I Key issues in

Second Language
Acquisition
Second Language Acquisition
Introduction
• SLA – a complex process, involving many interrelated factors.
• What is SLA?
• It is not a uniform and predictable phenomenon – there is no
single way in which learners acquire knowledge of a second
language (L2).
• It is a product of many factors pertaining to the learner and
the learning situation.
• Still, some generalizations can be made – the term SLA refers
to these general aspects.
L2 acquisition vs. L1 acquisition
• L2 acquisition stands in contrast to L1 acquisition. It studies
how the learner learn an additional lg. after they have
acquired their mother tongue.
• Second language and foreign language
• L2 acquisition does not contrast with foreign language
acquisition. SLA is used as a general term that embraces both
untutored (or ‘naturalistic’) and tutored (or ‘classroom’)
acquisition. It remains an open question whether the way in
which acquisition proceeds in these different situations is the
same or different.
• Centrality of syntax and morphology
• SLA refers to all aspects of language that the learner needs to
master. Those are – phonology, morphology, syntax, lexis and
pragmatic knowledge (how learners learn to communicate
their ideas).
• Competence vs. performance
• Chomsky (1965):
• - Competence – mental representation of linguistic rules
which constitute the speaker-hearer’s internalized grammar.
• - Performance – comprehension and production of language
• SLA – mainly interested in COMPETENCE – but since it can
only be seen from performance, SLA studies performance in
order to access competence.
Acquisition vs. learning
• Assumption that SL acquisition and learning are two different
processes.
• - Acquisition – refers to ‘picking up’ a second language through
exposure
• - Learning – conscious study of a second language
• However, most authors use them interchangeably.
• Krashen:
• “Language acquisition is very similar to the process children use in
acquiring first and second languages. It requires meaningful
interaction in the target language – natural communication – in
which speakers are concerned not with the form of their utterances
but with the messages they are conveying and understanding. Error
corrections and explicit teaching of rules are not relevant to language
acquisition [...] Acquirers need not have a conscious awareness of the
‘rules’ they possess, and may selfcorrect on the basis of a ‘feel’ for
gramaticality.
• Conscious language learning, on the other hand, is thought to
be helped a great deal by error correction and the
presentation of explicit rules.”
• According to Krashen, we use the explicit knowledge of the
‘rules’ to internalize the rules. In that sense – learning serves
acquisition – they are interrelated.
The role of L1
• Until the 1960s, there was a strong assumption that most of
the difficulties facing the L2 learner were imposed by L1.
• It was assumed that where there were differences between
the L1 and L2, the learner’s L1 knowledge would interfere with
the L2, and where L1 and L2 were similar, the L1 would
actively aid the L2 learning.
• The process responsible for this was called language transfer.
• Curricula were designed so as to overcome the areas of
difficulty created by negative transfer.
• In order to identify the areas of difficulty, a procedure called
Contrastive Analysis was developed. It was based on the
belief that it was possible, by establishing the linguistic
differences between the L1 and L2, to predict what problems
the learner of a particular L2 would face.
• However, empirical research from the 70s showed that
negative transfer was a major factor in the process of SLA. A
large proportion of grammatical errors could not be explained
by L1 interference.
• One of the assumptions of CAH was that learners with
different L1 would learn a L2 in different ways. This was
investigated by studying the types of errors and classify them
according to the origin into interlanguage, intralanguage and
developmental errors.
• It was assumed, that there was a ‘natural’ route of
development in L2, just as there is one in L1.
• This issue became known as L2 = L1 hypothesis. It states that
the processes of SLA and L1 acquisition are very similar as a
result of the strategies learners employ.
• The task of ‘cracking the code’, faced by every learner, is met
through the application of a common set of mechanisms
which have their origin in the special characteristics of the
human language faculty.
• 1. learner errors analysis (errors collected, classified by their
predictiveness based on CAH, or resemblance with
divelopmental errors that occurred in L1). The frequency of
errors shows the pace at which a feature is acquired – the
fewer the errors, the earlier the feature gets acquired and vice
versa.
• 2. Longitudinal studies of L2 learners.
• There is contextual variation in errors – one learner may make
an error in one (situational or linguistic) context, but not in
another. E.g. He buys her a bunch of flowers, but in complex
sentence: He visits her every day and buy her a bunch of
flowers.
