Power Renee Eslm 578 : Theory And Practice

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.

Interpersonal interaction is how people relate towards each other in a verbal interaction or non-verbal interaction. Verbal interactions include speech, tone of somebody’s voice, listening and language. Non-verbal interactions include a person’s body language and the way they express it for example their posture, facial expression and their proximity. Interpersonal communication can take place in a health and social care setting, for example: at a care home, there is a new career and she does not speak English properly, so therefore it is hard for her to interact with the residents, which makes this is a language barrier.

First, children¡¯s acquisition of language is an innate mechanism that enables a child to analyze language and extract the basic rules of grammar, granted by Chomsky. It basically states that humans are born with a language acquisition device that, the ability to learn a language rapidly as children. However, there is one important controversy in language acquisition concerns how we acquire language; since Chomsky fails to adequately explain individual differences. From the behaviorists¡¯ perspectives, the language is learned like other learned behaviors. It is learned through operant

Principle four,” Instruction needs to focus on developing implicit knowledge of the second language while not neglecting explicit knowledge.” Professor Ellis says, “Implicit

Therefore, from the behaviourist approach, language acquisition can be seen as a stimulus-response process. Children learn language by immitation and analogy. The roles of imitation, repetition, reinforcement, and motivation are essential in learning the language. The First Language Acquisition is thus the result of nature which based on practicing.

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 the time of acquisition, as well as the comprehensible input and output with the use of scaffolding play a major role in second language acquisition. Kirsten Hummel states, “The one most effective way to increase L2 competence was by exposure to ‘comprehensible input’.” (Hummel, 2014, p. 73) Let us also not forget the importance of written expression as well as reading comprehension with these L2 learners. Each plays a role in language development. However, I believe that to acquire language one must use a variety of techniques that work together to create a balance within the learning environment. Furthermore, all L2 learners acquire language differently and so using a variety of resources that are based on the ability of each student is neccesary. There are many theories that have been developed by highly qualified experts in the field of linguistics. However, I will address those areas that I agree with as I present my personal theories on second language acquisition.

There are several theories regarding language development. Work by Chomsky, Piaget and Kuhl are critical. Studies by Chomsky, as examined by Albery, Chandler, Field, Jones, Messer, Moore and Sterling (2009); Deloache, Eisenberg & Siegler (2003) argued for the innateness of language acquisition due to its complexity. Development is assisted by a language acquisition device (LAD) and universal grammar both of which holding the propensity for commonalities throughout all languages. LAD is the key to the Syntax rule. The knowledge to master the rules is held unconsciously. Chomsky concludes exposure through auditory channels as being the only requirement for learning. Arguably Kuhl (2010) writes infantile exposure to language through auditory channels only, does not contribute effectively to learning indicating the importance of human interaction. Piaget, as discussed by Ault (1977) postulated language as not being part of the earliest stages of development. Signifying within sensorimotor stage, between birth and two years, the child’s development is too reflexive. Gleitman, Fridlund and Reisberg (2004) discuss the critical period hypothesis and suggest the young brain being more suited to acquisition than the adult brain. Lenneberg (1967) (as cited in Gleitman et al 2004) advocates, brain maturation closes language acquisition capacity window. Kuhl (2010) identified, within the critical period babies develop

In the other hand, behaviorists view language as complex and leaned skill, much like playing piano and dancing. B.F. Skinner argued that language represents nothing more than chains of responses acquired through reinforcement. Putting differently, children learn though process of reinforcement. For example, baby babbles “mama” the mother happily reward the baby with a hug and kisses and eventually will push the baby to say “mama” more and more; due to these reward children are motivated to repeat the behavior, thereby shaping their language and ensuring their development. Children’s language is being built up, this describe a way in which children environmental experiences influence and improve their language skills. Also that’s why parents

Scholars attribute that communication phenomenon involves the exchange of information from a communicator to the recipient. The exchange requires a contextual understanding of the message between the recipient and communicator. The message is usually encoded in the means of communication and has to be decoded by the recipient to understand. Subsequently, a phenomenon that is located in an interaction-oriented by a speaker to a recipient can be deemed as a communication phenomenon (Goldhaber,20). A common question that communication phenomenon scholars ask is that, how do people communicate? People communicate through talking and behavioral bodily gestures accompanying that talk. Talking is thus regarded as the primary

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.

Acquiring and learning a second language do not refer only to handling oral communication skills. It is more than that; it takes the students´ abilities in enhancing their lexicon, their management in syntax, and their perspective about words´ influences in people. Thus, summing this up, it is indispensable that ESL students have a grand deal about linguistic knowledge. In other words, ESL learners not only require speaking, but also reading, writing and thinking in English when they complete whatever English career.

When learning a L2, the learner is engaged in the acquisition of sounds, words, structures, and discourse through conscious attention to these units, but s/he may also acquire them subconsciously (Van Polen, 2013a). Alternatively, and especially in the classroom setting, the conscious, deliberate type of learning usually prevails. Drawing upon this distinction in L2 acquisition, two views have been formed. First, incidental learning that is most often defined as “picking up” words and structures when a L2 learner engages in a communication task such as listening or reading, and when s/he focuses on the meaning of the language. Secondly, intentional learning, referred to as “the deliberate committing to memory of thousands of words (their meaning, sound, and spelling) and dozens of grammar rules” (Hulstijn, 2003, p.349). The terms have received various interpretations from researchers (Ellis, 1994b; Huckin & Coady, 1999; Gass, 1999), which are also sometimes identical with the two more general terms of implicit and explicit learning indicating the degree of involvement of consciousness (or awareness) in the act of learning. Although all

In order to describe the interactional architecture, the institutional core goal needs to be identified at first, which is what the teacher aims to teach to the learners in the second language classroom. This core goal remains the same no matter who will teach it and where it will be taught. There are three properties deriving from the core goal according to Seedhouse (2004), which shapes the interaction in the second language classroom. Property one is that language is both the medium and goal of instruction. That is to say, language is not only used by both teachers and learners in the second language classroom as a medium but also it is the goal of their learning by using this language. Property two is that pedagogy and interaction have an influence on each other, which means that if the pedagogical focus changes, the interaction changes as well and vice versa. Whatever one says in the second language classroom usually reflects that he is displaying his analysis of the relationship between pedagogy and interaction. Property three is that the interaction which the learners produce will be evaluated

The effects of classroom interaction on language learning have long been a focus of research for second and foreign language teachers and researchers (Allwright, 1984; Chaudron, 1988; Ellis, 1984; 1994; van Lier, 1988). They argue that language learning comes about as a consequence of the interplay of the factors created by the learners, the teacher, and the interaction among them (teacher-student, student-student). Allwright (1984) sees classroom interaction as "the fundamental fact of classroom pedagogy because everything that happens in the classroom happens through a process of live person-to-person interaction"(p. 156).

Interaction is a two-way communication under the sociocultural theory promoting consciousness. From Swain and Lapkin’s (1998) study of two grade 8 French immersion students performing a jigsaw task, when students work out the story line and face linguistic problems, they use L1 and L2 to