ushioda (Paperback - 29 Jul 2010)
6.Questionnaires in Second Language Research (Second Language Acquisition Research Series): Construction, Administration, and Processing by Zoltán Dörnyei and Tatsuya Taguchi (Paperback - 21 Dec 2009)
7.The Psychogy of Second Language Acquisition (Oxford Applied Linguistics) by Zoltán Dörnyei (Paperback - 26 Feb 2009)
8.Group Dynamics in the Language Classroom (Cambridge Language Teaching Library) by Zoltán Dörnyei and Tim Murphey (Paperback - 16 Oct 2003)
9.Questionnaires in Second Language Research (Second Language Acquisition Research Series) by Zoltán Dörnyei and Tatsuya Taguchi (Hardcover - 22 Dec 2009)
10.Questionnaires in Second Language Research: Construction, Administration and Processing (SLA Research: Theoretical & Methodological Issues) by Zoltan Dörnyei (Hardcover - 12 Sep 2002)
11. Motivation Strategies in the Language Classroom by Zoltan Dörnyei (Paperback - Jan 2001)
12.Teaching and Researching Motivation (Applied Linguistics in Action) by Zoltan Dörnyei (Paperback - 11 Jan 2001)
13. Group Dynamics in the Language Classroom by Zoltán Dörnyei and Tim Murphey (Kindle Edition - 12 Jan 2004) - Kindle eBook
14.Group Dynamics in the Language Classroom (Cambridge Language Teaching Library) by Zoltán Dörnyei and Tim Murphey (Hardcover - 16 Oct 2003)
15. Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom (Cambridge Language Teaching Library) by Zoltan Dörnyei (Hardcover - 27 Sep 2001)
16. Psycholinguistic factors in foreign language learning by Zoltan Dörnyei (Unknown Binding - 1988)
This review is from: The Psychology of Second Language Acquisition (Oxford Applied Linguistics) (Paperback)
There is much food for thought here. Unlike most books, I am reading this one for the second time. The field is clearly still in a state of development. Promising though.
Synopsis. The first 127 pages are background information. Useful for people like myself who are not specialists.
The rest of the book descibes the patchwork of theories and schools that try to descibe the processes involved in language acquistion.
The style is scholarly. I would recommend it not only to academics, but also to those who are seriously involved in language learning. There are however no easy, formulaic answers here.
other books by same author:
1. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methodologies (Oxford Applied Linguistics) by Zoltan Dörnyei (Paperback - 19 Jul 2007)
2.The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition (Second Language Acquisition Research) by Zoltan Dörnyei (Paperback - 11 Jan 2006)
3.Questionnaires in Second Language Research: Construction, Administration and Processing (SLA Research: Theoretical & Methodological Issues) by Zoltan Dörnyei (Paperback - 31 Jul 2007)
4.Motivtional Strategies in the Language Classroom (Cambridge Language Teaching Library) by Zoltan Dörnyei (Paperback - 27 Sep 2001)
5.Teaching and Researching: Motivation (Applied Linguistics in Action) by Dr Zoltán Dörnyei and Dr Ema Ushioda (Paperback - 29 Jul 2010)
6.Questionnaires in Second Language Research (Second Language Acquisition Research Series): Construction, Administration, and Processing by Zoltán Dörnyei and Tatsuya Taguchi (Paperback - 21 Dec 2009)
7.The Psychogy of Second Language Acquisition (Oxford Applied Linguistics) by Zoltán Dörnyei (Paperback - 26 Feb 2009)
8.Group Dynamics in the Language Classroom (Cambridge Language Teaching Library) by Zoltán Dörnyei and Tim Murphey (Paperback - 16 Oct 2003)
9.Questionnaires in Second Language Research (Second Language Acquisition Research Series) by Zoltán Dörnyei and Tatsuya Taguchi (Hardcover - 22 Dec 2009)
10.Questionnaires in Second Language Research: Construction, Administration and Processing (SLA Research: Theoretical & Methodological Issues) by Zoltan Dörnyei (Hardcover - 12 Sep 2002)
11. Motivation Strategies in the Language Classroom by Zoltan Dörnyei (Paperback - Jan 2001)
12.Teaching and Researching Motivation (Applied Linguistics in Action) by Zoltan Dörnyei (Paperback - 11 Jan 2001)
13. Group Dynamics in the Language Classroom by Zoltán Dörnyei and Tim Murphey (Kindle Edition - 12 Jan 2004) - Kindle eBook
14.Group Dynamics in the Language Classroom (Cambridge Language Teaching Library) by Zoltán Dörnyei and Tim Murphey (Hardcover - 16 Oct 2003)
15. Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom (Cambridge Language Teaching Library) by Zoltan Dörnyei (Hardcover - 27 Sep 2001)
16. Psycholinguistic factors in foreign language learning by Zoltan Dörnyei (Unknown Binding - 1988)
Wikipedia on Second Language Acquisition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_language_acquisition
Second language acquisition (SLA) or second language learning is the process by which people of a language can learn a second language in addition to their native language(s). "Second language acquisition" refers to what the student does; it does not refer to what the teacher does (see "language education" for work on language teaching). "Second language acquisition research" studies the psychology and sociology of the learning process. Sometimes the terms "acquisition" and "learning" are not treated as synonyms and are instead used to refer to the subconscious and conscious aspects of this process respectively (see second language learning).
"Second language", "target language", or "L2" are used to refer to any language learned after the native language, which is also called "mother tongue", "first language", "L1", or "source language". Second language acquisition also includes third language acquisition/multilingualism and heritage language acquisition. Second language acquisition may be abbreviated as "SLA", or "L2A", for "L2 acquisition".
Contents
[hide]
1 Second Language Acquisition and its premises
1.1 Related fields
2 Learner language
2.1 Error analysis
2.2 Interlanguage
3 Order of acquisition
4 Language transfer
5 Second language acquisition theories
5.1 Acquisition-learning hypothesis
5.2 Input hypothesis
5.3 Monitor model
5.4 Interaction hypothesis
5.5 Output hypothesis
5.6 Competition model
5.7 Connectionism and second language acquisition
5.8 Noticing hypothesis
5.9 Processability
5.10 Automaticity
5.11 Declarative/procedural model
5.12 Memory and second language acquisition
6 Individual variation
6.1 Language aptitude
6.2 Age
6.3 Strategy use
6.4 Affective factors
6.4.1 Affective Filter
6.4.2 Anxiety
6.4.3 Personality Factors
6.4.4 Social effects
6.4.5 Motivation
7 Pedagogical effects
8 Understanding SLA
8.1 Concepts of ability
9 See also
10 Notes
11 References
12 Further reading
13 External links
[edit] Second Language Acquisition and its premises
Second language acquisition is the process of learning a new language after the acquisition of a learner's native language. It can also incorporate the learning of third, fourth or subsequent languages[1] as well as heritage language learning.[2] Bilingualism is not usually seen to be within the field of second language acquisition. Most SLA researchers see bilingualism as being the end result of learning a language, not the process itself, and see the term as referring to native-like fluency, which second language learners rarely achieve. Writers in fields such as education and psychology, however, often use bilingualism loosely to refer to all forms of multilingualism.[3]
Cenoz and Genesee (1998)[4][vague] terms multilingual acquisition and multilingualism as complex phenomena and add that they implicate all the factors and processes associated with second language acquisition and bilingualism as well as unique and potentially more complex factors and effects associated with the interactions that are possible among the multiple languages being learned and the processes of learning them. Valdés (2000)[5][broken citation] defines heritage language as the language someone learns at home as a child which is a minority language in society, but because of growing up using the dominant language, the speaker seems to be more competent in the latter and feels more comfortable to communicate in that language. However, since heritage speakers are commonly alienated from their heritage language for a long time, and have limited or no exposure to that language, they seem to be in a state of language acquisition that differs greatly from monolinguals or second language speakers of that language.
[edit] Related fields
Second language acquisition is closely related to the fields of linguistics, psychology, neuroscience, sociology, and education.
[edit] Learner language
"Learner language" is the written or spoken language produced by a learner. It is also the main type of data used in second language acquisition research.[6] Much research in second language acquisition is concerned with the internal representations of a language in the mind of the learner, and in how those representations change over time. It is not yet possible to inspect these representations directly with brain scans or similar techniques, so SLA researchers are forced to make inferences about these rules from learners' speech or writing.[7] There are a number of different ways of gathering and interpreting learner language. Researchers may adopt an interlanguage perspective, regarding each learner language as a language in its own right, or they may study how a learner language compares to a natively spoken language. Much of the research has focused on the English language as the language being learned, because of the huge number of people around the world learning and teaching it.
[edit] Error analysis
Main article: Error analysis
Error analysis in SLA was established in the 1960s by Stephen Pit Corder and colleagues.[8] Error analysis was an alternative to contrastive analysis, an approach influenced by behaviorism through which applied linguists sought to use the formal distinctions between the learners' first and second languages to predict errors. Error analysis showed that contrastive analysis was unable to predict a great majority of errors, although its more valuable aspects have been incorporated into the study of language transfer. A key finding of error analysis has been that many learner errors are produced by learners making faulty inferences about the rules of the new language. Although error analysis is still used to investigate specific questions in SLA, the quest for an overarching theory of learner errors has largely been abandoned. In the mid-1970s, Corder and others moved on to a more wide-ranging approach to learner language, known as interlanguage.[citation needed]
[edit] Interlanguage
Main article: Interlanguage
Interlanguage is a term coined by Selinker.[9] Interlanguage scholarship seeks to understand learner language on its own terms, as a natural language with its own systematic rules. Interlanguage scholars reject, at least for heuristic purposes, the view of learner language as merely an imperfect version of the target language. Interlanguage work is a vibrant microcosm of linguistics. It is possible to apply an interlanguage perspective to learners' underlying knowledge of the target language sound system (interlanguage phonology), grammar (morphology and syntax), vocabulary (lexicon), and language-use norms found among learners (interlanguage pragmatics).
By describing the ways in which learner language conforms to universal linguistic norms, interlanguage research has contributed greatly to our understanding of linguistic universals in SLA. See below, under "linguistic universals".
[edit] Order of acquisition
Main article: Order of acquisition
The order of acquisition is a concept in language acquisition that all learners of a given language will learn the grammatical features of that language in roughly the same order. This phenomenon has been confirmed for people learning their first language, and also, to some extent, for people learning a second language. The reason the order of acquisition is less stable in second language learners is not known, but is thought to be due either to the effects of language transfer or other interference by mental processes that second language learners have developed.
Researchers have found a very consistent order in the acquisition of first language structures by children, and this has drawn a great deal of interest from SLA scholars. Considerable effort has been devoted to testing the "identity hypothesis", which asserts that first-language and second-language acquisition conform to the same patterns. This has not been confirmed, perhaps because second-language learners' cognitive and affective states are so much more advanced, and perhaps because it is not true. Orders of acquisition in SLA often resemble those found in first language acquisition, and may have common neurological causes, but there is no convincing evidence for this. It is not safe to say that the order of L1 acquisition has any easy implications for SLA.
[edit] Language transfer
Main article: Language transfer
Language transfer typically refers to the learner's trying to apply rules (syntaxe) and forms (lexical) of the first or third language into the target second language. Contrastive analysis, discussed above, sought to predict all learner errors based on language transfer. Transfer is an important factor in language learning at all levels
On the syntactical side, subsequent researches in error analysis and interlanguage structure showed, this project was flawed: most errors are not due to transfer, but to faulty inferences about the rules of the target language. On the lexical side, typically learners begin by transferring word aspects : sounds (phonetic transfer), meanings (semantic transfer), and orthography.
As learners progress and gain more experience with the target language, the role of transfer typically diminishes. In the UG-based framework (see Linguistic universals below), "language transfer" specifically refers to the linguistic parameter settings defined by the language universal. Thus, "language transfer" is defined as the initial state of second language acquisition rather than its developmental stage.
[edit] Second language acquisition theories
[edit] Acquisition-learning hypothesis
Main article: Acquisition-learning hypothesis
Stephen Krashen introduced the acquisition-learning hypothesis, which makes a distinction between conscious language learning and subconscious language acquisition.[10] Krashen argues that only subconscious acquisition can lead to fluency.