Individual learner differences
• Individual differences are potentially infinite and difficult to
classify. There are five general factors that SLA has been
involved with:
• age
• aptitude
• cognitive style
• motivation
• personality
• 1. A question commonly asked is whether adults learn L2 in
the same way as children. There is no conclusive evidence that
children are ‘better’ language learners than adults. Adults
have a greater memory capacity and are able to focus more
easily on the purely formal features of a language.
• 2. Aptitude is not to be identified with intelligence. The latter
refers to the ability to master a range of skills, both linguistic
and non-linguistic. Aptitude refers to the special ability
involved in language learning. Various studies show that
learners with higher aptitude tended to score better in
proficiency tests, but it remains unclear what is aptitude –
what cognitive abilities constitute aptitude.
• 3. Motivation – always proved to be one of the most powerful
factors. Only those learners interested in the social and
cultural customs of native speakers of the language they are
learning are likely to be successful. Also, learners with strong
instrumental motivation (e.g. in order to study, work or live in
a country of L2) are more successful. In contrast, unmotivated
learners may fail to learn the language.
• Dulay and Burt (1977) propose that the learner has a
‘socioaffective filter’, which governs how much of the input
gets through to the language processing mechanisms. As a
result of conscious or unconscious motives or needs, attitudes
or emotional states, the learner is ‘open’ or ‘closed’ to the L2.
Once the learner has obtained sufficient knowledge of L2,
he/she may stop learning. This result in what Selinker (1972)
termed ‘fossilization’.
• 4 & 5. Little is known about how personality and cognitive
style influence SLA, although there is a general conviction that
both are potentially extremely important. Research results are
generally inconclusive, most probably due to unclear research
methodology.
The role of the input
• Natural setting vs. formal instruction
• Spoken vs. written
• Early theories of SLA insisted on the notions of habit
formation through practice and reinforcement.
• It was believed that presenting the L2 in the right-sized doses
and ensuring that the learner continued to practice until each
feature was ‘overlearned’ (i.e. became automatic).
• Learning an L2 was like any other kind of learning. It consisted
of building up chains of stimulus-response links which could
be controlled and shaped by reinforcement.
• In this approach – language learning is viewed as a passive
process – an external, and not internal phenomenon.
• In the 1960s this view was challenged, especially by Chomsky,
who pointed out that in many instances there was no match
between the kind of language to be observed in the input and
the language that learners produced.
• This could best be explained by hypothesizing a set of mental
processes inside learner’s mind which were responsible for
working on the input and converting it into a form(ula) that
the learner could store and handle in production – Chomsky’s
‘mentalist view’.
• Chomsky postulated the existence of the learner’s ‘language
acquisition device’ which was the main factor of language
learning. Chomsky thus played down the role of the linguistic
environment – input only served as a trigger to activate the
device.
• A major issue in SLA is whether the input shapes and controls
learning or is just a trigger.
• Currently, there is considerable interest in the input. The
research is beginning to show that mere exposure to the L2 is
not enough.
• Learners need L2 data that are specially suited to whatever
stage of development they are at.
• There is somewhat less agreement about precisely what
constitutes an optimal input.
• Is it, as teachers assume, an input selected and graded
according to formal and logical criteria, or is it, as Krashen
(1981) argues, simply a matter of ‘comprehensible input’,
providing learners with language that they can understand?
Learner processes
• Learners need to sift the input they receive and relate it to
their existing knowledge. How do they do this?
• There are two possible explanations.
• 1. They may use general cognitive strategies which are part of
their procedural knowledge and which are used in other forms
of learning. These strategies are often referred to as learner
strategies.
• 2. Alternatively, they may possess a special linguistic faculty
that enables them to operate on the input data in order to
discover the L2 rules in maximally efficient ways. This linguistic
faculty is referred to as Universal Grammar.
Tarone (1980) distinguishes three sets of
learner strategies:
• 1. Learning strategies – means by which the learner processes
the L2 input in order to develop linguistic knowledge. They can
be conscious or behavioral (e.g. memorization or repetition
with the purpose of remembering), or they can be
subconscious and psycholinguistic (e.g. inferencing or
overgeneralization).
