PREFACE

All praise be to Allah SWT and greetings to the Prophet Muhammad

SAW. Thanks to the abundance of His grace authors were able to complete
the task this paper.
Religion as a belief system in human life can be done through a variety
of viewpoints. Islam as a religion that has evolved over fourteen centuries
save a lot of issues that need to be investigated. Whether it concerns the
teachings and religious thought and social realities, politics, economics and
culture.
This paper hopefully useful to contribute to the students of the Faculty
Unsyiah as the provision of science and of course this paper is still very far
from perfect. For it to lecturers, we ask enter it for the improvement of our
paper manufacture where that will come.

INTRODUCTION
Before we start to discuss a topic that I was learned. I would like to
introduce a professor from California, his name is Stephen Krashen, he was

born in Chicago in 1941 he has published more than 350 papers and books
and one of them I would like to discuss the topic about Theories of Second
Language Acquisition.
I choose this topic because we need to know the difference between the
philosophy of language and philosophy of linguistic. That attempst to solve
philosophical problems with attation to the details of the usage habits
detailde word or other elements of language are detailed as
phonology,syntax and semantics.
In accordance with the conclusion that language acquisition is more
central than learning a second language. Intake enough acquisition language
is derived from the underlying linguistic input that helps language
acquisition. Thus, the provision of essential intake for acquisition in language
learning, making it challenging to provide material and context containing
the intake.

THEORIES OF SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

In another study (Krashen 1978) mentions the need for a caretake talks.
Lannguage aimed at children contain more intakes. Caretaker is actually not
meant to teach a language, they only focus on communication. Caretaker
have characteristics:

a. Noting principle here and today. That caretaker can provide the
environment for the child so that the child talks more understanding
on what was discussed.
b. Caretake job will bw easier as the development of childrens langauge
ability.
c. Caretake speech is communication.

Caretaker function is to convey the message that will encourage the

acquisition of language. In conclusion, the intake is a first input that can be
understood. Understanding is the essence of the process of language
acquisition, we may understand the language slightly exceed our ability to
use knowledge extra linguistic context or another.
For example, when a person reaches the level of mastery of syntax i then he
can continue communication at level i + 1 to understand the complexity of
the input. Furthermore, it also involves the patterns that go beyond a
person's ability to speak and tend to be more complex. This progress should
be adjusted to the development of language skills of a person. Intake also are
natural which means that this intake is the language used in the
communication.

We can also observe in the classroom to find the current input. Chat
freely without themes not suitable as input either because it does not
correspond to the subject matter, because learning is not only about things
that are of interest to students. There is a presumption of a native speaker
can be a language teacher. This is not entirely true because structured
grammar learning more is needed than just talk with using proper grammar.
Learning grammar is required and is not regarded as trivial. Although
sometimes it is not natural, so it is only appropriate at a given time but can
improve the quality of learning.
In the lecture, the teachers are trained to create a context for learning
grammar. And forget the drill technique. Language acquisition will be easier
if intake communicatived and comprehensible.
Designing learning to stimulate the mechanical training is not difficult.
Similarly to communicate in the classroom. Provide input through learning
activities that are meaningful and communicative is quite a challenging task.

But in order to meet the criteria as an intake. To realize this is not easy
especially adapted to the learning materials.
But exercise meaningful and communicative still has weaknesses. In
fact, if students master the language structure of higher (i + 1) they will not
manage to find enough natural input in language acquisition. In this case, if
drawn generalization, appropriate activities for learning is that it is natural,
attractive, and easy to understand. If these three things are met, plus natural
inputs, mastery (i + 1) will be naturally achieved and maintained, so that
language acquisition is achieved. If the intake, it is important in the design of
language learning in the classroom, meet the three criteria above, the class
will be the right place to obtain a minimal language to intermediate level. As
has been said by Wagner-Gough and Hatch (1975) that the "outside world" is
usually reluctant to provide intake for adults in learning the language. While
children who are acquiring a second language to benefit by gaining real
intake, but this does not apply to adults.