A distinction closely related to that made by Krashen (1982) between acquisition and learning is one between implicit and explicit linguistic knowledge.[10] Learners gain implicit knowledge by processing target-language input without consciously giving attention to acquiring the forms and structures of the language. On the other hand, learners get explicit knowledge of a language when they process language input with the conscious intention of discovering the structural rules of the language. A distinction between the implicit learning involved in acquiring a first language (L1) and the mix of implicit and explicit learning that takes place in L2 acquisition has been one analytic route for understanding the virtually universal success of L1 acquisition versus the more limited success of L2 acquisition among adult learners (Hulstijn, 2005).[11] Ellis has found empirical confirmation for the distinct constructs of implicit and explicit language knowledge.[12]
[edit] Input hypothesis
Main article: Comprehensible input
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 take in is one of the most important factors affecting their learning. However, it must be at a level that is comprehensible to them. In his Monitor Theory, Krashen advanced the concept that language input should be at the "i+1" level, just beyond what the learner can fully understand; this input is comprehensible, but contains structures that are not yet fully understood. This has been criticized on the basis that there is no clear definition of i+1, and that factors other than structural difficulty (such as interest or presentation) can affect whether input is actually turned into intake. The concept has been quantified, however, in vocabulary acquisition research; Nation reviews various studies which indicate that about 98% of the words in running text should be previously known in order for extensive reading to be effective.[13]
In his Input Hypothesis, Krashen proposes that language acquisition takes place only when learners receive input just beyond their current level of L2 competence. He termed this level of input “i+1.” However, in contrast to emergentist and connectionist theories, he follows the innate approach by applying Chomsky’s Government and binding theory and concept of Universal grammar (UG) to second language acquisition. He does so by proposing a Language Acquisition Device that uses L2 input to define the parameters of the L2, within the constraints of UG, and to increase the L2 proficiency of the learner. In addition, Krashen (1982)’s Affective Filter Hypothesis holds that the acquisition of a second language is halted if the leaner has a high degree of anxiety when receiving input. According to this concept, a part of the mind filters out L2 input and prevents uptake by the learner, if the learner feels that the process of SLA is threatening. As mentioned earlier, since input is essential in Krashen’s model, this filtering action prevents acquisition from progressing.
A great deal of research has taken place on input enhancement, the ways in which input may be altered so as to direct learners' attention to linguistically important areas. Input enhancement might include bold-faced vocabulary words or marginal glosses in a reading text. Research here is closely linked to research on pedagogical effects, and comparably diverse.
[edit] Monitor model
Main article: Monitor hypothesis
Other concepts have also been influential in the speculation about the processes of building internal systems of second language information. Some thinkers hold that language processing handles distinct types of knowledge. For instance, one component of the Monitor Model, propounded by Krashen, posits a distinction between “acquisition” and “learning.”[10] According to Krashen, L2 acquisition is a subconscious process of incidentally “picking up” a language, as children do when becoming proficient in their first languages. Language learning, on the other hand, is studying, consciously and intentionally, the features of a language, as is common in traditional classrooms. Krashen sees these two processes as fundamentally different, with little or no interface between them. In common with connectionism, Krashen sees input as essential to language acquisition.[10]
Further, Bialystok and Smith make another distinction in explaining how learners build and use L2 and interlanguage knowledge structures.[14] They argue that the concept of interlanguage should include a distinction between two specific kinds of language processing ability. On one hand is learners’ knowledge of L2 grammatical structure and ability to analyze the target language objectively using that knowledge, which they term “representation,” and, on the other hand is the ability to use their L2 linguistic knowledge, under time constraints, to accurately comprehend input and produce output in the L2, which they call “control.” They point out that often non-native speakers of a language have higher levels of representation than their native-speaking counterparts have, yet have a lower level of control. Finally, Bialystok has framed the acquisition of language in terms of the interaction between what she calls “analysis” and “control.”[15] Analysis is what learners do when they attempt to understand the rules of the target language. Through this process, they acquire these rules and can use them to gain greater control over their own production.
Monitoring is another important concept in some theoretical models of learner use of L2 knowledge. According to Krashen, the Monitor is a component of an L2 learner’s language processing device that uses knowledge gained from language learning to observe and regulate the learner’s own L2 production, checking for accuracy and adjusting language production when necessary.[10]
[edit] Interaction hypothesis
Long's interaction hypothesis proposes that language acquisition is strongly facilitated by the use of the target language in interaction. In particular, the negotiation of meaning has been shown to contribute greatly to the acquisition of vocabulary.[16][broken citation] In a review of the substantial literature on this topic, Nation relates the value of negotiation to the generative use of words: the use of words in new contexts which stimulate a deeper understanding of their meaning.[13][vague]
[edit] Output hypothesis
Main article: Comprehensible output
In the 1980s, Canadian SLA researcher Merrill Swain advanced the output hypothesis, that meaningful output is as necessary to language learning as meaningful input. However, most studies have shown little if any correlation between learning and quantity of output. Today, most scholars[citation needed] contend that small amounts of meaningful output are important to language learning, but primarily because the experience of producing language leads to more effective processing of input.
[edit] Competition model
Main article: Competition model of language acquisition
Some of the major cognitive theories of how learners organize language knowledge are based on analyses of how speakers of various languages analyze sentences for meaning. MacWhinney, Bates, and Kliegl found that speakers of English, German, and Italian showed varying patterns in identifying the subjects of transitive sentences containing more than one noun.[17] English speakers relied heavily on word order; German speakers used morphological agreement, the animacy status of noun referents, and stress; and speakers of Italian relied on agreement and stress. MacWhinney et al. interpreted these results as supporting the Competition Model, which states that individuals use linguistic cues to get meaning from language, rather than relying on linguistic universals.[17] According to this theory, when acquiring an L2, learners sometimes receive competing cues and must decide which cue(s) is most relevant for determining meaning.
[edit] Connectionism and second language acquisition
See also: Connectionism
These findings also relate to Connectionism. Connectionism attempts to model the cognitive language processing of the human brain, using computer architectures that make associations between elements of language, based on frequency of co-occurrence in the language input.[18] Frequency has been found to be a factor in various linguistic domains of language learning.[19] Connectionism posits that learners form mental connections between items that co-occur, using exemplars found in language input. From this input, learners extract the rules of the language through cognitive processes common to other areas of cognitive skill acquisition. Since connectionism denies both innate rules and the existence of any innate language-learning module, L2 input is of greater importance than it is in processing models based on innate approaches, since, in connectionism, input is the source of both the units and the rules of language.
[edit] Noticing hypothesis
Main article: Noticing hypothesis
Attention is another characteristic that some believe to have a role in determining the success or failure of language processing. Schmidt states that although explicit metalinguistic knowledge of a language is not always essential for acquisition, the learner must be aware of L2 input in order to gain from it.[20][broken citation] In his “noticing hypothesis,” Schmidt posits that learners must notice the ways in which their interlanguage structures differ from target norms. This noticing of the gap allows the learner’s internal language processing to restructure the learner’s internal representation of the rules of the L2 in order to bring the learner’s production closer to the target. In this respect, Schmidt’s understanding is consistent with the ongoing process of rule formation found in emergentism and connectionism.
[edit] Processability
Main article: Processability theory
Some theorists and researchers have contributed to the cognitive approach to second language acquisition by increasing understanding of the ways L2 learners restructure their interlanguage knowledge systems to be in greater conformity to L2 structures. Processability theory states that learners restructure their L2 knowledge systems in an order of which they are capable at their stage of development.[21] For instance, In order to acquire the correct morphological and syntactic forms for English questions, learners must transform declarative English sentences. They do so by a series of stages, consistent across learners. Clahsen proposed that certain processing principles determine this order of restructuring.[22] Specifically, he stated that learners first, maintain declarative word order while changing other aspects of the utterances, second, move words to the beginning and end of sentences, and third, move elements within main clauses before subordinate clauses.
[edit] Automaticity
Thinkers have produced several theories concerning how learners use their internal L2 knowledge structures to comprehend L2 input and produce L2 output. One idea is that learners acquire proficiency in an L2 in the same way that people acquire other complex cognitive skills. Automaticity is the performance of a skill without conscious control. It results from the gradated process of proceduralization. In the field of cognitive psychology, Anderson expounds a model of skill acquisition, according to which persons use procedures to apply their declarative knowledge about a subject in order to solve problems.[23] On repeated practice, these procedures develop into production rules that the individual can use to solve the problem, without accessing long-term declarative memory. Performance speed and accuracy improve as the learner implements these production rules. DeKeyser tested the application of this model to L2 language automaticity.[24] He found that subjects developed increasing proficiency in performing tasks related to the morphosyntax of an artificial language, Autopractan, and performed on a learning curve typical of the acquisition of non-language cognitive skills. This evidence conforms to Anderson’s general model of cognitive skill acquisition, supports the idea that declarative knowledge can be transformed into procedural knowledge, and tends to undermine the idea of Krashen[10] that knowledge gained through language “learning” cannot be used to initiate speech production.
[edit] Declarative/procedural model
Michael T. Ullman has used a declarative/procedural model to understand how language information is stored. This model is consistent with a distinction made in general cognitive science between the storage and retrieval of facts, on the one hand, and understanding of how to carry out operations, on the other. It states that declarative knowledge consists of arbitrary linguistic information, such as irregular verb forms, that are stored in the brain’s declarative memory. In contrast, knowledge about the rules of a language, such as grammatical word order is procedural knowledge and is stored in procedural memory. Ullman reviews several psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic studies that support the declarative/procedural model.[25]
[edit] Memory and second language acquisition
Perhaps certain psychological characteristics constrain language processing. One area of research is the role of memory. Williams conducted a study in which he found some positive correlation between verbatim memory functioning and grammar learning success for his subjects.[26] This suggests that individuals with less short-term memory capacity might have a limitation in performing cognitive processes for organization and use of linguistic knowledge.
[edit] Individual variation
Research on variation between individual learners seeks to address the question: Why do some learners do better than others? A flurry of studies in the 1970s, often labelled the "good language learner studies", sought to identify the distinctive factors of successful learners. Although those studies are now widely regarded as simplistic, they did serve to identify a number of factors affecting language acquisition. More detailed research on many of these specific factors continues today.
[edit] Language aptitude
Main article: Language learning aptitude
Tests of language aptitude have proven extremely effective in predicting which learners will be successful in learning. However, considerable controversy remains about whether language aptitude is properly regarded as a unitary concept, an organic property of the brain, or as a complex of factors including motivation and short-term memory. Research has generally shown that language aptitude is quite distinct from general aptitude or intelligence, as measured by various tests, and is itself fairly consistently measurable by different tests.
Language aptitude research is often criticized for being irrelevant to the problems of language learners, who must attempt to learn a language regardless of whether they are gifted for the task or not. This claim is reinforced by research findings that aptitude is largely unchangeable. In addition, traditional language aptitude measures such as the Modern Language Aptitude Test strongly favor decontextualized knowledge of the sort used in taking tests, rather than the sort used in conversation. For this reason little research is carried out on aptitude today. However, operators of selective language programs such as the United States Defense Language Institute continue to use language aptitude testing as part of applicant screening.
[edit] Age
Main article: critical period hypothesis
How children acquire native language (L1) and the relevance of this to foreign language (L2) learning has long been debated. Although evidence for L2 learning ability declining with age is controversial, a common notion is that children learn L2s easily and older learners rarely achieve fluency. This assumption stems from ‘critical period’ (CP) ideas. A CP was popularised by Eric Lenneberg in 1967 for L1 acquisition, but considerable interest now surrounds age effects on second language acquisition (SLA).[27] SLA theories explain learning processes and suggest causal factors for a possible CP for SLA, mainly attempting to explain apparent differences in language aptitudes of children and adults by distinct learning routes, and clarifying them through psychological mechanisms. Research explores these ideas and hypotheses, but results are varied: some demonstrate pre-pubescent children acquire language easily, and some that older learners have the advantage, and yet others focus on existence of a CP for SLA. Recent studies have recognised that certain aspects of SLA may be affected by age, though others remain intact.[28]
[edit] Strategy use
The effective use of strategies has been shown to be critical to successful language learning, so much so that Canale and Swain (1980) included "strategic competence" among the four components of communicative competence.[29] Research here has also shown significant pedagogical effects. This has given rise to "strategies-based instruction."