• 2. Production strategies – learners’ attempt to use the L2
knowledge efficiently, clearly and with minimum effort. E.g.
rehearsing what should be said and discourse planning, or
structuring a series of utterances.
• 3. Communication strategies – like production strategies,
these are strategies of language use rather than learning,
although they can indirectly contribute to learning by helping
the learner to obtain more input. Learners, particularly in
natural settings, constantly need to express ideas which are
beyond their linguistic resources. They can either give up or
try to find some way around it. Typical communication
strategies are requests for assistance (e.g. ‘What do you call
____?’) or paraphrase (e.g. ‘wow-wow’ for ‘bark’).
Communication strategies involve compensating for non-
existent knowledge by improvising with existing L2 knowledge
in incorrect and inappropriate ways.
• Learner strategies cannot be observed directly, but can only
be inferred from language-learning behavior.
• The role of formal instruction
• It is generally believed that formal instruction speeds up SLA.
THE ROLE OF THE FIRST LANGUAGE:
Introduction
• It is generally believed that SLA is strongly influenced by the
learner’s first language (L1). The clearest support comes from
‘foreign accents’ in the L2 speech of learners. The levels at
which it is evident are pronunciation, vocabulary and
grammar.
• The influence of L1 is usually negative, and learning L2 is
generally seen as replacing L1 features by L2 features, in a
‘restructuring process’ (Corder 1978).
• However, research does not always confirm that L1 is the only
factor interfering with SLA, if at all.
• Contrastive analysis hypothesis goes hand in hand with the
behaviorist theory of learning.
• Behaviorist learning theory
• In order to understand the early importance that was attached
to L1, it is necessary to understand the main tenets of
behaviorist learning theory. Behaviorism was the dominant
school in psychology. The key notions related to language
learning are ‘habits’ and ‘errors’.
Habits
• Behaviorists set out to explain behavior by observing the
responses that took place when particular stimuli were
present. Different stimuli produced different responses from a
learner. The association of a particular response with a
particular stimulus constituted a habit, and it was this type of
behavior that psychologists (e.g. Watson 1924 and Skinner
1957) set out to investigate. They wanted to know how habits
were established.
• Behaviorists attributed two important characteristics to
habits. The first was that they were observable. The second
was that they were automatic, i.e. they were performed
spontaneously without awareness and were difficult to
eradicate, unless environmental changes led to the extinction
of the stimuli upon which they were built.
• The automatic response to a specific stimulus developed after
a number of repetitions – practice. Skinner (neo-behaviorists)
played down the importance of stimulus, arguing that it was
not always observable. Skinner claimed that habit was formed
when a behavior followed a response which reinforced it and
thus helped strengthen the association. Learning a habit could
occur through imitation - the learner copies the stimulus
behavior sufficiently often for it to become automatic, or
through reinforcement (i.e. the response of the learner is
rewarded or punished depending on whether is appropriate or
not, until only appropriate responses are given).
• Therefore, SLA was believed to be the most efficient when the
tasks were broken down into a number of stimulus-response
links, which could be systematically practiced and mastered
one at a time.
Errors
• According to behaviorist learning theory, old habits get in the
way of learning new habits. Thus, the system of L1 interferes
with the smooth acquisition of L2. The notion of interference
has a central place in behaviorist account of SLA.
• Previous learning prevents or inhibits the learning of new
habits. In SLA, it means the following: where L1 and L2 share a
meaning but express it in different ways, an error is likely to
arise in L2. E.g. the structure ‘I’m cold’ in English is realized in
different ways in French or Serbian.
• If a pattern is the same in the two languages, it will not stand in
the way of SLA, it will even facilitate it.
• In conclusion, error was seen as undesirable in SLA, and
therefore the main task of language teaching was to predict
the potential areas of errors and prevent them.
This was done by comparison of the two linguistic systems.
Here are some possibilities that a comparison might reveal:

• 1. No difference between a feature of the L1 and L2. E.g. SVO

word order in Serbian and English.
• 2. ‘Convergent phenomena’ – two items of L1 are merged into one
in L2. E.g. German ‘kennen’ and ‘wissen’ coalesce into English
‘know’.
• 3. An item from L1 is absent in L2. E.g. sequence of tenses in
Serbian.
