Add new comment Language Acquisition: An OverviewByKristina Robertson,Karen FordOn this page Stages of Language Acquisition Instructional Strategies Recommendations Hot links"One generation plants the trees; another gets the shade." Chinese ProverbWhen I readThe Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxyby Douglas Adams, I remember being fascinated by the "babel fish." These were fish, who when dropped in a person's ear, would provide immediate translation of any language, thriving on sound waves and converting them into comprehensible language.Wouldn't it be just great if learning a new language were that easy (despite the "yuck" factor)? While we do have some technology that provides translation into a variety of languages, it often fails to translate accurately due to the complexity of language. Effective communication requires so much more than just being able to translate vocabulary words it requires knowledge of intonation, dialect, and intent, and a nuanced understanding of word use, expression, and a language's cultural context. For example, one online translation application I tried translated "Fall Events" as "fall down events" in Spanish because it didn't know that I was referring to events in autumn.So, without a babel fish or perfect technology, we are left with the old-fashioned way of learning a new language, which requires time, effort, and patience. How much time, effort, and patience depends a lot on the individual who is learning, as well as the learning environment and situation, but language researchers have developed a general outline of language acquisition that helps explain the process that language learners go through to develop skills in a foreign language. In this article, I will provide an overview to the stages of language acquisition, and offer strategies designed to support ELL instruction at different stages of language acquisition.Stages of Language AcquisitionResearchers define language acquisition into two categories: first-language acquisition and second-language acquisition. First-language acquisition is a universal process regardless of home language. Babies listen to the sounds around them, begin to imitate them, and eventually start producing words. Second-language acquisition assumes knowledge in a first language and encompasses the process an individual goes through as he or she learns the elements of a new language, such as vocabulary, phonological components, grammatical structures, and writing systems.The Six Stages of Second-Language AcquisitionPre-productionThis is also called "the silent period," when the student takes in the new language but does not speak it. This period often lasts six weeks or longer, depending on the individual.

Early productionThe individual begins to speak using short words and sentences, but the emphasis is still on listening and absorbing the new language. There will be many errors in the early production stage.

Speech EmergentSpeech becomes more frequent, words and sentences are longer, but the individual still relies heavily on context clues and familiar topics. Vocabulary continues to increase and errors begin to decrease, especially in common or repeated interactions.

Beginning FluencySpeech is fairly fluent in social situations with minimal errors. New contexts and academic language are challenging and the individual will struggle to express themselves due to gaps in vocabulary and appropriate phrases.

Intermediate FluencyCommunicating in the second language is fluent, especially in social language situations. The individual is able to speak almost fluently in new situations or in academic areas, but there will be gaps in vocabulary knowledge and some unknown expressions. There are very few errors, and the individual is able to demonstrate higher order thinking skills in the second language such as offering an opinion or analyzing a problem.

Advanced FluencyThe individual communicates fluently in all contexts and can maneuver successfully in new contexts and when exposed to new academic information. At this stage, the individual may still have an accent and use idiomatic expressions incorrectly at times, but the individual is essentially fluent and comfortable communicating in the second language.

How long does it take for a language learner to go through these stages? Just as in any other learning situation, it depends on the individual. One of the major contributors to accelerated second language learning is the strength of first language skills. Language researchers such as Jim Cummins, Catherine Snow, Lily Wong Filmore and Stephen Krashen have studied this topic in a variety of ways for many years. The general consensus is that it takes between five to seven years for an individual to achieve advanced fluency. This generally applies to individuals who have strong first language and literacy skills. If an individual has not fully developed first language and literacy skills, it may take between seven to ten years to reach advanced fluency. It is very important to note that every ELL student comes with his or her own unique language and education background, and this will have an impact on their English learning process.It is also important to keep in mind that the understood goal for American ELL students is Advanced Fluency, which includes fluency in academic contexts as well as social contexts. Teachers often get frustrated when ELL students appear to be fluent because they have strong social English skills, but then they do not participate well in academic projects and discussions. Teachers who are aware of ELL students' need to develop academic language fluency in English will be much better prepared to assist those students in becoming academically successful. (Learn more about academic language inColorn Colorado'sacademic language resource section.)Instructional StrategiesIf you have ELL students in your classroom, it is more than likely there will be students at a variety of stages in the language acquisition process. What can teachers do to differentiate instruction according to language level? Here are some suggestions for appropriate instructional strategies according to stages of language acquisition.Language StageStrategies

Pre-production Emphasize listening comprehension by using read-alouds and music. Use visuals and have students point to pictures or act out vocabulary. Speak slowly and use shorter words, but use correct English phrasing. Model "survival" language by saying and showing the meaning. For example, say, "Open your book," and then open a book while the student observes. Gesture, point and show as much as possible. More advanced classmates who speak the same language can support new learning through interpretation. Avoid excessive error correction. Reinforce learning by modeling correct language usage when students make mistakes.