Strategies are commonly divided into learning strategies and communicative strategies, although there are other ways of categorizing them. Learning strategies are techniques used to improve learning, such as mnemonics or using a dictionary. Learners (and native speakers) use communicative strategies to get meaning across even when they lack access to the correct language: for example, by using pro-forms like "thing", or non-spoken means such as mime. Communicative strategies may not have any direct bearing on learning, and some strategies such as avoidance (not using a form with which one is uncomfortable) may actually hinder learning.
Learners from different cultures use strategies in different ways,[30] as a research tradition led by Rebecca Oxford has demonstrated. Related to this are differences in strategy use between male and female learners. Numerous studies have shown that female learners typically use strategies more widely and intensively than males; this may be related to the statistical advantage which female learners enjoy in language learning.[citation needed]
[edit] Affective factors
Affective factors relate to the learner's emotional state and attitude toward the target language. Research on affect in language learning is still strongly influenced by Bloom's taxonomy, which describes the affective levels of receiving, responding, valuing, organization, and self-characterization through one's value system. It has also been informed in recent years by research in neurobiology and neurolinguistics.
[edit] Affective Filter
Main article: Affective filter
Furthermore, researchers believe that language learners all possess an affective filter which affects language acquisition. If a student possesses a high filter they are less likely to engage in language learning because of shyness, concern for grammar or other factors. Students possessing a lower affective filter will be more likely to engage in learning because they are less likely to be impeded by other factors. The affective filter is an important component of second language learning.
[edit] Anxiety
Although some continue to propose that a low level of anxiety may be helpful, studies have almost unanimously shown that anxiety damages students' prospects for successful learning. Anxiety is often related to a sense of threat to the learner's self-concept in the learning situation, for example if a learner fears being ridiculed for a mistake.
[edit] Personality Factors
Second language acquisition is defined as the learning and adopting of a language that is not your native language. Studies[vague] have shown that extraverts (or unreserved and outgoing people) acquire a second language better than introverts (or shy people).
One particular study done by Naiman[vague] reflected this point. The subjects were 72 Canadian high school students from grades 8, 10 and 12 who were studying French as a second language.
Naiman gave them all questionnaires to establish their psychological profiles, which also included a French listening test and imitation test. He found that approximately 70% of the students with the higher grades (B or higher) would consider themselves extroverts.
Extroverts will be willing to try to communicate even if they are not sure they will succeed. Two scientists, Kinginger and Farrell, conducted interviews with U.S. students after their study abroad program in France in 2003.[broken citation] They found that many of the students would avoid interaction with the native speakers at all costs, while others jumped at the opportunity to speak the language. Those who avoided interaction were typically quiet, reserved people, (or introverts).
Logically, anxiety will cause students not to try and advance their skills, especially when they feel they are under pressure. Just the lack of practice will make introverts less likely to fully acquire the second language.
[edit] Social effects
The process of language learning can be very stressful, and the impact of positive or negative attitudes from the surrounding society can be critical. One aspect that has received particular attention is the relationship of gender roles to language achievement. Studies across numerous cultures have shown that women, on the whole, enjoy an advantage over men. Some have proposed that this is linked to gender roles. Doman notes in a journal devoted to issues of Cultural affects on SLA, "Questions abound about what defines SLA, how far its borders extend, and what the attributions and contributions of its research are. Thus, there is a great amount of heterogeneity in the entire conceptualization of SLA. Some researchers tend to ignore certain aspects of the field, while others scrutinize those same aspects piece by piece."[31]
Community attitudes toward the language being learned can also have a profound impact on SLA. Where the community has a broadly negative view of the target language and its speakers, or a negative view of its relation to them, learning is typically much more difficult. This finding has been confirmed by research in numerous contexts. A widely-cited example is the difficulty faced by Navajo children in learning English as a second language.[citation needed]
Other common social factors include the attitude of parents toward language study, and the nature of group dynamics in the language classroom. Additionally, early attitudes may strengthen motivation and facility with language in general, particularly with early exposure to the language.
[edit] Motivation
Main article: Motivation in second language learning
The role of motivation in SLA has been the subject of extensive scholarship, closely influenced by work in motivational psychology. Motivation is internally complex, and Dörnyei begins his work by stating that "strictly speaking, there is no such thing as motivation."[32] There are many different kinds of motivation; these are often divided into types such as integrative or instrumental, intrinsic or extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation refers to the desire to do something for an internal reward. Most studies have shown it to be substantially more effective in long-term language learning than extrinsic motivation, for an external reward such as high grades or praise. Integrative and instrumental orientations refer to the degree that a language is learned "for its own sake" (integratively) or for instrumental purposes. Studies have not consistently shown either form of motivation to be more effective than the other, and the role of each is probably conditioned by various personality and cultural factors.
Some research has shown that motivation correlates strongly with proficiency, indicating both that successful learners are motivated and that success improves motivation. Thus motivation is not fixed, but is strongly affected by feedback from the environment. Accordingly, the study of motivation in SLA has also examined many of the external factors discussed above, such as the effect of instructional techniques on motivation. An accessible summary of this research can be found in Dörnyei (2001a).[32]
In their research on Willingness to communicate, MacIntyre et al. have shown that motivation is not the final construct before learners engage in communication. In fact, learners may be highly motivated yet remain unwilling to communicate.[33]
The European Union Lifelong learning programme has funded a project to research and build a set of best practices to motivate adult language learners, called Don't Give Up
[edit] Pedagogical effects
Efforts have been made to systematically measure or evaluate the effectiveness of language teaching practices in promoting second language acquisition. Such studies have been undertaken for every level of language, from phonetics to pragmatics, and for almost every current teaching methodology. It is therefore impossible to summarize their findings here. However, some more general issues have been addressed.
Research has indicated that many traditional language-teaching techniques are extremely inefficient.[34] One issue is the effectiveness of explicit teaching: can language teaching have a constructive effect beyond providing learners with enhanced input? Research on this at different levels of language has produced quite different results. Traditional areas of explicit teaching, such as phonology, grammar and vocabulary, have had decidedly mixed results. It is generally agreed that pedagogy restricted to teaching grammar rules and vocabulary lists does not give students the ability to use the L2 with accuracy and fluency. Rather, to become proficient in the L2, the learner must be given opportunities to use the L2 for communicative purposes, learning (as for example, through a teacher's corrective feedback) to attend to both meaning and formal accuracy.[35][36]
There is considerable promising research in the classroom on the impact of corrective feedback on L2 learners' use and acquisition of target language forms. The effectiveness of corrective feedback has been shown to vary depending on the technique used to make the correction, and the overall focus of the classroom, whether on formal accuracy or on communication of meaningful content.[37][38][39] However, it appears that a learner's ability to focus on corrective feedback on grammatical features that do not affect meaning is considerably altered when the learner has low alphabetic literacy.[40]
There is considerable interest in supplementing published research with approaches that engage language teachers in action research on learner language in their own classrooms.[41] As teachers become aware of the features of learner language produced by their students, they can refine their pedagogical intervention to maximize interlanguage development.[42]
Horwitz summarises findings of SLA research, and applies to L2 teaching some principles of L2 acquisition honed from a vast body of relevant literature.[43] Like Asher,[vague] Horwitz highlights the importance of naturalistic experience in L2, promoting listening and reading practice and stressing involvement in life-like conversations. She explicitly suggests teaching practices based on these principles; ‘[m]uch class time should be devoted to the development of listening and reading abilities’, and ‘[t]eachers should assess student interests and supply appropriate…materials’.[44] The ‘audio-lingual’ teaching practices used in the present study are based on principles explicated by Asher and Horwitz; listening featured heavily, closely followed by reading and speaking practice. The vocabulary items taught were deemed relevant for all learners, regardless of age, and, according to Pfeffer, they are among the most commonly used nouns in everyday German language.[45]
[edit] Understanding SLA
The systematic modelling of SLA is concerned with the question: What are the most important overall factors in language acquisition? Models of SLA have played an important role in laying out directions for future research, and also for informing practice in language teaching.
Different models of SLA have focused on different aspects of SLA and general linguistic research. For example, Schumann's Acculturation Model, which viewed second language acquisition as just one part of adapting to a new culture, emphasized findings related to language socialization. Krashen's Monitor Model prioritized research on input and affective factors. Long's Interaction Hypothesis took a social constructivist view of research on input. Caleb Gattegno based The Silent Way on the principle of the education of awareness. No single model of SLA has gained wide acceptance. Given that the field is complex and interdisciplinary, few scholars expect that any model will do so in the foreseeable future.
[edit] Concepts of ability
Numerous notions have been used to describe learners' ability in the target language. The first such influential concept was the competence-performance distinction introduced by Chomsky. This distinguishes competence, a person's idealized knowledge of language rules, from performance, the imperfect realization of these rules. Thus, a person may be interrupted and not finish a sentence, but still know how to make a complete sentence. Although this distinction has become fundamental to most work in linguistics today, it has not proven adequate by itself to describe the complex nature of learners' developing ability.
[edit] See also
Autonomous Technology-Assisted Language Learning (ATALL Wikibook)
Computer-assisted language learning
Education
Error analysis
Foreign language anxiety
Glossary of language teaching terms and ideas
Hardest language
Interlanguage
Language acquisition
Language exchange
Learning by teaching (LdL)
Metalinguistic awareness
Second language attrition
[edit] Notes
^ Gass & Selinker 2008, p. 7
^ Gass & Selinker 2008, pp. 21-24
^ Gass & Selinker 2008, pp. 24-25.
^ Cenoz & Genesee 1998.
^ Valdés 2000.
^ Ellis & Barkhuizen 2005, p. 4.
^ Ellis & Barkhuizen 2005, p. 6.
^ Corder 1967.
^ Selinker 1972.
^ a b c d e f Krashen 1982.
^ Hulstijn 2005.
^ Ellis 2005.
^ a b Nation 2001.
^ Bialystok & Smith 1985.
^ Bialystok 1994.
^ Long 1990.
^ a b MacWhinney, Bates & Kliegl 1984.
^ Christiansen & Chater 2001.
^ Ellis 2002a.
^ Schmidt 1990.
^ Pienemann 1998.
^ Clahsen 1984.
^ Anderson 1992.
^ DeKeyser 1997.
^ Ullman 2001.
^ Williams 1999.
^ Lenneberg 1967.
^ Mayberry & Lock 2003.
^ Canale & Swain 1980.
^ Hadzibeganovic & Cannas 2009.
^ Doman 2006.
^ a b Dörnyei 2001, p. 1.
^ MacIntyre et al. 1998.
^ Lightbown 1990 cited in Ellis 1994.
^ Doughty & Williams 1998.
^ Ellis 2002b.
^ Lightbown & Spada 1990.
^ Lyster & Ranta 1997.
^ Lyster & Mori 2006.
^ Tarone, Bigelow & Hansen 2009.
^ Allwright & Hanks 2009.
^ Tarone & Swierzbin 2009.
^ Horwitz 1986.
^ Horwitz 1986, pp. 685-686.
^ Pfeffer 1964.
[edit] References
Allwright, Dick; Hanks, Judith (2009). The Developing Language Learning: An Introduction to Exploratory Practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. ISBN 9781403985316.
Anderson, J. R. (1992). "Automaticity and the ACT* theory". American Journal of Psychology 105 (2): 165–180. doi:10.2307/1423026. PMID 1621879. http://jstor.org/stable/1423026.
Bialystok, E.; Smith, M. S. (1985). "Interlanguage is not a state of mind: An evaluation of the construct for second-language acquisition". Applied Linguistics 6 (2): 101–117. doi:10.1093/applin/6.2.101.
Bialystok, E. (1994). "Analysis and control in the development of second language proficiency". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16 (2): 157–168. doi:10.1017/S0272263100012857.