• 4. An item has a different distribution in L1 and L2. E.g. /ɳ/ in
African languages occurs word-initially, but in English only
medially or finally.
• 5. No similarity between L1 and L2. E.g. negative verbal
construction in Serbian and English (‘Ne znam’ vs. ‘I don’t know’)
• 6. ‘Divergent phenomena’ – one item in L1 becomes two items in
L2. E.g. Serbian ‘pozajmiti’, English ‘borrow’ and ‘lend’.
Criticisms

• On empirical, theoretical and practical grounds:

• - Doubt concerning CA to predict errors – these doubts arose
when researchers began to examine language learners’
language in depth.
• - Methodological criticisms.
• - Doubts if there was anything relevant that CA could offer to
language teaching.
II INTERLANGUAGE AND THE ‘NATURAL’
ROUTE OF DEVELOPMENT
• One of the main concerns of SLA research is whether learners acquire
L2 in a fixed order as a result of a predisposition to process language
data in highly specific ways.
• The claims about a fixed order are based on a theory of learning that
stresses the learner-internal factors which contribute to acquisition.
This theory was first developed with regard to L1 acquisition, which
also saw the first attempts to examine empirically how a learner builds
up knowledge of L1.
• The key concept is that of interlanguage. It is a system which is
independent from both L1 and L2, and it was used as the basis of
studying the stages of development through which L2 learners pass on
their way to L2 proficiency.
• In essence, this is a universalist hypothesis – it stresses the similarities
in the developmental route followed by different L2 learners, regardless
of the learners’ age, learning context or L1 background.
Mentalist accounts of L1 acquisition
• Key representatives – Chomsky and Lenneberg
• Chomsky’s (1959) attack on Skinner’s theory of language
learning led to a reassertion of mentalist views oh L1
acquisition in place of the empiricist approach of behaviorists.
Chomsky stressed the active contribution of the child and
minimized the importance of imitation and reinforcement.
• He claimed that the child’s knowledge of his mother tongue
was derived from a Universal Grammar (UG) which specified
the essential form that any natural language could take. The
child has at its disposal the concept of a sentence at the start
of learning.
• UG then existed as a set of linguistic principles which
comprised the ‘initial state’ and which controlled the form
which the sentences of any given language could take. Also,
part of the UG was a set of discovery procedures for relating
the universal principles to the data provided by exposure to a
natural language. This view of L1 acquisition is represented in
the form of a model:
• primary linguistic data → LAD → G
• LAD = Language Acquisition Device, G = Grammar
• For the LAD, which contains the UG, to work, the learner
requires access to ‘primary linguistic data’ (input), but only as
a trigger to activate the device – it did not shape the process
of acquisition.
• Lenneberg (1967) emphasized the biological prerequisites of
language – only humans are capable of learning language. He
claimed that the child’s brain was specifically adapted to the
process of language acquisition, but that the innate property
was lost as maturation took place.
• The child builds up the knowledge of his mother tongue by
means of hypothesis testing. The child connects the innate
knowledge of basic grammar relations to the surface structure
of sentences in the language he’s learning. He does so by
forming a series of hypotheses about the ‘transformations’
necessary to convert innate knowledge to into the surface
forms of the mother tongue. The hypotheses are then tested
out against the primary linguistic data and modified
accordingly.
• In summary, mentalist views of L1 acquisition posited the
following:
• Language is a human-specific faculty
• Language exists as an independent faculty in the human mind,
i.e. although it is part of the learner’s total cognitive
apparatus, it is separate from the general cognitive
mechanisms responsible for intellectual development
• The primary determinant of L1 acquisition is the child’s LAD,
which is genetically endowed and provides the child with a set
of principles about grammar
• The LAD atrophies with age
• The process of acquisition consists of hypothesis-testing, by
which the grammar of the learner’s mother tongue is related
to the principles of the UG.
• In the 1960s extensive empirical research was conducted into
L1 acquisition – three major projects at Harvard, Berkley and
Maryland Universities independently arrived at similar
descriptions. The studies were longitudinal, and included
‘natural’ samples of mother-child discourse in play situations
over several years, as well as some samples of elicited speech.
The aim was to describe the child’s emerging linguistic
competence as he gradually ‘cracked the code’.