Early Production Continue the strategies listed above, but add opportunities for students to produce simple language. Ask students to point to pictures and say the new word. Ask yes/no and either/or questions. Have students work in pairs or small groups to discuss a problem. Have literate students write short sentences or words in graphic organizers. Model a phrase and have the student repeat it and add modifications. Teacher says, "This book is very interesting." The student repeats it and says, "This book is very boring." Continue with as many modifications as possible. Avoid excessive error correction. Reinforce learning by modeling correct usage.

Speech Emergent Introduce more academic language and skills by using the same techniques listed above, but beginning to use more academic vocabulary. Introduce new academic vocabulary and model how to use it in a sentence. Provide visuals and make connections with student's background knowledge as much as possible. Ask questions that require a short answer and are fairly literal. Introduce charts and graphs by using easily understood information such as a class survey of food preferences. Have students re-tell stories or experiences and have another student write them down. The ELL student can bring these narratives home to read and reinforce learning. In writing activities, provide the student with a fill-in-the blank version of the assignment with the necessary vocabulary listed on the page. Provide minimal error correction. Focus only on correction that directly interferes with meaning. Reinforce learning by modeling the correct usage.

Beginning Fluency Have students work in pairs and groups to discuss content. During instruction, have students do a"Think, pair, share"to give the student an opportunity to process the new language and concept. Ask questions that require a full response with explanation. If you do not understand the student's explanation, ask for clarification by paraphrasing and asking the student if you heard them correctly. Ask questions that require inference and justification of the answer. Ask students if they agree or disagree with a statement and why. Model more advanced academic language structures such as, "I think," "In my opinion," and "When you compare." Have students repeat the phrases in context. Re-phrase incorrect statements in correct English, or ask the student if they know another way to say it. Introduce nuances of language such as when to use more formal English and how to interact in conversations. Have students make short presentations, providing them with the phrases and language used in presentations ("Today I will be talking about") and giving them opportunities to practice the presentation with partners before getting in front of the class. Continue to provide visual support and vocabulary development. Correct errors that interfere with meaning, and pre-identify errors that will be corrected in student writing, such as verb-tense agreement. Only correct the errors agreed upon. You may want to assist in improving pronunciation by asking a student to repeat key vocabulary and discussing how different languages have different sounds.

Intermediate Fluency Identify key academic vocabulary and phrases and model them. Ask students to produce the language in class activities. Use graphic organizers and thinking maps and check to make sure the student is filling them in with details. Challenge the student to add more. Help the student make connections with new vocabulary by instructing him or her in the etymology of words or word families such as, "important, importance, importantly." Create assessments that give students an opportunity to present in English after they have an opportunity to practice in pairs or small groups. Introduce more academic skills, such as brainstorming, prioritizing, categorization, summarizing and compare and contrast. Ask students to identify vocabulary by symbols that show whether the student "knows it really well, kind of knows it, or doesn't know it at all." Help students focus on strategies to get the meaning of new words. Have a "guessing time" during silent reading where they circle words they don't know and write down their guess of the meaning. Check the results as a class. Introduce idioms and give examples of how to use them appropriately. For example, "Let's wind up our work." What's another way you could use the phrase "wind up?" Starting at this level, students need more correction/feedback, even on errors that do not directly affect meaning. They should be developing a more advanced command of syntax, pragmatics, pronunciation, and other elements that do not necessarily affect meaning but do contribute to oral fluency. It may also be helpful to discuss language goals with the student so you can assist in providing modeling and correction in specified areas.

Advanced Fluency Students at this level are close to native language fluency and can interact well in a variety of situations. Continue to develop language skills as gaps arise by using the strategies listed above. Although the student may seem completely fluent, he or she still benefit from visual support, building on background knowledge, pre-teaching vocabulary and making connections between content areas. Offer challenge activities to expand the student's vocabulary knowledge such as identifying antonyms, synonyms and the use of a thesaurus and dictionary. Demonstrate effective note-taking and provide a template. Offer error correction on academic work and on oral language. Because students at this stage have achieved near-native fluency, they benefit from support in fine-tuning their oral and written language skills.