Canale, M.; Swain, M. (1980). "Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing". Applied Linguistics 1 (1): 1–47. doi:10.1093/applin/1.1.1.
Cenoz, Jasone; Genesee, Fred, eds (1998). Beyond Bilingualism: Multilingualism and Multilingual Education. Levittown, PA: Taylor & Francis. ISBN 1-85359-420-2.
Christiansen, M. H.; Chater, N. (2001). "Connectionist psycholinguistics: Capturing the empirical data". Trends in Cognitive Sciences 5 (2): 82–88. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01600-4. PMID 11166638.
Clahsen, Harald (1984). "The acquisition of German word order: a test case for cognitive approaches to second language acquisition". In Andersen, Roger. Second languages: a cross-linguistic perspective. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. pp. 219–242. ISBN 9780883774403.
Corder, S. P. (1967). "The significance of learners' errors". International Review of Applied Linguistics 5: 160–170.
DeKeyser, R. M. (1997). "Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language morphosyntax". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19: 195–222.
Doman, E. (2006). "Current Debates in SLA". The Asian EFL Journal 7 (4). http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/December_05_ed.php. Retrieved 2010-12-01.
Dörnyei, Zoltan (2001). Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521793777.
Doughty, Catherine; Williams, Jessica, eds (1998). Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-62390-2.
Ellis, Rod (1994). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0194371891.
Ellis, N. (2002a). "Frequency effects in language processing". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24 (2): 143–188.
Ellis, R. (2002b). "Does form-focused instruction affect the acquisition of implicit knowledge?". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24 (2): 223–236.
Ellis, R. (2005). "Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27 (2): 141–172.
Ellis, Rod; Barkhuizen, Gary (2005). Analysing Learner Language. Oxford University Press, USA. ISBN 978-0194316347.
Gass, Susan; Selinker, Larry (2008). Second Language Acquisition: An Introductory Course. New York, NY: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-805-85497-8.
Hadzibeganovic, Tarik; Cannas, Sergio A. (2009). "A Tsallis' statistics based neural network model for novel word learning". Physica A 388 (5): 732–746. doi:10.1016/j.physa.2008.10.042.
Horwitz, E. K. (1986). "Some Language Acquisition Principles and their Implications for Second Language Teaching". Hispania 69 (3): 684-689.
Hulstijn, J. H. (2005). "Theoretical and empirical issues in the study of implicit and explicit second-language learning". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27 (2): 129–140.
Krashen, Stephen (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Pergamon Press. ISBN 0-08-028628-3. http://www.sdkrashen.com/Principles_and_Practice/index.html. Retrieved 2010-11-25.
Lenneberg, Eric (1967). Biological Foundations of Language. New York: Wiley. ISBN 0898747007.
Lightbown, Patsy (1990). "Chapter 6: Process-product research on second language learning in classrooms". In Harley, Birgit. The Development of Second Language Proficiency. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 82-92. ISBN 9780521384100.
Lightbown, Patsy; Spada, Nina (1990). "Focus-on-Form and Corrective Feedback in Communicative Language Teaching: Effects on Second Language Learning". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 12 (4): 429-48.
Lyster, R.; Ranta, L. (1997). "Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19: 37–66.
Lyster, R.; Mori, H. (2006). "Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 28: 269–300.
MacIntyre, P.D.; Clément, R.; Dörnyei, Z.; Noels, K.A. (1998). "Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in an L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation". The Modern Language Journal 82 (4): 545–562. doi:10.2307/330224. http://jstor.org/stable/330224.
MacWhinney, B.; Bates, E.; Kliegl, R. (1984). "Cue validity and sentence interpretation in English, German, and Italian". Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 23 (2): 127–150. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(84)90093-8.
Mayberry, R. I.; Lock, E. (2003). "Age constraints on first versus second language acquisition: Evidence for linguistic plasticity and Epigenesis". Brain and Language 87: 369-384.
Nation, Paul (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-80498-1.
Pfeffer, J. A. (1964). Grunddeutsch: Basic (Spoken) German Word List. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall. OCLC 475772972.
Pienemann, Manfred (1998). Language Processing and Second Language Development: Processability Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ISBN 9781556195495.
Selinker, L. (1972). "Interlanguage". International Review of Applied Linguistics 10: 209–241. doi:10.1515/iral.1972.10.1-4.209.
Tarone, Elaine; Bigelow, Martha; Hansen, Kit (2009). Literacy and Second Language Oracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780194423007.
Tarone, Elaine; Swierzbin, Bonnie (2009). Exploring Learner Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780194422918.
Ullman, M. T. (2001). "The declarative/procedural model of lexicon and grammar". Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 30 (1): 37–69. doi:10.1023/A:1005204207369. PMID 11291183.
Williams, J. (1999). "Memory, attention and inductive learning". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 21: 1–48.
[edit] Further readingCook, V. (2008). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching (4th ed). London: Hodder Arnold.
Ellis, R. (2008). The Study of Second Language Acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, Rod. (2007). Educational Settings and Second Language Learning. Volume 9 Asian EFL Journal. [1]
Ellis, Rod. (2005). Principles of Instructed Language Learning. Volume 7 Asian EFL Journal.
Lightbown, P. and Spada, N. (2006). How Languages are Learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2nd edition. [ISBN 0-19-442224-0]
Lin, G. H. C. (2008). "Lin, G. H. C. (2008). Pedagogies proving Krashen’s theory of affective filter , Hwa Kang Journal of English Language & Literature, Vol, 14, pp.113-131 ERIC Collection as ED503681 [2]
Ellis, Rod (1991). "The Interaction Hypothesis A critical evaluation". pp. 37. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED338037 - on Michael H. Long's Interaction Hypothesis
Mangubhai, F. (2006). "What do we know about learning and teaching second languages: Implications for teaching " Asian EFL Journal Vol 8. 2006 [3]
McKay, Sharon; Schaetzel, Kirsten, Facilitating Adult Learner Interactions to Build Listening and Speaking Skills, CAELA Network Briefs, CAELA and Center for Applied Linguistics
Mitchell, R. and Myles, F. (2004). Second Language Learning Theories (2nd ed). London: Hodder Arnold.
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2006). (Eds.). Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching. John Benjamins: Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
Ortega, L. (2009). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. London: Hodder Arnold.
Ortega, L. (2010). Second language acquisition. Critical concepts in linguistics. London: Routledge. [ISBN 978-0-415-45020-1]
Oxford, R,. & Lee, K. (2008). Understanding EFL Learners’ Strategy Use and Strategy Awareness.[4]
Robertson, P. & Nunn, R. (2007). The Study of Second Language Acquisition in the Asian Context [5]
Tarone, E. & Swierzbin, B. (2009). Exploring Learner Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
White, L. (2003). Second Language Acquisition and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[edit] External linksSecond Language Acquisition Topics by Vivian Cook: information on SLA, applied linguistics and language teaching research, including a large bibliography.
Center for Applied Linguistics homepage
One Language or Two: Answers to Questions about Bilingualism in Language-Delayed Children: Information for Parents and Speech-Language Pathologists
[hide]v · d · eTopics in second language acquisition
Language learners Multilingualism · Heritage language
Analyzing learner language Contrastive analysis · Error analysis · Interlanguage
Linguistic factors Language transfer · Linguistic universals
Non-linguistic factors Language learning aptitude · Critical period hypothesis · Motivation · Willingness to communicate · Foreign language anxiety · Metalinguistic awareness Code-switching
SLA hypotheses Order of acquisition · Acquisition-learning hypothesis · Comprehensible input · Monitor hypothesis · Comprehensible output · Competition model · Connectionism · Noticing hypothesis · Processability theory · Affective filter
In the classroom Input enhancement
Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_language_acquisition
Categories: Applied linguistics
Language acquisition
Linguistics articles needing images
Hidden categories: Wikipedia articles needing style editing from August 2010
All articles needing style editing
All Wikipedia articles needing clarification
Wikipedia articles needing clarification from August 2010
All pages needing cleanup
Articles with unsourced statements from November 2010
All articles with unsourced statements
Wikipedia articles needing clarification from November 2010
Articles with unsourced statements from February 2009
Articles with inconsistent citation formats
MacIntyre, P.D.; Clément, R.; Dörnyei, Z.; Noels, K.A. (1998). "Conceptualizing willingness to
Second language acquisition (SLA) or second language learning is the process by which people of a language can learn a second language in addition to their native language(s). "Second language acquisition" refers to what the student does; it does not refer to what the teacher does (see "language education" for work on language teaching). "Second language acquisition research" studies the psychology and sociology of the learning process. Sometimes the terms "acquisition" and "learning" are not treated as synonyms and are instead used to refer to the subconscious and conscious aspects of this process respectively (see second language learning).
"Second language", "target language", or "L2" are used to refer to any language learned after the native language, which is also called "mother tongue", "first language", "L1", or "source language". Second language acquisition also includes third language acquisition/multilingualism and heritage language acquisition. Second language acquisition may be abbreviated as "SLA", or "L2A", for "L2 acquisition".
Contents
[hide]
1 Second Language Acquisition and its premises
1.1 Related fields
2 Learner language
2.1 Error analysis
2.2 Interlanguage
3 Order of acquisition
4 Language transfer
5 Second language acquisition theories
5.1 Acquisition-learning hypothesis
5.2 Input hypothesis
5.3 Monitor model
5.4 Interaction hypothesis
5.5 Output hypothesis
5.6 Competition model
5.7 Connectionism and second language acquisition
5.8 Noticing hypothesis
5.9 Processability
5.10 Automaticity
5.11 Declarative/procedural model
5.12 Memory and second language acquisition
6 Individual variation
6.1 Language aptitude
6.2 Age
6.3 Strategy use
6.4 Affective factors
6.4.1 Affective Filter
6.4.2 Anxiety
6.4.3 Personality Factors
6.4.4 Social effects
6.4.5 Motivation
7 Pedagogical effects
8 Understanding SLA
8.1 Concepts of ability
9 See also
10 Notes
11 References
12 Further reading
13 External links
[edit] Second Language Acquisition and its premises
Second language acquisition is the process of learning a new language after the acquisition of a learner's native language. It can also incorporate the learning of third, fourth or subsequent languages[1] as well as heritage language learning.[2] Bilingualism is not usually seen to be within the field of second language acquisition. Most SLA researchers see bilingualism as being the end result of learning a language, not the process itself, and see the term as referring to native-like fluency, which second language learners rarely achieve. Writers in fields such as education and psychology, however, often use bilingualism loosely to refer to all forms of multilingualism.[3]
Cenoz and Genesee (1998)[4][vague] terms multilingual acquisition and multilingualism as complex phenomena and add that they implicate all the factors and processes associated with second language acquisition and bilingualism as well as unique and potentially more complex factors and effects associated with the interactions that are possible among the multiple languages being learned and the processes of learning them. Valdés (2000)[5][broken citation] defines heritage language as the language someone learns at home as a child which is a minority language in society, but because of growing up using the dominant language, the speaker seems to be more competent in the latter and feels more comfortable to communicate in that language. However, since heritage speakers are commonly alienated from their heritage language for a long time, and have limited or no exposure to that language, they seem to be in a state of language acquisition that differs greatly from monolinguals or second language speakers of that language.
[edit] Related fields
Second language acquisition is closely related to the fields of linguistics, psychology, neuroscience, sociology, and education.
[edit] Learner language
"Learner language" is the written or spoken language produced by a learner. It is also the main type of data used in second language acquisition research.[6] Much research in second language acquisition is concerned with the internal representations of a language in the mind of the learner, and in how those representations change over time. It is not yet possible to inspect these representations directly with brain scans or similar techniques, so SLA researchers are forced to make inferences about these rules from learners' speech or writing.[7] There are a number of different ways of gathering and interpreting learner language. Researchers may adopt an interlanguage perspective, regarding each learner language as a language in its own right, or they may study how a learner language compares to a natively spoken language. Much of the research has focused on the English language as the language being learned, because of the huge number of people around the world learning and teaching it.
