INTRODUCTION

Every aspect of language is enormously complex. Yet, children learn most of the
intricate system of their mother tongue before the age of six. Before they can add 2+2,
children are putting sentences together, asking questions, negating sentences, using the
syntactic, phonological, morphological, and semantic rules of the language. Children are
not taught language as they are taught arithmetic. They learn language in a different
way.

LINGUIST COMPETENCE AND COMMUNICATIVE

COMPETENCE
We are far from completely understanding the language acquisition process. We
are just beginning to grapple with those aspects of the human neurological and
biological make up which explain the childs ability to acquire language. Certainly it is
clear that the child is equipped from birth with the necessary neural prerequisites for
language and language use.
Our knowledge of the nature of human language tell us something about what
the child does and does when acquiring a language:
1) Children do not learn a language by storing all the words ant all the
sentences in some giant mental dictionary. The list of words is finite,
but no dictionary can hold all the sentences, which are infinite in
number.
2) Children learn to understand sentences they have never heard before,
and to construct sentences, most of which they have never produced
before.

3) Children must therefore learn rules which permit them to use

language creatively.
4) No one teaches them these rules. Their parents are no more aware of
phonological, syntactic, morphological, and semantic rules than the
children are. Children, then, seem to act like very efficient linguists
equipped with a perfect theory of language, who use this theory to
build up the grammar of the language they hear.
In addition to acquiring the complex rules of the grammar (that is,
linguistic competence), children must also learn the complex rules of the
appropriate social use for language, what certain scholars have called
communicative competence. These include, for example, the greetings
which are to be used, the taboo words, the polite forms of address the
various styles which are appropriate to different situations, and so forth.

STAGES OF LANGUAGE ACQUISITION IN CHILDREN

Linguists divide the childs acquisition of a language into prelinguistic and
linguistic stages. There continues to be disagreement as to what should be included in
these periods. But most scholars agree that the earliest cries and whimpers of the
newborn cannot be considered early language. Such noises are completely stimuluscontrolled; they are the childs involuntary responses to hunger, discomfort, the feeling
of well-being, etc.
THE BABBLING STAGE
Usually around the sixth month period, the infant begins to babble. The sounds
produced in this period seem to include the sounds of human languages. The role of
babbling is not clearly understood, but it is absolutely clear that in order that the
language develop finally, the child must receive some auditory input.

THE HOLOPHRASTIC STAGE

Sometime after children are one year old, they begin to use same string of
sounds repeatedly to mean the same thing. Most children seem to go through the one
word=one sentence stage. The child uses just one word to express concepts or
predications which will later be expressed by complex phrases and sentences.
THE TWO-WORD STAGE
Around the time of their second birthday children begin to produce two-word
utterances like: allgone sock; bye-bye boat; it ball; hi mommy; dirty sock;
mummy sock.
During this stage there are no syntactic or morphological markers; that is, no
inflections for number, tense, or person. The two words a child utters can express a
number of different grammatical relations which will later be expressed by other
syntactic devices.
TELEGRAPH TO INFINITY
There does not seem to be any three-word sentence stage. When a child starts
stringing more than two words together, the utterances may be two, three, four, or five
words or longer. The words in a sentence are not strung together randomly; from a
very early stage, childrens utterances reveal their grasp of the principles of sentence
formation.
These first utterances of children which are longer than two words have a special
characteristic. Usually, the small function words such as to, the, can, is, etc, are
missing ; only the words which carry the main message the content words occur.
Children often sound as if they were reading telegrams, which is why such utterances
are called telegraphic speech. For example: Cathy build house; No sit here; Car
stand up table.

As children acquire more and more language, or more closely approximate the
adult grammar, they not only begin to use function words but also acquire the
inflectional and derivational morphemes of the language. There seems to be a natural
order of acquisition of morphemes. It seems that the suffix ing is the earliest
inflectional morpheme acquired. Eventually all the other inflections are added, along
with the syntactic rules, and finally the childs utterances sound like those spoken by
adults.