Listen this convertation talks 5-year olds who are learning English with
older adults:
Adult (A): "Is this your ball?"
Paul (P) : "Yeah."
A
: "What color is your ball?"
Q
: (no answer)
A
: "Is that your doggy?"
P
: "Yeah."
A
: "Is that your doggy or Jim's doggy?"
P
: "Jim's doggy."
In a speech Paul changes the intake requirements must be met. Answer
Paul indicates that he quite understood if it is not all the questions directed to
him (probably should thank the adults who apply the principles here and
now). This is a simple input fitting needed by Paul to learn English and it is
natural input. Compare with the required inputs older children (aged 13
years).
It can be concluded in the study of child language acquisition, namely
language comprehension precedes production. Production languages do not
even have happened. Lenneberg (1962) suggests congenital dysarthria cases
in children aged 8 years who never spoke but could understand English very

well. He recorded :
Similar phenomenon in a smaller form is very unusual. The process of
understanding usually precedes the process of speaking in a few weeks or
months. This difference increased regularly in all types of developmental
disorders of speech is simple and clearly delineated on students who have
developmental mastery of grammar is not perfect in the oral cavity or
pharynx and children who produce speech that can be understood for years
sometimes to rest life without a little scattering of understanding. Children
who are deaf from birth also learn to understand language without mastery
of vocal skills. However not found clear evidence that demonstrates the
ability to speak this could arise in the absence of understanding.

Linguist and educator Stephen Krashen proposed the Monitor Model, his
theory of second language acquisition, in Principles and practice in second
language acquisition published in 1982. Influenced by the theory of first
language acquisition proposed by Noam Chomsky, the Monitor Model posits
five hypotheses about second language acquisition and learning:
1. Acquisition-learning hypothesis
2. Natural order hypothesis
3. Monitor hypothesis
4. Input hypothesis
5. Affective filter hypothesis

1. Acquisition/learning hypothesis
Stephen Krashen's Acquisition-learning hypothesis is the most important
of aspect of his theory of second language acquisition. It states that there are
two independent ways in which we develop our linguistic skills: acquisition
and learning. According to Krashen acquisition is more important than
learning.

Acquisition
Acquisition of language is a subconscious process and the learner is unaware
of the process taking place. Once the new knowledge has been acquired, the
learner is actually unaware of possessing such knowledge.
Learning
Learning a language involves formal instruction and is therefore a conscious
process. New language forms are represented and possibly contrasted
consciously by the learner as "rules" and "grammar". These "rules" - while
known by the student - may well nave no actual impact on the language
produced by the student.
The first hypothesis of Krashens Monitor Model, the acquisition-learning
hypothesis, distinguishes between the processes of language acquisition and
language learning. Krashen contrasts acquisition and learning as two distinct
and separate language processes. Acquisition occurs passively and
unconsciously through implicit, informal, or natural learning, resulting in
implicit knowledge and acquired competence of a language; in other words,
to acquire a language is to pick up a language by relying on feelings of
correctness rather than conscious knowledge of language rules.
2. The Natural Order Hypothesis
The second of Krashen's (1983) hypothesis, as published in his book The
Natural Approach, is the Natural Order Hypothesis. This hypothesis states
that grammatical structures are learned in a predictable order. Krashen also
claims that this can only happen if the subject is given input they can
comprehend, and if anxiety levels are low.
The natural order hypothesis, argues that the acquisition of grammatical
structures occurs in a predictable sequence. The natural order hypothesis
applies to both first language acquisition and second language acquisition,
but, although similar, the order of acquisition often differs between first and
second languages. In other words, the order of acquisition of a first language
is different from the order of acquisition of that same language as a second
language.
the natural order hypothesis fails to account for the considerable influence of
the first language on the acquisition of a second language; in fact, the results
of other studies indicate that second language learners acquire a second
language in different orders depending on their native language. Therefore,
although posited by the natural order hypothesis, second language learners
do not necessarily acquire grammatical structures in a predictable sequence.
Although the Monitor Model has been influential in the field of second
language acquisition, the second hypothesis, the natural order hypothesis,

has not been without criticism as evidenced by the critiques offered by other
linguists and educators in the field.