[edit] Error analysis
Main article: Error analysis
Error analysis in SLA was established in the 1960s by Stephen Pit Corder and colleagues.[8] Error analysis was an alternative to contrastive analysis, an approach influenced by behaviorism through which applied linguists sought to use the formal distinctions between the learners' first and second languages to predict errors. Error analysis showed that contrastive analysis was unable to predict a great majority of errors, although its more valuable aspects have been incorporated into the study of language transfer. A key finding of error analysis has been that many learner errors are produced by learners making faulty inferences about the rules of the new language. Although error analysis is still used to investigate specific questions in SLA, the quest for an overarching theory of learner errors has largely been abandoned. In the mid-1970s, Corder and others moved on to a more wide-ranging approach to learner language, known as interlanguage.[citation needed]
[edit] Interlanguage
Main article: Interlanguage
Interlanguage is a term coined by Selinker.[9] Interlanguage scholarship seeks to understand learner language on its own terms, as a natural language with its own systematic rules. Interlanguage scholars reject, at least for heuristic purposes, the view of learner language as merely an imperfect version of the target language. Interlanguage work is a vibrant microcosm of linguistics. It is possible to apply an interlanguage perspective to learners' underlying knowledge of the target language sound system (interlanguage phonology), grammar (morphology and syntax), vocabulary (lexicon), and language-use norms found among learners (interlanguage pragmatics).
By describing the ways in which learner language conforms to universal linguistic norms, interlanguage research has contributed greatly to our understanding of linguistic universals in SLA. See below, under "linguistic universals".
[edit] Order of acquisition
Main article: Order of acquisition
The order of acquisition is a concept in language acquisition that all learners of a given language will learn the grammatical features of that language in roughly the same order. This phenomenon has been confirmed for people learning their first language, and also, to some extent, for people learning a second language. The reason the order of acquisition is less stable in second language learners is not known, but is thought to be due either to the effects of language transfer or other interference by mental processes that second language learners have developed.
Researchers have found a very consistent order in the acquisition of first language structures by children, and this has drawn a great deal of interest from SLA scholars. Considerable effort has been devoted to testing the "identity hypothesis", which asserts that first-language and second-language acquisition conform to the same patterns. This has not been confirmed, perhaps because second-language learners' cognitive and affective states are so much more advanced, and perhaps because it is not true. Orders of acquisition in SLA often resemble those found in first language acquisition, and may have common neurological causes, but there is no convincing evidence for this. It is not safe to say that the order of L1 acquisition has any easy implications for SLA.
[edit] Language transfer
Main article: Language transfer
Language transfer typically refers to the learner's trying to apply rules (syntaxe) and forms (lexical) of the first or third language into the target second language. Contrastive analysis, discussed above, sought to predict all learner errors based on language transfer. Transfer is an important factor in language learning at all levels
On the syntactical side, subsequent researches in error analysis and interlanguage structure showed, this project was flawed: most errors are not due to transfer, but to faulty inferences about the rules of the target language. On the lexical side, typically learners begin by transferring word aspects : sounds (phonetic transfer), meanings (semantic transfer), and orthography.
As learners progress and gain more experience with the target language, the role of transfer typically diminishes. In the UG-based framework (see Linguistic universals below), "language transfer" specifically refers to the linguistic parameter settings defined by the language universal. Thus, "language transfer" is defined as the initial state of second language acquisition rather than its developmental stage.
[edit] Second language acquisition theories
[edit] Acquisition-learning hypothesis
Main article: Acquisition-learning hypothesis
Stephen Krashen introduced the acquisition-learning hypothesis, which makes a distinction between conscious language learning and subconscious language acquisition.[10] Krashen argues that only subconscious acquisition can lead to fluency.
A distinction closely related to that made by Krashen (1982) between acquisition and learning is one between implicit and explicit linguistic knowledge.[10] Learners gain implicit knowledge by processing target-language input without consciously giving attention to acquiring the forms and structures of the language. On the other hand, learners get explicit knowledge of a language when they process language input with the conscious intention of discovering the structural rules of the language. A distinction between the implicit learning involved in acquiring a first language (L1) and the mix of implicit and explicit learning that takes place in L2 acquisition has been one analytic route for understanding the virtually universal success of L1 acquisition versus the more limited success of L2 acquisition among adult learners (Hulstijn, 2005).[11] Ellis has found empirical confirmation for the distinct constructs of implicit and explicit language knowledge.[12]
[edit] Input hypothesis
Main article: Comprehensible input
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 take in is one of the most important factors affecting their learning. However, it must be at a level that is comprehensible to them. In his Monitor Theory, Krashen advanced the concept that language input should be at the "i+1" level, just beyond what the learner can fully understand; this input is comprehensible, but contains structures that are not yet fully understood. This has been criticized on the basis that there is no clear definition of i+1, and that factors other than structural difficulty (such as interest or presentation) can affect whether input is actually turned into intake. The concept has been quantified, however, in vocabulary acquisition research; Nation reviews various studies which indicate that about 98% of the words in running text should be previously known in order for extensive reading to be effective.[13]
In his Input Hypothesis, Krashen proposes that language acquisition takes place only when learners receive input just beyond their current level of L2 competence. He termed this level of input “i+1.” However, in contrast to emergentist and connectionist theories, he follows the innate approach by applying Chomsky’s Government and binding theory and concept of Universal grammar (UG) to second language acquisition. He does so by proposing a Language Acquisition Device that uses L2 input to define the parameters of the L2, within the constraints of UG, and to increase the L2 proficiency of the learner. In addition, Krashen (1982)’s Affective Filter Hypothesis holds that the acquisition of a second language is halted if the leaner has a high degree of anxiety when receiving input. According to this concept, a part of the mind filters out L2 input and prevents uptake by the learner, if the learner feels that the process of SLA is threatening. As mentioned earlier, since input is essential in Krashen’s model, this filtering action prevents acquisition from progressing.
A great deal of research has taken place on input enhancement, the ways in which input may be altered so as to direct learners' attention to linguistically important areas. Input enhancement might include bold-faced vocabulary words or marginal glosses in a reading text. Research here is closely linked to research on pedagogical effects, and comparably diverse.
[edit] Monitor model
Main article: Monitor hypothesis
Other concepts have also been influential in the speculation about the processes of building internal systems of second language information. Some thinkers hold that language processing handles distinct types of knowledge. For instance, one component of the Monitor Model, propounded by Krashen, posits a distinction between “acquisition” and “learning.”[10] According to Krashen, L2 acquisition is a subconscious process of incidentally “picking up” a language, as children do when becoming proficient in their first languages. Language learning, on the other hand, is studying, consciously and intentionally, the features of a language, as is common in traditional classrooms. Krashen sees these two processes as fundamentally different, with little or no interface between them. In common with connectionism, Krashen sees input as essential to language acquisition.[10]
Further, Bialystok and Smith make another distinction in explaining how learners build and use L2 and interlanguage knowledge structures.[14] They argue that the concept of interlanguage should include a distinction between two specific kinds of language processing ability. On one hand is learners’ knowledge of L2 grammatical structure and ability to analyze the target language objectively using that knowledge, which they term “representation,” and, on the other hand is the ability to use their L2 linguistic knowledge, under time constraints, to accurately comprehend input and produce output in the L2, which they call “control.” They point out that often non-native speakers of a language have higher levels of representation than their native-speaking counterparts have, yet have a lower level of control. Finally, Bialystok has framed the acquisition of language in terms of the interaction between what she calls “analysis” and “control.”[15] Analysis is what learners do when they attempt to understand the rules of the target language. Through this process, they acquire these rules and can use them to gain greater control over their own production.
Monitoring is another important concept in some theoretical models of learner use of L2 knowledge. According to Krashen, the Monitor is a component of an L2 learner’s language processing device that uses knowledge gained from language learning to observe and regulate the learner’s own L2 production, checking for accuracy and adjusting language production when necessary.[10]
[edit] Interaction hypothesis
Long's interaction hypothesis proposes that language acquisition is strongly facilitated by the use of the target language in interaction. In particular, the negotiation of meaning has been shown to contribute greatly to the acquisition of vocabulary.[16][broken citation] In a review of the substantial literature on this topic, Nation relates the value of negotiation to the generative use of words: the use of words in new contexts which stimulate a deeper understanding of their meaning.[13][vague]
[edit] Output hypothesis
Main article: Comprehensible output
In the 1980s, Canadian SLA researcher Merrill Swain advanced the output hypothesis, that meaningful output is as necessary to language learning as meaningful input. However, most studies have shown little if any correlation between learning and quantity of output. Today, most scholars[citation needed] contend that small amounts of meaningful output are important to language learning, but primarily because the experience of producing language leads to more effective processing of input.
[edit] Competition model
Main article: Competition model of language acquisition
Some of the major cognitive theories of how learners organize language knowledge are based on analyses of how speakers of various languages analyze sentences for meaning. MacWhinney, Bates, and Kliegl found that speakers of English, German, and Italian showed varying patterns in identifying the subjects of transitive sentences containing more than one noun.[17] English speakers relied heavily on word order; German speakers used morphological agreement, the animacy status of noun referents, and stress; and speakers of Italian relied on agreement and stress. MacWhinney et al. interpreted these results as supporting the Competition Model, which states that individuals use linguistic cues to get meaning from language, rather than relying on linguistic universals.[17] According to this theory, when acquiring an L2, learners sometimes receive competing cues and must decide which cue(s) is most relevant for determining meaning.
[edit] Connectionism and second language acquisition
See also: Connectionism
These findings also relate to Connectionism. Connectionism attempts to model the cognitive language processing of the human brain, using computer architectures that make associations between elements of language, based on frequency of co-occurrence in the language input.[18] Frequency has been found to be a factor in various linguistic domains of language learning.[19] Connectionism posits that learners form mental connections between items that co-occur, using exemplars found in language input. From this input, learners extract the rules of the language through cognitive processes common to other areas of cognitive skill acquisition. Since connectionism denies both innate rules and the existence of any innate language-learning module, L2 input is of greater importance than it is in processing models based on innate approaches, since, in connectionism, input is the source of both the units and the rules of language.
[edit] Noticing hypothesis
Main article: Noticing hypothesis
Attention is another characteristic that some believe to have a role in determining the success or failure of language processing. Schmidt states that although explicit metalinguistic knowledge of a language is not always essential for acquisition, the learner must be aware of L2 input in order to gain from it.[20][broken citation] In his “noticing hypothesis,” Schmidt posits that learners must notice the ways in which their interlanguage structures differ from target norms. This noticing of the gap allows the learner’s internal language processing to restructure the learner’s internal representation of the rules of the L2 in order to bring the learner’s production closer to the target. In this respect, Schmidt’s understanding is consistent with the ongoing process of rule formation found in emergentism and connectionism.
[edit] Processability
Main article: Processability theory
Some theorists and researchers have contributed to the cognitive approach to second language acquisition by increasing understanding of the ways L2 learners restructure their interlanguage knowledge systems to be in greater conformity to L2 structures. Processability theory states that learners restructure their L2 knowledge systems in an order of which they are capable at their stage of development.[21] For instance, In order to acquire the correct morphological and syntactic forms for English questions, learners must transform declarative English sentences. They do so by a series of stages, consistent across learners. Clahsen proposed that certain processing principles determine this order of restructuring.[22] Specifically, he stated that learners first, maintain declarative word order while changing other aspects of the utterances, second, move words to the beginning and end of sentences, and third, move elements within main clauses before subordinate clauses.
[edit] Automaticity
Thinkers have produced several theories concerning how learners use their internal L2 knowledge structures to comprehend L2 input and produce L2 output. One idea is that learners acquire proficiency in an L2 in the same way that people acquire other complex cognitive skills. Automaticity is the performance of a skill without conscious control. It results from the gradated process of proceduralization. In the field of cognitive psychology, Anderson expounds a model of skill acquisition, according to which persons use procedures to apply their declarative knowledge about a subject in order to solve problems.[23] On repeated practice, these procedures develop into production rules that the individual can use to solve the problem, without accessing long-term declarative memory. Performance speed and accuracy improve as the learner implements these production rules. DeKeyser tested the application of this model to L2 language automaticity.[24] He found that subjects developed increasing proficiency in performing tasks related to the morphosyntax of an artificial language, Autopractan, and performed on a learning curve typical of the acquisition of non-language cognitive skills. This evidence conforms to Anderson’s general model of cognitive skill acquisition, supports the idea that declarative knowledge can be transformed into procedural knowledge, and tends to undermine the idea of Krashen[10] that knowledge gained through language “learning” cannot be used to initiate speech production.