THEORIES OF CHILD LANGUAGE ACQUISISTION

IMITATION
There are those who think that children merely imitate what they hear. Imitation
is involved, of course, but the sentences produced by children show that they are not
imitating adult speech. Even when children are deliberately trying to imitate what they
hear, there are unable to produce sentences which cannot be generated by their
grammar.
POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT
Another theory suggest that children learn to produce correct sentences
because they are positively reinforced when they say something right and negatively
reinforced when they say something wrong. This view does not tell us how children
construct the correct rules.
Whatever correction takes place is based more on the content of the message
than on its form. That is, if a child says Nobody dont like me, the mother may say
Everybody likes you2. Besides, all attempts to correct a childs language are doomed
to failure. Children dont know what they are doing wrong and are even unable to make
the corrections when they are pointed to them.

CREATIVE CONSTRUCTION
The reinforcement theory fails along with the imitation theory. Neither of these
views accounts for the fact that children are constructing their own rules. Different rules
govern the construction of sentences as the grammar is learned.
The imperfect sentences children use are perfectly regular. They are not
mistakes in the childs language; they reflect his or her grammar at a certain stage of
development. The child seems to form the simplest and most general rule he can from
the language input he receives, and is so pleased with his theory that he uses the
rule whenever he can.
The most obvious example of this overgeneralization is shown when children
treat irregular verbs and nouns as if they were regular. We have probably all heard
children say goed, singed, or foots, childs. These mistakes tell us more about
how children learn language than the correct forms they use. The child couldnt be
imitating; children use such forms in families where parents would never utter such
bad English.
The childs ability to generalize patterns and construct rules is also shown in the
development of the semantic system. For example, the child learns the word daddy
and later applies it to other men.
Thus, a third theory suggests that language acquisition is a creative construction
process, and that children have to construct all the rules of the grammar. According to
the famous linguist Noam Chomsky., it seems plain that language acquisition is based
on the childs discovery of what from a formal point of view is a deep and abstract
theory a generative grammar of his language.

Children seem to be equipped with special abilities or with a language

acquisition device, residing principally in the left side of the brain, to know just what
they can ignore, to find all the regularities in the language.
The details of this innate device are far from understood. As we gain more
information about brain functions and the preconditions for language acquisition, we
will learn more about the nature of human language.

LEARNING AND ACQUISITION OF A SECOND LANGUAGE

As we compare a childs acquisition of his mother tongue with the learning and
acquisition of a second or foreign language, it becomes evident that the processes and
theories involved seem to be, at least to a certain extent, parallel. Other aspects, on the
other hand, keep less similarity , as it the case with the stages that children go through.
The learning progression does not take place in a linear way, by successive
appropriation of the different subsystems implied, but rather by a global approximation
which in the initial stages implies a considerable simplification and an exclusion of
peculiarities that are not perceived as essential. Progress consists then in a continuous
process of completing, polishing and enriching this global apprehension of the new
communication system. Thus, the teaching and learning of a foreign language should
not be viewed so much in terms of a series of elemental units of content which are
perfectly apprehended before proceeding to the next, but in terms of a communication
system which is globally elaborated and whose complexity and communicative potential
increases in a progressive form.
It should be pointed out that the information processing mechanisms often work
efficiently even when the student is not producing utterances. During the first moments
in the learning of a foreign language, there are often silent periods during which the
student does not produce at all. This silence, however, cannot unmistakably be

interpreted as a lack of learning; it often covers an intense activity that cannot be

directly observed and which sometime in the future, will let him produce utterances
which reflect the internal representation that he has built during those silent periods. If
we accept that creative construction can take place without generating an immediate
production, we will have to admit that receptive activities specific comprehension
competencies can be developed, but also, what is not so evident, the general
communicative competence that is behind every linguistic system.
The above explained makes clear that the process of language learning is
complex and that this process takes place in a personal and distinct way for each
individual since the strategies which let the subject receive and transform the input he
receives are always used in a particular way.