• Two points are important here:
• 1. Many of the children’s early utterances were unique, in the
sense that no native speaking adult could have produced
them.
• 2. The development was continuous and incremental, but
could be characterized as a series of stages.
• The uniqueness of children’s early utterances is a universal
feature of L1 acquisition.
• Examples (in English, but similar sentences are found in every
L1):
• Mommy sock.
• No the sun shining.
• What the dollie have?
• Want pussy Lwindi.
• That is, utterances different in form from adult utterances
were attested in L1 acquisition of all languages. This finding
was important, because it provided a strong argument for
rejecting behaviorist accounts of L1 acquisition. Learning a L1
certainly did not consist of stimulus-response connections
learnt through imitation and reinforcement. If the child’s
linguistic output does not match the input, the explanation
must lie in the internal processing that has taken place.
• The incremental nature of L1 acquisition – two aspects: 1.
length of utterances gradually increases, 2. knowledge of
grammatical system is built up in steps (e.g. –ing and ‘do
support’ are not acquired at the same time, but in sequence).
Interlanguage
• The term first used by Selinker (1972).
• It is a structured system that the learner constructs at any
given stage in his development. It is distinct from L1 and L2 at
any given time and the systems of learners at the same stage
of proficiency roughly coincide.
• Hypothesis testing is found in interlanguage just as in L1
acquisition.
• The influence of L1 was not entirely rejected, but has come to
be seen as one of the factors among many other cognitive
processes responsible for SLA.
• Selinker suggests that there are five principal processes
that operate in interlanguage:
• Language transfer
• Overgeneralization of target language rules
• Transfer of training (i.e. a rule enters the learner’s
system as a result of instruction)
• Strategies of L2 learning (‘an identifiable approach by
the learner to the material to be learned’)
• Strategies of L2 communication (‘an identifiable
approach to communication with native speakers)
• Interference was thus seen as one of several processes
responsible for interlanguage.
• The five processes together constitute the ways in which the
learner tries to internalize the L2 system.
• They enable the learner to reduce the learning burden to
manageable proportions, and can be called ‘simplifications’.
Learners have a limited processing space and, therefore,
cannot cope with the total complexity of a language system,
so they limit the number of hypotheses they test at any point
in time.
• Selinker points that many L2 learners fail to reach target
language competence – they stop learning when their
interlanguage contains at least some rules are different from
those of the target language system.
• He refers to this as fossilization. An example is using /t/ or /d/
instead of /T/ or /D/ in the interlanguage of Serbian learners
of English.
• The reasons for fossilization are both internal and external –
the learner may believe that he does not need to develop his
interlanguage any further in order to communicate effectively,
or because the changes in the neural structure of his brain as a
result of age restrict the operation of the hypothesis-testing
mechanism.
• Selinker suggests that there are two paths of acquiring L2:
• – one where the learner continues to use LAD (like the child in
L1 acquisition), reactivating the ‘latent language structure’, or
• – the other, which does not involve recourse to UG, but
mechanisms responsible for other types of learning apart
from language.
• According to Selinker, there are three principal features of
interlanguage:
• 1. Interlanguage is permeable – the rules that constitute the
learner’s knowledge at any one stage are not fixed, but are open to
amendment. This is a general feature of natural languages (changes
of grammatical rules over time).
• 2. Interlanguage is dynamic – it changes constantly. However, the
learner does not jump from one stage to the next, but rather slowly
revises the interim systems to accommodate new hypotheses. This
takes place by the introduction of a new rule, first in one context
and then in another. A new rule spreads in the sense that its
coverage gradually extends over a range of linguistic contexts (e.g.
wh- questions may at first be asked without inversion or auxiliary;
later the generalization of the object ‘what’ may be spread to the
other wh- words).
• 3. Interlanguage is systematic
• Despite the variability of Interlanguage, it is possible to detect
rule-based nature of the learner’s use of the L2.
• In contrast to the CAH, which attempted to predict errors,
Interlanguage hypothesis set out to explain them. Errors are
generally divided into:
• developmental (or intralingual – the same as found in native
L1 speakers)
• interference (or interlingual – under the influence of L1)
• other types of errors occurring for psychological reasons
(negligence of rules, overgeneralizations, etc.)