[edit] Declarative/procedural model
Michael T. Ullman has used a declarative/procedural model to understand how language information is stored. This model is consistent with a distinction made in general cognitive science between the storage and retrieval of facts, on the one hand, and understanding of how to carry out operations, on the other. It states that declarative knowledge consists of arbitrary linguistic information, such as irregular verb forms, that are stored in the brain’s declarative memory. In contrast, knowledge about the rules of a language, such as grammatical word order is procedural knowledge and is stored in procedural memory. Ullman reviews several psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic studies that support the declarative/procedural model.[25]
[edit] Memory and second language acquisition
Perhaps certain psychological characteristics constrain language processing. One area of research is the role of memory. Williams conducted a study in which he found some positive correlation between verbatim memory functioning and grammar learning success for his subjects.[26] This suggests that individuals with less short-term memory capacity might have a limitation in performing cognitive processes for organization and use of linguistic knowledge.
[edit] Individual variation
Research on variation between individual learners seeks to address the question: Why do some learners do better than others? A flurry of studies in the 1970s, often labelled the "good language learner studies", sought to identify the distinctive factors of successful learners. Although those studies are now widely regarded as simplistic, they did serve to identify a number of factors affecting language acquisition. More detailed research on many of these specific factors continues today.
[edit] Language aptitude
Main article: Language learning aptitude
Tests of language aptitude have proven extremely effective in predicting which learners will be successful in learning. However, considerable controversy remains about whether language aptitude is properly regarded as a unitary concept, an organic property of the brain, or as a complex of factors including motivation and short-term memory. Research has generally shown that language aptitude is quite distinct from general aptitude or intelligence, as measured by various tests, and is itself fairly consistently measurable by different tests.
Language aptitude research is often criticized for being irrelevant to the problems of language learners, who must attempt to learn a language regardless of whether they are gifted for the task or not. This claim is reinforced by research findings that aptitude is largely unchangeable. In addition, traditional language aptitude measures such as the Modern Language Aptitude Test strongly favor decontextualized knowledge of the sort used in taking tests, rather than the sort used in conversation. For this reason little research is carried out on aptitude today. However, operators of selective language programs such as the United States Defense Language Institute continue to use language aptitude testing as part of applicant screening.
[edit] Age
Main article: critical period hypothesis
How children acquire native language (L1) and the relevance of this to foreign language (L2) learning has long been debated. Although evidence for L2 learning ability declining with age is controversial, a common notion is that children learn L2s easily and older learners rarely achieve fluency. This assumption stems from ‘critical period’ (CP) ideas. A CP was popularised by Eric Lenneberg in 1967 for L1 acquisition, but considerable interest now surrounds age effects on second language acquisition (SLA).[27] SLA theories explain learning processes and suggest causal factors for a possible CP for SLA, mainly attempting to explain apparent differences in language aptitudes of children and adults by distinct learning routes, and clarifying them through psychological mechanisms. Research explores these ideas and hypotheses, but results are varied: some demonstrate pre-pubescent children acquire language easily, and some that older learners have the advantage, and yet others focus on existence of a CP for SLA. Recent studies have recognised that certain aspects of SLA may be affected by age, though others remain intact.[28]
[edit] Strategy use
The effective use of strategies has been shown to be critical to successful language learning, so much so that Canale and Swain (1980) included "strategic competence" among the four components of communicative competence.[29] Research here has also shown significant pedagogical effects. This has given rise to "strategies-based instruction."
Strategies are commonly divided into learning strategies and communicative strategies, although there are other ways of categorizing them. Learning strategies are techniques used to improve learning, such as mnemonics or using a dictionary. Learners (and native speakers) use communicative strategies to get meaning across even when they lack access to the correct language: for example, by using pro-forms like "thing", or non-spoken means such as mime. Communicative strategies may not have any direct bearing on learning, and some strategies such as avoidance (not using a form with which one is uncomfortable) may actually hinder learning.
Learners from different cultures use strategies in different ways,[30] as a research tradition led by Rebecca Oxford has demonstrated. Related to this are differences in strategy use between male and female learners. Numerous studies have shown that female learners typically use strategies more widely and intensively than males; this may be related to the statistical advantage which female learners enjoy in language learning.[citation needed]
[edit] Affective factors
Affective factors relate to the learner's emotional state and attitude toward the target language. Research on affect in language learning is still strongly influenced by Bloom's taxonomy, which describes the affective levels of receiving, responding, valuing, organization, and self-characterization through one's value system. It has also been informed in recent years by research in neurobiology and neurolinguistics.
[edit] Affective Filter
Main article: Affective filter
Furthermore, researchers believe that language learners all possess an affective filter which affects language acquisition. If a student possesses a high filter they are less likely to engage in language learning because of shyness, concern for grammar or other factors. Students possessing a lower affective filter will be more likely to engage in learning because they are less likely to be impeded by other factors. The affective filter is an important component of second language learning.
[edit] Anxiety
Although some continue to propose that a low level of anxiety may be helpful, studies have almost unanimously shown that anxiety damages students' prospects for successful learning. Anxiety is often related to a sense of threat to the learner's self-concept in the learning situation, for example if a learner fears being ridiculed for a mistake.
[edit] Personality Factors
Second language acquisition is defined as the learning and adopting of a language that is not your native language. Studies[vague] have shown that extraverts (or unreserved and outgoing people) acquire a second language better than introverts (or shy people).
One particular study done by Naiman[vague] reflected this point. The subjects were 72 Canadian high school students from grades 8, 10 and 12 who were studying French as a second language.
Naiman gave them all questionnaires to establish their psychological profiles, which also included a French listening test and imitation test. He found that approximately 70% of the students with the higher grades (B or higher) would consider themselves extroverts.
Extroverts will be willing to try to communicate even if they are not sure they will succeed. Two scientists, Kinginger and Farrell, conducted interviews with U.S. students after their study abroad program in France in 2003.[broken citation] They found that many of the students would avoid interaction with the native speakers at all costs, while others jumped at the opportunity to speak the language. Those who avoided interaction were typically quiet, reserved people, (or introverts).
Logically, anxiety will cause students not to try and advance their skills, especially when they feel they are under pressure. Just the lack of practice will make introverts less likely to fully acquire the second language.
[edit] Social effects
The process of language learning can be very stressful, and the impact of positive or negative attitudes from the surrounding society can be critical. One aspect that has received particular attention is the relationship of gender roles to language achievement. Studies across numerous cultures have shown that women, on the whole, enjoy an advantage over men. Some have proposed that this is linked to gender roles. Doman notes in a journal devoted to issues of Cultural affects on SLA, "Questions abound about what defines SLA, how far its borders extend, and what the attributions and contributions of its research are. Thus, there is a great amount of heterogeneity in the entire conceptualization of SLA. Some researchers tend to ignore certain aspects of the field, while others scrutinize those same aspects piece by piece."[31]
Community attitudes toward the language being learned can also have a profound impact on SLA. Where the community has a broadly negative view of the target language and its speakers, or a negative view of its relation to them, learning is typically much more difficult. This finding has been confirmed by research in numerous contexts. A widely-cited example is the difficulty faced by Navajo children in learning English as a second language.[citation needed]
Other common social factors include the attitude of parents toward language study, and the nature of group dynamics in the language classroom. Additionally, early attitudes may strengthen motivation and facility with language in general, particularly with early exposure to the language.
[edit] Motivation
Main article: Motivation in second language learning
The role of motivation in SLA has been the subject of extensive scholarship, closely influenced by work in motivational psychology. Motivation is internally complex, and Dörnyei begins his work by stating that "strictly speaking, there is no such thing as motivation."[32] There are many different kinds of motivation; these are often divided into types such as integrative or instrumental, intrinsic or extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation refers to the desire to do something for an internal reward. Most studies have shown it to be substantially more effective in long-term language learning than extrinsic motivation, for an external reward such as high grades or praise. Integrative and instrumental orientations refer to the degree that a language is learned "for its own sake" (integratively) or for instrumental purposes. Studies have not consistently shown either form of motivation to be more effective than the other, and the role of each is probably conditioned by various personality and cultural factors.
Some research has shown that motivation correlates strongly with proficiency, indicating both that successful learners are motivated and that success improves motivation. Thus motivation is not fixed, but is strongly affected by feedback from the environment. Accordingly, the study of motivation in SLA has also examined many of the external factors discussed above, such as the effect of instructional techniques on motivation. An accessible summary of this research can be found in Dörnyei (2001a).[32]
In their research on Willingness to communicate, MacIntyre et al. have shown that motivation is not the final construct before learners engage in communication. In fact, learners may be highly motivated yet remain unwilling to communicate.[33]
The European Union Lifelong learning programme has funded a project to research and build a set of best practices to motivate adult language learners, called Don't Give Up
[edit] Pedagogical effects
Efforts have been made to systematically measure or evaluate the effectiveness of language teaching practices in promoting second language acquisition. Such studies have been undertaken for every level of language, from phonetics to pragmatics, and for almost every current teaching methodology. It is therefore impossible to summarize their findings here. However, some more general issues have been addressed.
Research has indicated that many traditional language-teaching techniques are extremely inefficient.[34] One issue is the effectiveness of explicit teaching: can language teaching have a constructive effect beyond providing learners with enhanced input? Research on this at different levels of language has produced quite different results. Traditional areas of explicit teaching, such as phonology, grammar and vocabulary, have had decidedly mixed results. It is generally agreed that pedagogy restricted to teaching grammar rules and vocabulary lists does not give students the ability to use the L2 with accuracy and fluency. Rather, to become proficient in the L2, the learner must be given opportunities to use the L2 for communicative purposes, learning (as for example, through a teacher's corrective feedback) to attend to both meaning and formal accuracy.[35][36]
There is considerable promising research in the classroom on the impact of corrective feedback on L2 learners' use and acquisition of target language forms. The effectiveness of corrective feedback has been shown to vary depending on the technique used to make the correction, and the overall focus of the classroom, whether on formal accuracy or on communication of meaningful content.[37][38][39] However, it appears that a learner's ability to focus on corrective feedback on grammatical features that do not affect meaning is considerably altered when the learner has low alphabetic literacy.[40]
There is considerable interest in supplementing published research with approaches that engage language teachers in action research on learner language in their own classrooms.[41] As teachers become aware of the features of learner language produced by their students, they can refine their pedagogical intervention to maximize interlanguage development.[42]
Horwitz summarises findings of SLA research, and applies to L2 teaching some principles of L2 acquisition honed from a vast body of relevant literature.[43] Like Asher,[vague] Horwitz highlights the importance of naturalistic experience in L2, promoting listening and reading practice and stressing involvement in life-like conversations. She explicitly suggests teaching practices based on these principles; ‘[m]uch class time should be devoted to the development of listening and reading abilities’, and ‘[t]eachers should assess student interests and supply appropriate…materials’.[44] The ‘audio-lingual’ teaching practices used in the present study are based on principles explicated by Asher and Horwitz; listening featured heavily, closely followed by reading and speaking practice. The vocabulary items taught were deemed relevant for all learners, regardless of age, and, according to Pfeffer, they are among the most commonly used nouns in everyday German language.[45]
[edit] Understanding SLA
The systematic modelling of SLA is concerned with the question: What are the most important overall factors in language acquisition? Models of SLA have played an important role in laying out directions for future research, and also for informing practice in language teaching.
Different models of SLA have focused on different aspects of SLA and general linguistic research. For example, Schumann's Acculturation Model, which viewed second language acquisition as just one part of adapting to a new culture, emphasized findings related to language socialization. Krashen's Monitor Model prioritized research on input and affective factors. Long's Interaction Hypothesis took a social constructivist view of research on input. Caleb Gattegno based The Silent Way on the principle of the education of awareness. No single model of SLA has gained wide acceptance. Given that the field is complex and interdisciplinary, few scholars expect that any model will do so in the foreseeable future.
