Differences Between L2 And L2 Development

Many popular theories of second language acquisition have been analyzed throughout history. The socialization of L2 learners, their present emotional state that is present at time of acquisition, as well as the comprehensible input and output with the use of scaffolding play a major role in second language acquisition. Let us also not forget the importance of written expression as well as reading comprehension with these L2 learners. Each play a role in language development. However, I believe that in acquiring a language, one must use a variety of techniques that work together to create a balance within the learning environment. Furthermore, all L2 learners learn differently and so a variety of resources will need to be used based on the ability of each student. There are many theories that have been developed by highly qualified experts in the field on linguistics. However, I will address those areas that I agree with as I present my personal theories on second language acquisition.

Learning a second language is something that numerous people have attempted to do throughout the years. The motivation for doing this, be it intrinsic or extrinsic, varies from student to student. Learning a second language becomes effective when teachers are able to identify students’ individual learning problems, apply diverse methods and approaches to solve them, and nourish students’ learning motivation.

In recent years, a discussion has been brought forward about whether the mother tongue (L1) should be implemented in foreign language classrooms or not. “The issue of whether language teachers should use the students’ first language in their second/ foreign language classroom has always been a controversial one” (Sharma, 2006:80). When looking at the historical process of teaching a foreign language, it is observed that teaching techniques should not be based on mother tongue. The target language (TL) is best taught in that language and by the native speakers. It is widely believed that the more exposure to the other languages, the less effective the target

As defined by Gass and Selinker, Second Language Acquisition “refers to the learning of nonnative language after learning of the native language” (2008: 7). Two main problems are often discussed when defining SLA: the distinction between second and third, fourth, etc. language acquisition, and second versus foreign language acquisition. According to Ellis, in many communities it is quite common to speak more than one language, therefore some learners acquire “more than one ‘second’ language” (Ellis 2015: 6). For this reason, the term Second Language Acquisition is used as an all-inclusive term “for learning any language after the first” (Ellis 2015: 6). Kees de Bot, Lowie and Verspoor note that in some definitions it is indicated that second language acquisition “typically takes place in a setting in which the language to be learned is the language spoken in the local community” and usually in a natural, non-instructed environment. As a contrast, foreign language acquisition occurs when the learner is not a part of the local community of the target language and the setting is controlled (de Bot et al. 2005: 7). However, in the paper I will not be making a distinction between second and foreign language acquisition as the difference has not been indicated in any of the theories chosen for

Cunningham (2003) remarks “While there may indeed be some negative effects from using translation,… there is a place in the learning environment for translation. With careful application aimed at specific goals and situations, translation can contribute to the students' acquisition of the target language, at all levels.” According to this, there are different situations in which students are more comfortable by using L1. While there are clear advantages on the communicative approach, not every student feels on a “safety” environment to apply their L2 knowledge, and by giving them the chance to have a transition from both languages, they feel that they have something to more familiar – native language – to rely

Acquisition of an L2 (second language), has always been an important issue in the field of linguistics, and its relationship with an L1 (First language) is what concerns Vivian Cook in the chapter called “The relationship between first and second language learning revisited”.

Since, the second language is an additional language after we acquire the first language, the L2 learning process can be influenced by the L1 learning process This essay will demonstrate the similarities and differences in L1 and L2 acquisition by discussing various theories. Then, draw a conclusion based on the evidence provided and my own experience.

Freeman and Freeman (2003) addressed the different types of ELLs and the differences in language experiences related to cultural background. The first two types of students have both recently arrived from another country; however, one has experienced adequate formal schooling in their native language, and one has experienced limited formal schooling. The ELL student with adequate formal schooling in the native language may find it easier to acquire the English language due to a strong foundation in their first language or native language, while the ELL student with inadequate schooling in their native language may struggle with acquiring the English language. A third type of ELL is one exposed to two languages, which may have caused a lack of academic literacy in either language (Freeman & Freeman, 2003). Finally, there is the long-term ELL, although exposed to English-speaking classes for more than five years, requires ongoing language support. The long-term ELL may have literacy skills that are below grade level using their first language as well. As indicated by the diverse groups, teachers should understand that the label of ELL does not indicate homogeneity within the group. “Teachers should never assume that students who share the same language will observe the same cultural practices or understand the same types of

Many second language acquisition theories have been developed over the years. These theories examine the avenues in which second language is acquired and the avenues in which they are

The first language helps in the initial stages of second language acquisition as it can serve as a referent and a tool to which students can turn when needed. It is useful, for example, to turn to the first language during the acquisition of new vocabulary or to compare the structures of both the first and the second language for understanding in a better way some concepts like verb tenses.

ELL students come from all over the world and experience different ways of life, so in order for a teacher to know about their students they must also know where they came from in order to better understand them and their different levels of language proficiency. One of the many struggles is that students come into the classroom with different levels of language proficiency. Some people believe that this makes it impossible for the students to perform well, but that is not the case. ELL learners learn the same way as English speaking students. There are many factors that contribute to how a native speaking student learns and there is no difference in how an ELL student learns. ELL students are affected by the climate of the classroom, translation resources, and support. The questions to consider when examining and ELL classroom for these things is how the students are treating each other, are there the proper resources for ELL students, and what techniques are used to help ELL's understand the information. A lot of people are advocates for English-only classrooms, but they are unaware of how this will affect the children and also how much the children need

To elaborate on this hypothesis, Brown (2000) argues that …the CAH claims that the principal barrier to second language acquisition is that the interference of the first language system with the second language system, and that a scientific, structural analysis of the two languages in question would yield a taxonomy of linguistic contrast between them which in turn would enable the linguist to predict the difficulties a learner

The first area of difference between first (L1) and second (L2) language learning is input – specifically the quality and quantity of input. It is the idea of the "connectionist model that implies... (that the) language learning process depends on the input frequency and regularity" (5).. It is here where one finds the greatest difference between L1 and L2 acquisition. The quantity of exposure to a target language a child gets is immense compared to the amount an adult receives. A child hears the language all day everyday, whereas an adult learner may only hear the target language in the classroom – which could be as little as three hours a week. Even if one looks at an adult in a total submersion situation the quantity is still less because the amount of one on one interaction that a child gets for example with a parent or other caregiver is still much greater then the adult is receiving.

There are a growing number of researchers that have begun to question the exclusion of the L1 from the L2 classroom (Turnbull, 2001; Macaro, 2001; Van Lier, 1995). However, many teachers are still resistant to use the L1 in foreign language learning. According to Cook (2001) & Van Lier (1995), one reason for this teacher

The latter coined the term “interlanguage” in Selinker (1972). The term is used fairly loosely among numerous scholars to mean, differently, what the learner is able to do at any point after embarking on learning L2. Ellis (1994:710) defines interlanguage as the total profile of all the learner’s performance stages from the initial stages of learning L2 until reaching a native like production. Interlanguage is an imperative system essentially the same in the case of all learners regardless of their mother tongue, displaying a number of rules and patterns consistently found at any given stage, heedless of the L1 and the methods followed in the learning the target