3. Monitor Hypothesis
The third hypothesis is The monitor hypothesis asserts that a learner's
learned system acts as a monitor to what they are producing. In other words,
while only the acquired system is able to produce spontaneous speech, the
learned system is used to check what is being spoken.
The monitor hypothesis that the only function of learning within second
language acquisition is as an editor, or Monitor, for language use produced
by the acquired system as well as to produce grammatical forms not yet
acquired. The Monitor allows a language user to alter the form of an
utterance either prior to production by consciously applying learned rules or
after production via self-correction. In other words, the learned system
monitors the output of the acquired system.
The Monitor model then predicts faster initial progress by adults than
children, as adults use this monitor when producing L2 (target language)
utterances before having acquired the ability for natural performance, and
adult learners will input more into conversations earlier than children.
According to Krashen, for the Monitor to be successfully used, three
conditions must be met:
1. The acquirer/learner must know the rule
This is a very difficult condition to meet because it means that the speaker
must have had explicit instruction on the language form that he or she is
trying to produce.
2. The acquirer must be focused on correctness
He or she must be thinking about form, and it is difficult to focus on
meaning and form at the same time.

3.The acquirer/learner must have time to use the monitor

Using the monitor requires the speaker to slow down and focus on form.

4. The Input Hypothesis

The fourth hypothesis, the input hypothesis, which applies only to language
acquisition and not to language learning, posits the process that allows
second language learners to move through the predictable sequence of the
acquisition of grammatical structures predicted by the natural order
hypothesis. According to the input hypothesis, second language learners
require comprehensible input, represented by i+1, to move from the current
level of acquisition, represented by i, to the next level of acquisition.
Comprehensible input is input that contains a structure that is a little
beyond the current understandingwith understanding defined as
understanding of meaning rather than understanding of formof the
language learner.
More importantly, the input hypothesis focuses solely on comprehensible
input as necessary, although not sufficient, for second language acquisition
to the neglect of any possible importance of output. The output hypothesis
as proposed by Merrill Swain seeks to rectify the assumed inadequacies of
the input hypothesis by positing that language acquisition and learning may
also occur through the production of language.
According to Swain who attempts to hypothesize a loop between input and
output, output allows second language learners to identify gaps in their
linguistic knowledge and subsequently attend to relevant input. Therefore,
without minimizing the importance of input, the output hypothesis
complements and addresses the insufficiencies of the input hypothesis by
addressing the importance of the production of language for second
language acquisition.
Thus, despite the influence of the Monitor Model in the field of second
language learning and acquisition, the input hypothesis, the fourth
hypothesis of the theory, has not been without criticism as evidenced by the
critiques offered by other linguists and educators in the field.

5.The Affective Filter Hypothesis

The fifth hypothesis, the affective filter hypothesis, accounts for the influence
of affective factors on second language acquisition. Affect refers to nonlinguistic variables such as motivation, self-confidence, and anxiety.
According to the affective filter hypothesis, affect effects acquisition, but not
learning, by facilitating or preventing comprehensible input from reaching
the language acquisition device. In other words, affective variables such as
fear, nervousness, boredom, and resistance to change can effect the
acquisition of a second language by preventing information about the second
language from reaching the language areas of the mind.
Furthermore, when the affective filter blocks comprehensible input,
acquisition fails or occurs to a lesser extent then when the affective filter
supports the intake of comprehensible input. The affective filter, therefore,
accounts for individual variation in second language acquisition. Second
language instruction can and should work to minimize the effects of the
affective filter.
The affective filter is an impediment to learning or acquisition caused by
negative emotional ("affective") responses to one's environment. It is a
hypothesis of second-language acquisition theory, and a field of interest in
educational psychology.
According to the affective filter hypothesis, certain emotions, such as
anxiety, self-doubt, and mere boredom interfere with the process of acquiring
a second language. They function as a filter between the speaker and the
listener that reduces the amount of language input the listener is able to
understand. These negative emotions prevent efficient processing of the
language input. The hypothesis further states that the blockage can be
reduced by sparking interest, providing low-anxiety environments, and
bolstering the learner's self-esteem.