[edit] Concepts of ability
Numerous notions have been used to describe learners' ability in the target language. The first such influential concept was the competence-performance distinction introduced by Chomsky. This distinguishes competence, a person's idealized knowledge of language rules, from performance, the imperfect realization of these rules. Thus, a person may be interrupted and not finish a sentence, but still know how to make a complete sentence. Although this distinction has become fundamental to most work in linguistics today, it has not proven adequate by itself to describe the complex nature of learners' developing ability.
[edit] See also
Autonomous Technology-Assisted Language Learning (ATALL Wikibook)
Computer-assisted language learning
Education
Error analysis
Foreign language anxiety
Glossary of language teaching terms and ideas
Hardest language
Interlanguage
Language acquisition
Language exchange
Learning by teaching (LdL)
Metalinguistic awareness
Second language attrition
[edit] Notes
^ Gass & Selinker 2008, p. 7
^ Gass & Selinker 2008, pp. 21-24
^ Gass & Selinker 2008, pp. 24-25.
^ Cenoz & Genesee 1998.
^ Valdés 2000.
^ Ellis & Barkhuizen 2005, p. 4.
^ Ellis & Barkhuizen 2005, p. 6.
^ Corder 1967.
^ Selinker 1972.
^ a b c d e f Krashen 1982.
^ Hulstijn 2005.
^ Ellis 2005.
^ a b Nation 2001.
^ Bialystok & Smith 1985.
^ Bialystok 1994.
^ Long 1990.
^ a b MacWhinney, Bates & Kliegl 1984.
^ Christiansen & Chater 2001.
^ Ellis 2002a.
^ Schmidt 1990.
^ Pienemann 1998.
^ Clahsen 1984.
^ Anderson 1992.
^ DeKeyser 1997.
^ Ullman 2001.
^ Williams 1999.
^ Lenneberg 1967.
^ Mayberry & Lock 2003.
^ Canale & Swain 1980.
^ Hadzibeganovic & Cannas 2009.
^ Doman 2006.
^ a b Dörnyei 2001, p. 1.
^ MacIntyre et al. 1998.
^ Lightbown 1990 cited in Ellis 1994.
^ Doughty & Williams 1998.
^ Ellis 2002b.
^ Lightbown & Spada 1990.
^ Lyster & Ranta 1997.
^ Lyster & Mori 2006.
^ Tarone, Bigelow & Hansen 2009.
^ Allwright & Hanks 2009.
^ Tarone & Swierzbin 2009.
^ Horwitz 1986.
^ Horwitz 1986, pp. 685-686.
^ Pfeffer 1964.
[edit] References
Allwright, Dick; Hanks, Judith (2009). The Developing Language Learning: An Introduction to Exploratory Practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. ISBN 9781403985316.
Anderson, J. R. (1992). "Automaticity and the ACT* theory". American Journal of Psychology 105 (2): 165–180. doi:10.2307/1423026. PMID 1621879. http://jstor.org/stable/1423026.
Bialystok, E.; Smith, M. S. (1985). "Interlanguage is not a state of mind: An evaluation of the construct for second-language acquisition". Applied Linguistics 6 (2): 101–117. doi:10.1093/applin/6.2.101.
Bialystok, E. (1994). "Analysis and control in the development of second language proficiency". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16 (2): 157–168. doi:10.1017/S0272263100012857.
Canale, M.; Swain, M. (1980). "Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing". Applied Linguistics 1 (1): 1–47. doi:10.1093/applin/1.1.1.
Cenoz, Jasone; Genesee, Fred, eds (1998). Beyond Bilingualism: Multilingualism and Multilingual Education. Levittown, PA: Taylor & Francis. ISBN 1-85359-420-2.
Christiansen, M. H.; Chater, N. (2001). "Connectionist psycholinguistics: Capturing the empirical data". Trends in Cognitive Sciences 5 (2): 82–88. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01600-4. PMID 11166638.
Clahsen, Harald (1984). "The acquisition of German word order: a test case for cognitive approaches to second language acquisition". In Andersen, Roger. Second languages: a cross-linguistic perspective. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. pp. 219–242. ISBN 9780883774403.
Corder, S. P. (1967). "The significance of learners' errors". International Review of Applied Linguistics 5: 160–170.
DeKeyser, R. M. (1997). "Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language morphosyntax". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19: 195–222.
Doman, E. (2006). "Current Debates in SLA". The Asian EFL Journal 7 (4). http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/December_05_ed.php. Retrieved 2010-12-01.
Dörnyei, Zoltan (2001). Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521793777.
Doughty, Catherine; Williams, Jessica, eds (1998). Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-62390-2.
Ellis, Rod (1994). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0194371891.
Ellis, N. (2002a). "Frequency effects in language processing". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24 (2): 143–188.
Ellis, R. (2002b). "Does form-focused instruction affect the acquisition of implicit knowledge?". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24 (2): 223–236.
Ellis, R. (2005). "Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27 (2): 141–172.
Ellis, Rod; Barkhuizen, Gary (2005). Analysing Learner Language. Oxford University Press, USA. ISBN 978-0194316347.
Gass, Susan; Selinker, Larry (2008). Second Language Acquisition: An Introductory Course. New York, NY: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-805-85497-8.
Hadzibeganovic, Tarik; Cannas, Sergio A. (2009). "A Tsallis' statistics based neural network model for novel word learning". Physica A 388 (5): 732–746. doi:10.1016/j.physa.2008.10.042.
Horwitz, E. K. (1986). "Some Language Acquisition Principles and their Implications for Second Language Teaching". Hispania 69 (3): 684-689.
Hulstijn, J. H. (2005). "Theoretical and empirical issues in the study of implicit and explicit second-language learning". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27 (2): 129–140.
Krashen, Stephen (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Pergamon Press. ISBN 0-08-028628-3. http://www.sdkrashen.com/Principles_and_Practice/index.html. Retrieved 2010-11-25.
Lenneberg, Eric (1967). Biological Foundations of Language. New York: Wiley. ISBN 0898747007.
Lightbown, Patsy (1990). "Chapter 6: Process-product research on second language learning in classrooms". In Harley, Birgit. The Development of Second Language Proficiency. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 82-92. ISBN 9780521384100.
Lightbown, Patsy; Spada, Nina (1990). "Focus-on-Form and Corrective Feedback in Communicative Language Teaching: Effects on Second Language Learning". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 12 (4): 429-48.
Lyster, R.; Ranta, L. (1997). "Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19: 37–66.
Lyster, R.; Mori, H. (2006). "Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 28: 269–300.
MacIntyre, P.D.; Clément, R.; Dörnyei, Z.; Noels, K.A. (1998). "Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in an L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation". The Modern Language Journal 82 (4): 545–562. doi:10.2307/330224. http://jstor.org/stable/330224.
MacWhinney, B.; Bates, E.; Kliegl, R. (1984). "Cue validity and sentence interpretation in English, German, and Italian". Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 23 (2): 127–150. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(84)90093-8.
Mayberry, R. I.; Lock, E. (2003). "Age constraints on first versus second language acquisition: Evidence for linguistic plasticity and Epigenesis". Brain and Language 87: 369-384.
Nation, Paul (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-80498-1.
Pfeffer, J. A. (1964). Grunddeutsch: Basic (Spoken) German Word List. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall. OCLC 475772972.
Pienemann, Manfred (1998). Language Processing and Second Language Development: Processability Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ISBN 9781556195495.
Selinker, L. (1972). "Interlanguage". International Review of Applied Linguistics 10: 209–241. doi:10.1515/iral.1972.10.1-4.209.
Tarone, Elaine; Bigelow, Martha; Hansen, Kit (2009). Literacy and Second Language Oracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780194423007.
Tarone, Elaine; Swierzbin, Bonnie (2009). Exploring Learner Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780194422918.
Ullman, M. T. (2001). "The declarative/procedural model of lexicon and grammar". Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 30 (1): 37–69. doi:10.1023/A:1005204207369. PMID 11291183.
Williams, J. (1999). "Memory, attention and inductive learning". Studies in Second Language Acquisition 21: 1–48.
[edit] Further readingCook, V. (2008). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching (4th ed). London: Hodder Arnold.
Ellis, R. (2008). The Study of Second Language Acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, Rod. (2007). Educational Settings and Second Language Learning. Volume 9 Asian EFL Journal. [1]
Ellis, Rod. (2005). Principles of Instructed Language Learning. Volume 7 Asian EFL Journal.
Lightbown, P. and Spada, N. (2006). How Languages are Learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2nd edition. [ISBN 0-19-442224-0]
Lin, G. H. C. (2008). "Lin, G. H. C. (2008). Pedagogies proving Krashen’s theory of affective filter , Hwa Kang Journal of English Language & Literature, Vol, 14, pp.113-131 ERIC Collection as ED503681 [2]
Ellis, Rod (1991). "The Interaction Hypothesis A critical evaluation". pp. 37. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED338037 - on Michael H. Long's Interaction Hypothesis
Mangubhai, F. (2006). "What do we know about learning and teaching second languages: Implications for teaching " Asian EFL Journal Vol 8. 2006 [3]
McKay, Sharon; Schaetzel, Kirsten, Facilitating Adult Learner Interactions to Build Listening and Speaking Skills, CAELA Network Briefs, CAELA and Center for Applied Linguistics
Mitchell, R. and Myles, F. (2004). Second Language Learning Theories (2nd ed). London: Hodder Arnold.
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2006). (Eds.). Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching. John Benjamins: Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
Ortega, L. (2009). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. London: Hodder Arnold.
Ortega, L. (2010). Second language acquisition. Critical concepts in linguistics. London: Routledge. [ISBN 978-0-415-45020-1]
Oxford, R,. & Lee, K. (2008). Understanding EFL Learners’ Strategy Use and Strategy Awareness.[4]
Robertson, P. & Nunn, R. (2007). The Study of Second Language Acquisition in the Asian Context [5]
Tarone, E. & Swierzbin, B. (2009). Exploring Learner Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
White, L. (2003). Second Language Acquisition and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[edit] External linksSecond Language Acquisition Topics by Vivian Cook: information on SLA, applied linguistics and language teaching research, including a large bibliography.
Center for Applied Linguistics homepage
One Language or Two: Answers to Questions about Bilingualism in Language-Delayed Children: Information for Parents and Speech-Language Pathologists
[hide]v · d · eTopics in second language acquisition
Language learners Multilingualism · Heritage language
Analyzing learner language Contrastive analysis · Error analysis · Interlanguage
Linguistic factors Language transfer · Linguistic universals
Non-linguistic factors Language learning aptitude · Critical period hypothesis · Motivation · Willingness to communicate · Foreign language anxiety · Metalinguistic awareness Code-switching
SLA hypotheses Order of acquisition · Acquisition-learning hypothesis · Comprehensible input · Monitor hypothesis · Comprehensible output · Competition model · Connectionism · Noticing hypothesis · Processability theory · Affective filter
In the classroom Input enhancement
Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_language_acquisition
Categories: Applied linguistics
Language acquisition
Linguistics articles needing images
Hidden categories: Wikipedia articles needing style editing from August 2010
All articles needing style editing
All Wikipedia articles needing clarification
Wikipedia articles needing clarification from August 2010
All pages needing cleanup
Articles with unsourced statements from November 2010
All articles with unsourced statements
Wikipedia articles needing clarification from November 2010
Articles with unsourced statements from February 2009
Articles with inconsistent citation formats
MacIntyre, P.D.; Clément, R.; Dörnyei, Z.; Noels, K.A. (1998). "Conceptualizing willingness to
Ian Nation on Vocabulary
http://www.amazon.com/Learning-Vocabulary-Language-Cambridge-Linguistics/dp/0521804981/ref=cm_cr_pr_sims_
16 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars Indispensable resource on vocabulary learning, January 2, 2004
By A Customer
This review is from: Learning Vocabulary in Another Language (Cambridge Applied Linguistics) (Paperback)
This book was recommended to me by an English professor whose area of expertise is EFL vocabulary building. If you're an English teacher looking for a book which explains teaching vocabulary to ESL/EFL students in a crystal-clear manner, this is THE book.
