Theories Of Second Language Acquisition

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.

Judie Haynes’ article, “Stages of Second Language Acquisition”, clearly states five stages that a new learner of English may go through. In Haynes’ theory, there are five stages in total, and they are pre-production, early production, speech emergence, intermediate fluency, and advanced fluency. According to Haynes, new learners of English acquire language by going through the same stages. However, how much time each student spends at a particular stage may be different. Despite the different time length, the stages of people acquiring new language are worth discussing.

To establish clarity, I am dividing my paper up to two parts. As stated before there are two basic theories on language acquisition that were developed by two different men. In the first half of my paper I will be discussing Noam Chomsky’s theory on language, I will then turn to Skinner’s theory on language acquisition, to examine its strengths as well as weaknesses.

The subtlety of language acquisition has been the most fundamental question in the study of linguistics and human development. From Bow-wow Theory to Yo-He-Ho Theory, major theories on the origins and learnability of language have emerged in mid-20th century and heavily debated ever since. Among them, the idea of universal grammar in which is usually credited to linguist Noam Chomsky, remains the most notable and controversial theory over time. He introduced and developed the theory from 1950s to 1970s, as he proposed and championed linguistic nativism in language acquisition. Chomsky supports that language mastery involves knowledge of linguistic rules and conventions, which he later named that as ‘cognizance’. He believes that cognizance

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

Chomsky (Steinberg 2011) views language as an innate ability children carry; this views centers the idea that the process of acquiring language is rooted in organized cognitive structures, and these traits are considered fundamentally biological. Chomsky (Steinberg 2011) states that each child has the potential to learn language with a lan-guage acquisition device (LAD). The LAD contains linguistic universals, one being the ability to speak a universal amount of utterances which Chomsky labels this knowledge as linguistic crea-tivity (Steinberg 2011). It also provides for the ability to learn the complexities of a language rapidly and uniformly. Chomsky, and other research has provided a wealth of knowledge to ex-plain language development, but it has its limitations. Whether language is hard wired or a learned experience, we know language has universal components that are shared among many languages and are a part of language development. This paper will try take a point of view that encompasses both of these perceptive. The model that best suits this idea is the interactionist

Numerous theories try to explain the process of language acquisition. These theories fall into one of two camps. The environmentalist (or connectionist) theory of language acquisition asserts that language is acquired through environmental factors (Halvaei et al. 811). Theorists in this camp believe that a child learns language by gaining information from the outside world and then forming associations between words and objects. The nativist (or rationalist) approach, on the other hand, asserts that it is innate factors that determine language acquisition. Noam Chomsky, often described as “the father of modern linguistics”, falls into this camp as he believes that speech is the result of hidden rules of language that are hidden somewhere in the brain (Rahmani and Abdolmanafi 2111). Steven Pinker, a colleague of Chomsky, is a renowned psychologist, cognitive scientist and linguist who discusses his own theories on language acquisition in his book Words and Rules.

Two theories of primary language acquisition emerged from 1950s psychological research: B.F. Skinner’s behaviorist theory and Noam Chomsky’s biological theory of language development. Primary language acquisition addresses specifically the way in which an infant’s native language is beginning to form, starting at birth. Primary language acquisition continues to develop throughout the rest of childhood within the critical period.

What is First Language Acquisition? First Language Acquisition studies how children acquire their native language. Up to this day, there are many theories that theorist came up with to explain how children acquire their language. The main theories that people believe for how children acquire language are Innateness Hypothesis, Imitation Theory, Reinforcement Theory, Active Construction of a Grammar Theory and last but not least, Social Interaction Theory. These theories have many similar characteristics as well as many differences.

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

Language carries the beauty and persona of our thought process and the study of Linguistics helps us develop insights, appreciate and analyze many aspects of this powerful medium of expression. My fascination with Second Language Acquisition (SLA) began with the course ‘Language Acquisition and Learning’ that I took while I was in the 4th year of my undergraduate program at the University of Dhaka. In that course, for the first time, I was introduced to various theories and hypotheses about how people acquire a second language, such as Stephen Krashen’s five main hypotheses on language acquisition (the acquisition-learning hypothesis, the monitor hypothesis, the natural order hypothesis, the input hypothesis, and the affective filter hypothesis), Larry Selinker’s Interlanguage theory, John Schumann’s Acculturation model, and Howard Giles’s Accommodation theory. These theories helped me realize the robustness and richness of SLA research and made a permanent impression on my mind about this field. Besides SLA, I was also acquainted with Psycholinguistics through this course. I have learned about several theories of first language acquisition, e.g. the Behaviorist theory, the Innatist theory, the Cognitive theory, and the Maturational theory. It is worth mentioning here that this course really helped me set my dream to become an academic as well as a researcher in the field of language acquisition and learning.

According to Houmanfar, Hayes, and Herbst (2005), the first and second languages are interrelated and the history of the first language is a participatory factor in the acquisition of the second language (L2) and its maintenance. The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis indicates that the structure and shape of the L1 of an individual are different from those the L2 that could create errors in speaking, reading and writing (Dulay et al., 1982). Similarities and differences between L1 and L2 acquisition will be outlined in terms of various theories.

Language acquisition is the way in which humans perceive and understand a certain language, as well as producing and using words and sentences in order to communicate with one another. The way in which people learn another language is known as Second Language Acquisition, this refers to someone learning a language other than their mother tongue. A very important aspect within this process is cross-linguistic influence. Cross-linguistic influence is a term used to describe the various ways that certain language systems in the brain interact with and influence one and other. It explains how they can affect either the linguistic performance or the linguistic development of the learner, if not both. This most commonly refers to two separate languages, for example the effect that French has on a native speaker trying to learn another language such as Italian.

The acquisition is an automatic process which is developed in the subconscious level, driven by the need of communication, very similar to the process of assimilation that happens with the acquisition of the first or mother language. Acquisition is basically the result of a natural communication where the learner is focused mainly on the meaning. It is also considered a implicit way of learning or ‘picking up’ language, where the formal teaching does not help, but it is more relevant and crucial in the development of second language execution.

Different factors can affect second language acquisition in ELLs. It is important to determine what may hinder an ELLs students success in a K-12 setting. One issue is negative transfer and the differences between the L1 and English may cause an interference. However, that is just one of the issues. This research addresses the impact school environment may have on SLA.