Explanation of Hypothesis :
The Acquisition-Learning hypothesis
According to Krashen, there are two ways of developing language ability.
Acquisition involves the subconscious acceptance of knowledge where

information is stored in the brain through the use of communication; this is

the process used for developing native languages. Learning, on the other
hand, is the conscious acceptance of knowledge about a language (i.e. the
grammar or form). Krashen states that this is often the product of formal
language instruction.
The Monitor hypothesis
This hypothesis further explains how acquisition and learning are used; the
acquisition system, initiates an utterance and the learning system monitors
the utterance to inspect and correct errors. Krashen states that monitoring
can make some contribution to the accuracy of an utterance but its use
should be limited. He suggests that the monitor can sometimes act as a
barrier as it forces the learner to slow down and focus more on accuracy as
opposed to fluency.
The Natural Order hypothesis
According to Krashen, learners acquire parts of language in a predictable
order. For any given language, certain grammatical structures are acquired
early while others are acquired later in the process. This hypothesis suggests
that this natural order of acquisition occurs independently of deliberate
teaching and therefore teachers cannot change the order of a grammatical
teaching sequence.
The Input hypothesis
This hypothesis suggests that language acquisition occurs when learners
receive messages that they can understand, a concept also known as
comprehensible input. However, Krashen also suggests that this
comprehensible input should be one step beyond the learners current
language ability, represented as i + 1, in order to allow learners to continue
to progress with their language development.
The Affective Filter hypothesis
According to Krashen one obstacle that manifests itself during language
acquisition is the affective filter; that is a 'screen' that is influenced by
emotional variables that can prevent learning. This hypothetical filter does
not impact acquisition directly but rather prevents input from reaching the
language acquisition part of the brain. According to Krashen the affective
filter can be prompted by many different variables including anxiety, selfconfidence, motivation and stress.

Application for Teaching :

The Acquisition-Learning hypothesis

According to this theory, the optimal way a language is learned is through
natural communication. As a second language teacher, the ideal is to create
a situation wherein language is used in order to fulfill authentic purposes.
This is turn, will help students to acquire the language instead of just
learning it.
The Monitor hypothesis
As an SL teacher it will always be a challenge to strike a balance between
encouraging accuracy and fluency in your students. This balance will depend
on numerous variables including the language level of the students, the
context of language use and the personal goals of each student. This
balance is also known as Communicative competency.
The Natural Order hypothesis
According to this hypothesis, teachers should be aware that certain
structures of a language are easier to acquire than others and therefore
language structures should be taught in an order that is conducive to
learning. Teachers should start by introducing language concepts that are
relatively easy for learners to acquire and then use scaffolding to introduce
more difficult concepts.

The Input hypothesis

This hypothesis highlights the importance of using the Target Language in
the classroom. The goal of any language program is for learners to be able
to communicate effectively. By providing as much comprehensible input as
possible, especially in situations when learners are not exposed to the TL
outside of the classroom, the teacher is able to create a more effective
opportunity for language acquisition.
The Affective Filter hypothesis
In any aspect of education it is always important to create a safe, welcoming
environment in which students can learn. In language education this may be
especially important since in order to take in and produce language, learners
need to feel that they are able to make mistakes and take risks. This relates
to directly to Krashens hypothesis of the affective filter. To learn more about
creating a positive classroom environment .

CONCLUSION

In this paper I suggest that the second language classroom may be a

good place for second language acquisition. Provide interesting evidence that
informal environment may be better than the classroom, but on my review
indicate that the what is becoming modern now this is the amount that can
be obtained intake. In an informal environment rich intake, acquisition can
occur in the classroom and minimal intake then there will be no language
acquisition that is not optimal.
Although I personally can learn the language itself, but I would choose
to study in a formal class if I was given the opportunity to learn a foreign
language. My goal is to obtain the intake of teachers, classroom training, and
from my classmates.

REFERENCE

Husnulhamidiyah88.blogspot.com/2011/11/questionabout-second-language.html
Semayan-i.blogspot.com/2013/10/teori-dan-praktispemerolehan-bahasa-8.html
www.linguisticgirl.com/the-acquisition-learninghypothesis-definition-and-criticism
Diaz-Rico, L.T. & Weed, K.Z. (2010). The
crosscultural,language,and academic development
handbook : A complete K-12
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Input_hypothesis
Grass, Susan M. & Larry Selinker.2008. Second
Language acquisition : An introductory course, 3rd edn.
New York : Routledge
www.educ.ualberta.ca/staff/olenka.Bilash/best of
bilash/krashen.hmtl