SECOND LANGUAJE ACQUISTION THEORY

According to Krashen there are five hypotheses, which try to explain the process
of acquisition of a second language:
THE ACQUISTION-LEARNING HYPOTHESIS
Acquisition in a not conscious process in which the person is not aware of the
grammar or the rules he uses. In many ways acquisition can be compared to the process
by which a child becomes proficient in his mother tongue. In this way, fluency is
progressively gained as the proficiency in consolidated. Errors are accepted as a normal
part of the process.
Learning occurs consciously, we have to study the rules which govern a given
language. We are not responsible for our fluency since we depend on the activities
suggested by the teacher. Learning has only one function: as editor or as monitor, that is,
to make corrections and change our output.

THE NATURAL ORDER HYPOTHESIS

This Hypothesis states the grammatical structures are acquired in a fairly
predictable order in L1 native language and L2 (second language). In other words, just
as children learn their native language in a natural order, so students of a foreign
language learn structures in a predictable way.
Nevertheless two points can be made against this hypothesis:
a) We do not have information about the order of acquisition of every structure
in every language. Besides, there are individual variations.
b) The existence of a natural order of acquisition does not imply that we should
teach second languages following this order.

THE MONITOR HYPOTHESIS

The monitor hypothesis states the relationship between acquisition and learning.
Acquisition plays a far more important role than learning because learning is used as
editor or monitor only. The function of monitor is to make self corrections and change
the output before of after speaking or writing.
But in order to use the monitor, three conditions need be fulfilled:
a) Time: in order to make a self-correction we need time. Self correction can
hardly be used without altering fluency.
b) Focus on form: we have to be aware of the grammar forms we are using and
know that there is a choice of forms.
c) Finally, once we have stopped and concentrated on the form, it is necessary
to have a correct knowledge of the rules so that the proper correction can be
made.

Thus, it can be easily deducted that monitor overusers may have difficulty in
acquiring fluency. Monitor, however, can be a great help if used for grammar
tests and writing.
THE INPUT HYPOTHESIS
We acquire language by understanding input that contains i + 1
i + 1 means a step by step progression. In order to progress the input (i)
should be only a bit beyond (1) the acquirers current level of competence.
We understand language that we do not know by using context, extralinguistic information, and our knowledge of the world. In the same fashion,
language is made understandable to us through the use of devices such as
simplified, visual clues, key words and phrases, gestures or familiar topics.
We do not teach speaking directly
Speaking fluency emerges on its own over time, thus, the best way to
teach speaking is to provide comprehensible input. For the same reason, early
speech is typically not accurate. Direct error correction should be avoided.
The best input should not be grammatically sequenced
It is enough by providing genuinely interesting and comprehensible
input. Teachers should organize content on the basis of themes or topics which
are relevant to the students needs and interests (communication-based syllabus
or curriculum).
THE AFFECTIVE FILTER HYPOTHESIS
It deals with the effect of affective variables on L2 acquisition. They are
variables like anxiety, motivation or self-confidence.
The affective filter produces a mental block which prevents inputs to enter the
language acquisition device.

Krashen summarizes his five hypothesis with a single claim:

Comprehensible input is the only causative variable in second language
acquisition. People acquire second languages when they obtain comprehensible input
and when their affective filters are low enough to allow the input in.

AGE DIFFERENCES IN SECOND LANGUAGE

ACQUISITION
Older acquirers are faster in the early stages of second language acquisition
because:
a) they are better at obtaining comprehensible input as they have good
conversational management;
b) they have superior knowledge of the world, which helps to make input
comprehensible;
c) they can participate in conversation earlier, via use of first language syntax.

Younger acquirers tend to attain higher levels of proficiency in second languages

than adults in the long run due to a lower affective filter.

IMPLICATIONS FOR SECOND LANGUAGE TEACHING

The five hypothesis about L2 acquisition predict that any successful L2 teaching
program must have the following characteristics;
a) It must supply input in the L2 that is:
-

Comprehensible.

