The Monitor Theory Of Second Language Acquisition

881 Words4 Pages
Stephen Krashen is an expert in the field of linguistics, specializing in the theories of language acquisition and its development. His ideas have been for a long time “a source of ideas for research in second language acquisition” (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p.38). In the early 1970s, he proposed the Monitor Model theory of second language acquisition, which is consists of five main hypotheses: the acquisition-learning hypotheses, the monitor hypotheses, the input hypotheses, the natural order hypotheses and the affective filter hypotheses. Krashen’s theory is considered to be “One of the most controversial theoretical perspectives in SLA in the last quarter of the twentieth century” (Brown, 2000, p.277). Despite Krashen’s success to make acquiring…show more content…
The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis says that “adults have two distinct and independent ways of developing competence in a second language acquisition, which is subconscious, and learning, which is conscious” (Gregg, 1984, p.79). So according to Gregg, language acquisition is a subconscious process like the way that children acquire their first language. Where they won’t be aware of the grammatical rules of the language. For instance, they cannot tell why they put a subject then a verb in this order or why they add ‘ed’ to the verbs that are in the past tense at their ends. While learning is conscious knowledge of a second language, knowing the rules, being aware of them and being able to talk about them (a critical analysis by Enas Al.musallam). On the other hand, Krashen explains these two terms in a different way “we ‘acquire’ as we are exposed to samples of the second Language we understand in much the same way that children pick up their language—with no conscious attention to language form. We ‘learn’ on the other hand through conscious attention to form and rule learning” (lightbown & spade, 2006, p.36). “The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis indicates that adults do not lose the ability to acquire languages the way that children do, since Krashen claims that adults can access the same natural…show more content…
So because of the previous quotation, The Input Hypotheses has been for a long time an argument point between most of the critics. One of them is McLaughlin (1987) comment that Krashen has never defined what does he meant by “comprehensible input” term. Also according to “The input hypotheses is that acquisition occurs when one is exposed to language that is comprehensible and that contains i + 1” (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p.37). Here at this point, he has not given an exact definition for i +1, which is ambiguity and unclear, furthermore, McLaughlin (1987, p.37) said that “i +1 structures” as “unknown structures”. Therefore, Krashen for the first time states that i is referred to “our current level of competence” and then i +1 means “the next level along the nature order” (Krashen, 1985, p.2). ”Long (1983) agreed with Krashen that comprehensible input is necessary for language acquisition. However, he focused more on the question of how input could be made comprehensible” (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 42). “He seems to be talking about only one’s “level of competence”. “He then limits this type of competence to grammar alone and interprets i +1 as “structures at our next ‘stage’” (ibid). Despite this inconsistency, Krashen is more inclined to a general level of competence in grammar
Get Access