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars This book gets it done. . ., November 24, 2006
By a writing teacher (Boston, MA) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Learning Vocabulary in Another Language (Cambridge Applied Linguistics) (Paperback)
I can't agree more with the previous reviewer. This book is by far the best I've read on the subject--highly informed, highly practical, research-based, and comprehensive. If you're in doubt about whether to buy it, take a moment to look through the table of contents and the excerpts! After reading this book at a library, I can't imagine *not* buying a copy for my classroom.
5.0 out of 5 stars An indispensable resource both in theory and in practice, October 13, 2007
By amorteur (United States) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Learning Vocabulary in Another Language (Cambridge Applied Linguistics) (Paperback)
This book is indispensable for the serious language teacher. Firmly based on quantitative research, Nation's book contradicts the dogmas of language teaching found in charlatans such as Krashen. Read his book and learn what really works. Don't go to class without it!
16 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars Indispensable resource on vocabulary learning, January 2, 2004
By A Customer
This review is from: Learning Vocabulary in Another Language (Cambridge Applied Linguistics) (Paperback)
This book was recommended to me by an English professor whose area of expertise is EFL vocabulary building. If you're an English teacher looking for a book which explains teaching vocabulary to ESL/EFL students in a crystal-clear manner, this is THE book.
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars This book gets it done. . ., November 24, 2006
By a writing teacher (Boston, MA) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Learning Vocabulary in Another Language (Cambridge Applied Linguistics) (Paperback)
I can't agree more with the previous reviewer. This book is by far the best I've read on the subject--highly informed, highly practical, research-based, and comprehensive. If you're in doubt about whether to buy it, take a moment to look through the table of contents and the excerpts! After reading this book at a library, I can't imagine *not* buying a copy for my classroom.
5.0 out of 5 stars An indispensable resource both in theory and in practice, October 13, 2007
By amorteur (United States) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Learning Vocabulary in Another Language (Cambridge Applied Linguistics) (Paperback)
This book is indispensable for the serious language teacher. Firmly based on quantitative research, Nation's book contradicts the dogmas of language teaching found in charlatans such as Krashen. Read his book and learn what really works. Don't go to class without it!
Sunday, January 16, 2011
How to Learn Any Language logon
http://how-to-learn-any-language.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=22
snowtiger
s..z
example of discusion: Krashen and the Din in the Head:
http://how-to-learn-any-language.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=23420&PN=2
http://how-to-learn-any-language.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=22\
snowtiger
s..z
example of discusion: Krashen and the Din in the Head:
http://how-to-learn-any-language.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=23420&PN=2
http://how-to-learn-any-language.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=22\
Vivian Cook on SLL (4th Ed 2008)
Second Language Learning and Language Teaching by Vivian Cook
13 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent overview, 2 Sep 2004
By Marco Polo - See all my reviewsThis review is from: Second Language Learning and Language Teaching (Paperback)
An excellent overview of the field of second language acquisition and targeted at practising language teachers or trainee teachers. It is not a guide to SLA research methodology, nor is it an overall guide to language teaching methods, "only to those which connect with an SLA perspective."
Each chapter has some activity section, like a questionnaire to answer, or some provocative questions, so that the reader becomes more aware of their attitudes and beliefs about second language learning and teaching.
Each chapter is divided into a number of sections, and each major section begins with a short glossary of technical terms, which I found particularly helpful, as some of the sections are quite technical (e.g. the section on pronunciation). Each chapter ends with some discussion topics and suggestions for further reading.
The main topics are: grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary, writing, memory (short-term, working, and longer-term), listening processes, codeswitching, motivation, individual factors that affect language acquisition, the different roles of second languages in societies and some of the different goals of language teaching around the world, models of L2 learning (Universal Grammar, input hypothesis, etc), learning and teaching styles (academic, audio-lingual, communicative, mainstream EFL).
Cook has been Reader at the Department of Language and Linguistics at Essex University, UK, but is taking up a new post at the University of Newcastle in October 2004. Cook is not afraid of sticking in his own opinions, although he of course remains objective, as behoves an academic author. For instance, after a good general summary of CLL (community language learning), Cook adds: "The aim is not....to be able to do anything with language in the world outside. It is to do something here and now in the classroom, so that the student, in Curran's words, 'arrives at a more positive view of himself, of his situation, of what he wishes to do and to become' (Curran, 1976). A logical extension is the therapeutic use of language teaching for psychotherapy in mental hostipals."
A strong point of this book is the frequent references (indexed) to various EFL and ESL course books (over 50) published in the last 20 years or so, and in the first chapter there is a section on "technique analysis" in which the reader is guided to an analysis of a published textbook to discover the background assumptions of the activities, the type of language input (written, spoken, discourse or fragments, etc) and what activities the students actually do.
This book provides a very useful link between SLA research and classroom teaching through published textbooks taken from a wide variety of countries. Most of the book focuses on EFL "mainly because this is the chief language that has been investigated in SLA research"; however there are frequent references to other languages, including Asian tongues, which often throw English (and other Romance languages) into relief. The layout, headings and indeces make it easily "random-accessed". Even if you have taken an MA course in Applied Linguistics or in TESOL, you are sure to find something you did not know either about language, language acquisition or about your own teaching style and beliefs, and feel stimulated and encouraged to return to your classroom with refreshed curiosity and enthusiasm. (This review refers to the paperback 3rd edition, 2001). Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
12 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars Course Book, 12 Mar 2002
By sixashes@aol.com (Shropshire, UK) - See all my reviewsThis review is from: Second Language Learning and Language Teaching (Paperback)
I have studied Second Language Acquisition as part of my Spanish and TESOL degree, and I found this book invaluable. It presents the information in a particularly clear and lucid way.Unlike some other couse books on this subject, the author's arguments are objective, not subjective. I can thoroughly recommend this as a course book for TESOL, or for anyone with an enquiring mind and an interest in languages.
13 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent overview, 2 Sep 2004
By Marco Polo - See all my reviewsThis review is from: Second Language Learning and Language Teaching (Paperback)
An excellent overview of the field of second language acquisition and targeted at practising language teachers or trainee teachers. It is not a guide to SLA research methodology, nor is it an overall guide to language teaching methods, "only to those which connect with an SLA perspective."
Each chapter has some activity section, like a questionnaire to answer, or some provocative questions, so that the reader becomes more aware of their attitudes and beliefs about second language learning and teaching.
Each chapter is divided into a number of sections, and each major section begins with a short glossary of technical terms, which I found particularly helpful, as some of the sections are quite technical (e.g. the section on pronunciation). Each chapter ends with some discussion topics and suggestions for further reading.
The main topics are: grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary, writing, memory (short-term, working, and longer-term), listening processes, codeswitching, motivation, individual factors that affect language acquisition, the different roles of second languages in societies and some of the different goals of language teaching around the world, models of L2 learning (Universal Grammar, input hypothesis, etc), learning and teaching styles (academic, audio-lingual, communicative, mainstream EFL).
Cook has been Reader at the Department of Language and Linguistics at Essex University, UK, but is taking up a new post at the University of Newcastle in October 2004. Cook is not afraid of sticking in his own opinions, although he of course remains objective, as behoves an academic author. For instance, after a good general summary of CLL (community language learning), Cook adds: "The aim is not....to be able to do anything with language in the world outside. It is to do something here and now in the classroom, so that the student, in Curran's words, 'arrives at a more positive view of himself, of his situation, of what he wishes to do and to become' (Curran, 1976). A logical extension is the therapeutic use of language teaching for psychotherapy in mental hostipals."
A strong point of this book is the frequent references (indexed) to various EFL and ESL course books (over 50) published in the last 20 years or so, and in the first chapter there is a section on "technique analysis" in which the reader is guided to an analysis of a published textbook to discover the background assumptions of the activities, the type of language input (written, spoken, discourse or fragments, etc) and what activities the students actually do.
This book provides a very useful link between SLA research and classroom teaching through published textbooks taken from a wide variety of countries. Most of the book focuses on EFL "mainly because this is the chief language that has been investigated in SLA research"; however there are frequent references to other languages, including Asian tongues, which often throw English (and other Romance languages) into relief. The layout, headings and indeces make it easily "random-accessed". Even if you have taken an MA course in Applied Linguistics or in TESOL, you are sure to find something you did not know either about language, language acquisition or about your own teaching style and beliefs, and feel stimulated and encouraged to return to your classroom with refreshed curiosity and enthusiasm. (This review refers to the paperback 3rd edition, 2001). Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
12 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars Course Book, 12 Mar 2002
By sixashes@aol.com (Shropshire, UK) - See all my reviewsThis review is from: Second Language Learning and Language Teaching (Paperback)
I have studied Second Language Acquisition as part of my Spanish and TESOL degree, and I found this book invaluable. It presents the information in a particularly clear and lucid way.Unlike some other couse books on this subject, the author's arguments are objective, not subjective. I can thoroughly recommend this as a course book for TESOL, or for anyone with an enquiring mind and an interest in languages.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Digital Language Lab Solutions, 2nd edition (By browsing in CALICO, 13-01-11)
http://www.iallt.org/product/digital_language_lab_solutions_2nd_edition
© 2007. The great diversity of available digital language lab programs makes for a bewildering array of technical specifications, requirements, and product features. The purpose of this volume is to sort through these details as comprehensively as possible to allow informed decisions to be made about their acquisition. Packaged as a PDF file on a CD-ROM. An overview of the modules can be viewed online.
Jack Burston, Editor
Jack Burston, ed.
Digital Language Lab Solutions contains the following modules.
Thirteen digital lab products are evaluated in this volume. They are organized into three broad categories.
•The first consists of those whose major function is that of providing instructor control over, and communication with, student workstations: NetSupportSchool and SynchronEyes.
•The second group focuses primarily on providing various types of audio recording functionality: Dartmouth College Language Recorder/DLWeb, LangLab, and Wimba.
•The third, and largest. group is that of the full-fledged language lab programs: LEM/Spe@ker, LogoLAB, CAN-8, SANAKO Forum 100, ReLANPro, SANAKO Lab 300, Genesis, and SANS Virtuoso/Soloist.
To facilitate product comparisons, all chapters follow the same format. Each is divided into two main parts: description and evaluation. The descriptive portion of each chapter begins with a “Product at a Glance” summary, followed by a detailed product description. The evaluative portion of each chapter focuses on the strengths and shortcomings of each product, followed by a summary scaled rating of essential features. The volume concludes with a glossary of technical terms.
Price: $65.00
© 2007. The great diversity of available digital language lab programs makes for a bewildering array of technical specifications, requirements, and product features. The purpose of this volume is to sort through these details as comprehensively as possible to allow informed decisions to be made about their acquisition. Packaged as a PDF file on a CD-ROM. An overview of the modules can be viewed online.
Jack Burston, Editor
Jack Burston, ed.
Digital Language Lab Solutions contains the following modules.
Thirteen digital lab products are evaluated in this volume. They are organized into three broad categories.
•The first consists of those whose major function is that of providing instructor control over, and communication with, student workstations: NetSupportSchool and SynchronEyes.
•The second group focuses primarily on providing various types of audio recording functionality: Dartmouth College Language Recorder/DLWeb, LangLab, and Wimba.
•The third, and largest. group is that of the full-fledged language lab programs: LEM/Spe@ker, LogoLAB, CAN-8, SANAKO Forum 100, ReLANPro, SANAKO Lab 300, Genesis, and SANS Virtuoso/Soloist.
To facilitate product comparisons, all chapters follow the same format. Each is divided into two main parts: description and evaluation. The descriptive portion of each chapter begins with a “Product at a Glance” summary, followed by a detailed product description. The evaluative portion of each chapter focuses on the strengths and shortcomings of each product, followed by a summary scaled rating of essential features. The volume concludes with a glossary of technical terms.
Price: $65.00
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)