Interesting and relevant to students.

The goal is, thus, to transmit messages, not to practice grammar.

b) It must not force students to speak before they are ready and must be
tolerant of errors in early speech. We improve in grammatical
accuracy by obtaining more input, not by error correction.
c) It must put grammar in its proper place. Some adults, and very few
children, are able to use conscious grammar rules to increase the
grammatical accuracy of their output; and even for these people, very
strict conditions (time, focus on form, and knowledge of the rule)
need to be fulfilled before the conscious knowledge of grammar can
be applied, given the monitor hypothesis presented above.

ROLE OF THE FIRST LANGUAGE IN SECOND

LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS HYPOTHESIS
The first language has long been considered the major cause of a learners
problems with the new language. It interferes with the learners acquisition of his of
her L2.
If a structure in L1 differs from that of L2, errors that reflect the structure on the
L1 will be produced. This process has been labelled interference or negative transfer.
Spanish structure: adj + noun:

La casa grande

Interference with English:

*The house big

If a structure in both languages is the same, there will be positive transfer or zero
interference, and there will be no errors in L2 performance.
Spanish plural marker -s:

libros

English plural marker -s:

books

The contrastive Analysis treatment of errors was popular up through the 1960s.
A large part of the rationale for the Contrastive Analysis hypothesis was drawn from
principles of behaviourist psychology.
There are two central concepts in transfer:
a) the automatic and not conscious use of the old behaviour (habits) in new
learning situations (behaviourist view);
b) the use of past knowledge and experience in new situations (other
educational and psychological views).
In recent years there have been enough data accumulated to place the L2
learners first language in a respectable role. Present research results suggest that the
major impact the L1 has on L2 acquisition may have to do with accent, not with
grammar.
ERROR ANALYSIS MOVEMENT
Many teachers and researchers noticed that a great number of the errors that
students make could not possibly be traced to their native languages. The theoretical
climate of the late fifties and early sixties provided the ultimate rationale for the error
analysis approach:
Noam Chomskys, Review of B.F. Skinners Verbal Behaviour (1959)
questioned the very core of the behaviourist habit theory which accounts for language
learning. Chomskys views, along with Piagetian psychology, succeeded in highlighting
the previously neglected mental make-up of learners as a central force in the learning
process, not a habit formation.
Interlingual and developmental errors
The term error is used to refer to any deviation from a selected norm of language
performance, no mater what the characteristics or causes of the deviation might be.

In the Error Analysis view, errors that reflect the learners L1 structures are not
called interference but interlingual errors.
Development errors are errors similar to those made by children acquiring their
native tongue. For example, students of English as a foreign often say things such as:
He cans play football very well.
This error is also found in the speech of children acquiring English as their first
language.
Researchers have consistently found that, contrary to widespread opinion, the
great majority of errors made by second language learners are not interlingual, but
developmental. Although adults tend to exhibit more L1 influence in their errors then
children do, adult interlingual errors also occur in small proportions.
Implications of error analysis for L2 learning
Error Analysis has yielded insights into the L2 acquisition process that have
stimulated major changes in teaching practices. Studying learners errors serves two
major purposes:
a) it provides data from which interferences about the nature of the language
acquisition process can be made; and
b) it indicates to teachers and curriculum developers, which part of the target
language students have most difficulty to produce correctly and which error
types detract most from a learners ability to communicate effectively.
INTERLANGUAGE
Interlanguage is the linguistic system that a learner constructs on his way to the
mastery of a target language.
Methodologically, interlanguage may be said to incorporate the assumption of
both Contrastive Analysis and Error Analysis. While Contrastive Analysis contrasts the

learners native language and the target language, and conventional Error Analysis
involves contrast between the learners performance and the target language,
interlanguage take all three elements into account, explicitly incorporating the
contrastive analysis of the learners interlanguage with both his native and the target
language.