RecommendationsScaffoldinstruction so students receive comprehensible input and are able to successfully complete tasks at their level. Instructional scaffolding works just like the scaffolding used in building. It holds you at the level needed until you are ready to take it down. Scaffolding includes asking students questions in formats that give them support in answering, such as yes/no questions, one-word identifications, or short answers. It also means providing the context for learning by having visuals or other hands-on items available to support content learning. Also, when practicing a new academic skill such as skimming, scaffolding involves using well-known material so the students aren't struggling with the information while they are trying to learn a new skill. Scaffolding includes whatever it takes to make the instruction meaningful for the student in order to provide a successful learning experience.Use cognatesto help Spanish speakers learn English and derive meaning from content. The Colorn Colorado website has a helpfullist of common cognatesin Spanish for teachers to reference. Teachers can explicitly point out cognates for Spanish speaking students so they begin to realize that this is a useful way for them to increase their English vocabulary.Explicit vocabulary instructionis very important in accelerating ELL students' English language development. Textbooks includelists of new vocabulary wordsbased on grade-level content, but ELL students need further vocabulary instruction. There are many words in a text that may affect the ELL student's comprehension of the text that a teacher may assume he or she knows. It is important for teachers to develop ways to help students identify the words they don't know, as well as strategies for getting their meaning. Of course it is also beneficial if teachers reinforce the language structures or common associations of vocabulary. For example, "squeak" is a sound that often goes with "mouse" or "door" and it may be stated as, "squeak, squeaky, squeaks, or squeaked."Error correctionshould be done very intentionally and appropriately according to student language ability, as noted earlier in the article. Students who are just beginning to speak English are already nervous about using their new language skills and constant correction will not improve their ability; it will just make them want to withdraw. I inform students in advance of the type of errors I will correct, such as "missing articles" and "third person agreement," and then those are the only errors I check. In my class, I do not correct the errors; I circle the mistakes and return the paper to the student. They are responsible for correcting the errors and returning the paper to receive more points. Most of the time the students can make the corrections themselves when they see the area I've circled, but if they have difficulty, I guide them as they make the correction. In this way, I feel there is a manageable amount of correction information to work with and the student will actually learn from doing the correction.Learning another language. If you learn the language(s) your students speak, they will be thrilled to hear you try it with them. I learned how to say "good morning" in Somali and had to practice for an hour before I felt comfortable saying it. When I did I was rewarded with the big grins of students as they entered the room. They were excited to teach me other phrases as well, and we discussed how much English they had learned since they arrived in the country. They were very proud to think of how much progress they'd made.Seek the expertsin your building or district who can offer you guidance on effective instructional strategies for your ELL students. There are many teachers who have taught ELL students in your content area, have taught a certain population of students, or are trained ESL or bilingual teachers who have a lot of advice and support to offer. Don't hesitate to look for support when you are challenged to reach students who are learning English. This can be especially true when you have a "pre-production" or "beginning level" student and you are responsible for grade level content instruction.Visit the hotlinkssection for this article for more information on specific research regarding language acquisition and recommended instructional strategies. You can also search the Colorn Colorado educator information for useful information and resources to assist you in meeting ELL student needs.ELL teachers encounter students with a variety of backgrounds and abilities, and until the babel fish comes into existence, they will need to have flexibility, creativity and skill in order to help ELL students make meaning from the new language and content they are learning. An understanding of the language acquisition process and levels will help teachers tailor instruction to meet the needs of a diverse group of learners. Students will benefit from everything teachers do to support the development of their language skills while teaching them grade level content. Together teachers and students develop their understanding of each other, the world around them, and the language that connects us all.

Language acquisitionFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia"Language learning" redirects here. For the processing of language by the human brain, seeLearning languages. For the journal, seeLanguage Learning (journal). For formal instruction in language, seeLanguage education.Linguistics

Theoretical

Cognitive Generative Quantitative Functional theories of grammar Phonology Morphology Morphophonology Syntax Lexis Semantics Pragmatics Graphemics Orthography Semiotics

Descriptive

Anthropological Comparative Historical Etymology Graphetics Phonetics Sociolinguistics

Appliedand experimental

Computational Contrastive Evolutionary Forensic Internet Language acquisition Second-language acquisition Language assessment Language development Language education Linguistic anthropology Neurolinguistics Psycholinguistics

Related articles

History of linguistics Linguistic prescription List of linguists Unsolved linguistics problems

Linguistics portal

v t e

Part of a series on

Human growth and development

Stages

Embryo Fetus Infant Toddler Early childhood Child Preadolescence Adolescence Adult Middle age Old age