INDIVIDUAL LEARNER DIFFERENCES AND
SLA:
Introduction
• L2 learners vary on a number of dimensions to do with
personality, motivation, learning style, aptitude and age.
• Due to those differences, the learning process will differ in the
route along which learners pass in SLA, the rate and ultimate
success of SLA.
• In SLA research there has been huge variability in the use of
terms referring to individual differences between learners –
because they are not easily definable, and represent a cluster
of differences rather than single characteristics.
• They can be broadly divided into personal and general factors.
• Personal factors are highly idiosyncratic features of each
individual’s approach to learning a L2.
• For example, some learners may feel anxiety about changing
the learning environment or agenda.
• General factors are present in all learners, but differ in the
extent/degree to which they are present, or how they are
realized.
• General factors can further be divided into those that are
modifiable (i.e. likely to change during the course of SLA), such
as motivation, and those that are unmodifiable, such as
aptitude.
• Personal and general factors have social, cognitive and
affective aspects.
• - social – external to the learner and concern the relationship
of the learner and native speakers of L2
• - cognitive and affective – internal to the learner
• Cognitive – concern the nature of problem-solving strategies
used by the learner, while affective factors concern the
emotional responses aroused by the attempts to learn a L2.
• Different personal and general factors involve all three aspects
in different degrees.
• For example, aptitude is primarily cognitive in nature, but it
also involves affective and social aspects.
• Personality is primarily affective, but also has social and
cognitive sides.
• Age is a factor that may involve all three aspects fairly equally.
Personal factors
• Personal factors are difficult to observe by a third person. This
methodological problem is solved in two ways.
• First, through the use of diary studies, where individual
learners keep daily records of their experiences in learning a
L2, and after a longer period studying the ‘significant trends’.
• The second solution is to use questionnaires and interviews.
• Personal factors are rather heterogeneous. They can be
grouped together under three headings:
• 1. Group dynamics – competitiveness, comparison, anxiety –
all of these may be stimulating, but may also depress
performance.
• 2. Attitudes to the teacher and course material – some
students prefer teachers/materials that leave them enough
freedom to pursue their own learning paths. Others prefer
those materials that are firmly structured and teachers who
structure the learning tasks more tightly. In general, adult
learners prefer a variety of materials and the opportunity to
use them in ways they choose for themselves.
• 3. Individual learning techniques. There is a tremendous
variety in the techniques employed by different learners:
• - preparing and memorizing word lists
• - learning words in contexts – some learners made no attempt
to keep lists
• - practicing vocabulary – some used the technique of
deliberately putting words into different structures, others
used reading, playing games, repeating words
• Another difference is in the ways in which the learner gets into
contact with the L2 – some learners seek out situations in
which they’ll get more exposure to L2.
General factors
• 1. Age
• Age is the variable that has been most frequently considered
in discussions of individual differences in SLA.
• This is due in part to the ease with which it can be measured –
unlike the other general factors, it can be described reliably
and precisely.
• Another reason is the need to submit to empirical
investigation the commonly held belief that children are
better language learners than adults.
• There are a number of studies concerning age and SLA, but a
noticeable lack in agreement in the conclusions reached.
The effect of age
• The route of acquisition does not seem to be affected by the
age – adults and children acquired the same set of
morphemes in a similar order.
• As for the rate of learning, adult learners are better. I.e. if
learners at different ages are matched according to the
amount of time they have been exposed to the L2, it is the
older learners who reach higher levels of proficiency. Some
studies suggest that adolescents are by far the fastest
learners. It would appear that although age improves
language learning capacity, performance may peak in the
teens, after which performance declines. Yet, most
researchers agree that it is the amount/length of
exposure/learning that correlates positively with SLA.
• Another factor is the age when SLA is commenced. This
particularly refers to pronunciation.
Explaining the effect of age

• The critical period hypothesis states that there is a period when

language acquisition takes place naturally and effortlessly.
• Given the ability of many adult learners to attain target-like
proficiency in morphology and syntax, their apparent inability to
attain nativelike proficiency in pronunciation has often intrigued
linguists and nonlinguists alike.
• Scovel (1969, 1988) termed this the “Joseph Conrad phenomenon”.
• “You can’t teach an old dog new tricks” – many agree with Scovel
that adults are unable to achieve perfect pronunciation in L2.
• This view goes hand in hand with the generally held notion that
prepubescent children with adequate exposure to a second
language can achieve perfect pronunciation with relative ease.
• One line of research that supports these claims was originally
formulated by Penfield and Roberts (1959) and Lenneberg (1967).
• It posits a period, occurring around puberty, after which the brain
lateralization, or the assigning of certain functions to the different
hemispheres of the brain, is completed.
• The period prior to the completion of lateralization, called the
critical period, represents the biologically determined period of life
during which maximal conditions for language acquisition exist.
• The implications of this theory as it relates to second language
acquisition are quite clear. Scovel (1969) and later Krashen (1973)
claimed that along with lateralization (which according to Krashen
occurs as early as age 5) comes an increasing loss of brain plasticity,
which renders an individual incapable of achieving nativelike
pronunciation in a second language after puberty.
 Brain lateralization theory
• The right hemisphere specializes in
• The left hemisphere specializes in
analytical thought, dealing with hard
facts: abstractions, structure,
discipline and rules, time sequences,
mathematics, categorizing, logic and
rationality and deductive reasoning,
knowledge, details, definitions,
planning and goals, words (written
and spoken and heard), productivity
and efficiency, science and
technology, stability, extroversion,
physical activity, and the right side of
the body.
• LANGUAGE: grammar-vocabulary,
literal
• LANGUAGE:
the "softer" aspects of life:
intuition, feelings and sensitivity,
emotions, daydreaming and
visualizing, creativity (including art
and music), color, spatial
awareness, first impressions,
rhythm, spontaneity and
impulsiveness, the physical senses,
risk-taking, flexibility and variety,
learning by experience,
relationships, mysticism, play and
sports, introversion, humor, motor
skills, the left side of the body, and
a holistic way of perception that
recognizes patterns and similarities
and then synthesizes those
elements into new forms.
intonation/accentuation, prosody,
pragmatic, contextual
Cognitive explanations
• One obvious difference between the young child and the adolescent is
the ability of the latter to comprehend language as a formal system.
• According to Rosansky (1975) cognitive development is responsible for
the greater ease with which young children learn languages.
• The young child is cognitively predisposed to automatic language
acquisition, because he does not know he’s acquiring language.
• The onset of abstract thinking that comes around the age of twelve with
the final stage of cognitive development, as described by Piaget (i.e.
Formal Operations), means that the learner is predisposed to recognize
differences as well as similarities, to think flexibly and to become
increasingly de-centered.
• As a result, he possesses strong meta-awareness, and is likely to hold
strong social attitudes towards the use of his own language and the
target language. These may serve as blocks to natural language
acquisition, forcing the learner to treat the acquisition task as ‘a
problem to be solved using his hypothetico-deductive logic’.
• In Rosansky’s view it is the awareness that comes with age that inhibits
natural learning.
Affective explanation
• Acculturation factor – the new culture may be fascinating,
strange, felt as hostile. Children are not aware of the cultural
differences and may therefore be more open to other
languages.
• Intelligence and aptitude
• Intelligence – ‘a general academic or reasoning ability’. It is
involved in learning other school subjects as well as L2.
• Aptitude – ability of specific cognitive qualities needed for
SLA. It is rather difficult to define, but is usually related to the
learners ability to associate sounds with written symbols and
to identify grammatical regularities of a language.
• Carroll and Sapon (1959) identify three major components of
aptitude:
• 1. phonetic coding ability – the ability to perceive and
memorize new sounds
• 2. grammatical sensitivity – ability to demonstrate awareness
of the syntactical patterning of sentences of a language
• 3. inductive ability – consists of the ability to notice and
identify similarities and differences in both grammatical form
and meaning.
Attitudes and motivation
• Attitude – social factor, striving to a goal.
• Motivation:
• 1) global motivation – general orientation to the goal of
learning a L2
• 2) situational motivation – varies according to the situation in
which learning takes place
• 3) task motivation – motivation for performing a specific task.
• Integrative motivation – learner wishes to identify with the
culture of the L2 group
• Instrumental motivation – when the learner’s goal of learning
L2 is functional.