Biological milestones

Fertilization Childbirth Walking Language acquisition Puberty Ageing Death

Language acquisitionis the process by which humans acquire the capacity to perceive and comprehend language, as well as to produce and usewordsandsentencesto communicate. Language acquisition is one of the quintessential human traits,[1]becausenon-humans do not communicate by using language.[2]Language acquisition usually refers tofirst-language acquisition, which studies infants' acquisition of their native language. This is distinguished fromsecond-language acquisition, which deals with the acquisition (in bothchildrenand adults) of additional languages.The capacity to successfully use language requires one to acquire a range of tools includingphonology,morphology,syntax,semantics, and an extensivevocabulary. Language can be vocalized as in speech, or manual as insign. The human language capacity is represented in the brain. Even though the human language capacity is finite, one can say and understand an infinite number of sentences, which is based on a syntactic principle calledrecursion. Evidence suggests that every individual has three recursive mechanisms that allow sentences to go indeterminately. These three mechanisms are:relativization,complementationandcoordination.[3]Furthermore, there are actually two main guiding principles in first-language acquisition, that is,speech perceptionalways precedesspeech productionand the gradually evolving system by which a child learns a language is built up one step at a time, beginning with the distinction between individualphonemes.[4]

Stephen Krashen's Theory of Second Language AcquisitionAssimilao Natural -- o Construtivismo Comunicativo no Ensino de LnguasRicardo SchtzAvailable since: April 1998Last revision: June 12, 2014"Language acquisition does not require extensive use of conscious grammatical rules, and does not require tedious drill."Stephen Krashen"Acquisition 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."Stephen Krashen"The best methods are therefore those that supply 'comprehensible input' in low anxiety situations, containing messages that students really want to hear. These methods do not force early production in the second language, but allow students to produce when they are 'ready', recognizing that improvement comes from supplying communicative and comprehensible input, and not from forcing and correcting production."Stephen Krashen"In the real world, conversations with sympathetic native speakers who are willing to help the acquirer understand are very helpful."Stephen KrashenIntroductionStephen Krashen (University of Southern California) is an expert in the field of linguistics, specializing in theories of language acquisition and development. Much of his recent research has involved the study of non-English and bilingual language acquisition. During the past 20 years, he has published well over 100 books and articles and has been invited to deliver over 300 lectures at universities throughout the United States and Canada.Krashen's widely known and well accepted theory of second language acquisition has had a large impact in all areas of second language research and teaching since the 1980s.Summary of Krashen's Theory of Second Language AcquisitionKrashen's theory of second language acquisition consists of five main hypotheses: the Acquisition-Learning hypothesis, the Monitor hypothesis, the Input hypothesis, the Natural Order hypothesis, and the Affective Filter hypothesis.TheAcquisition-Learningdistinction is the most important of all the hypotheses in Krashen's theory and the most widely known and influential among linguists and language practitioners.According to Krashen there are two independent systems of second language performance: 'the acquired system' and 'the learned system'. The 'acquired system' or 'acquisition' is the product of a subconscious process very similar to the process children undergo when they acquire their first language. It requires meaningful interaction in the target language - natural communication - in which speakers are concentrated not in the form of their utterances, but in the communicative act.The 'learned system' or 'learning' is the product of formal instruction and it comprises a conscious process which results in conscious knowledge 'about' the language, for example knowledge of grammar rules. According to Krashen 'learning' is less important than 'acquisition'.(Veja o texto ao lado e tambm outra pgina em portugus sobreAcquisition/Learning).TheMonitorhypothesis explains the relationship between acquisition and learning and defines the influence of the latter on the former. The monitoring function is the practical result of the learned grammar. According to Krashen, the acquisition system is the utterance initiator, while the learning system performs the role of the 'monitor' or the 'editor'. The 'monitor' acts in a planning, editing and correcting function when three specific conditions are met: that is, the second language learner has sufficient time at his/her disposal, he/she focuses on form or thinks about correctness, and he/she knows the rule.It appears that the role of conscious learning is somewhat limited in second language performance. According to Krashen, the role of the monitor is - or should be - minor, being used only to correct deviations from 'normal' speech and to give speech a more 'polished' appearance.Krashen also suggests that there is individual variation among language learners with regard to 'monitor' use. He distinguishes those learners that use the 'monitor' all the time (over-users); those learners who have not learned or who prefer not to use their conscious knowledge (under-users); and those learners that use the 'monitor' appropriately (optimal users). An evaluation of the person's psychological profile can help to determine to what group they belong. Usually extroverts are under-users, while introverts and perfectionists are over-users. Lack of self-confidence is frequently related to the over-use of the 'monitor'.TheInputhypothesis is Krashen's attempt to explain how the learner acquires a second language how second language acquisition takes place. The Input hypothesis is only concerned with 'acquisition', not 'learning'. According to this hypothesis, the learner improves and progresses when he/she receives second language 'input' that is one stepbeyondhis/her current stage of linguistic competence. For example, if a learner is at a stage 'i', then acquisition takes place when he/she is exposed to 'Comprehensible Input' that belongs to level 'i + 1'. We can then define 'Comprehensible Input' as the target language that the learner would not be able to produce but can still understand. It goesbeyondthe choice of words and involves presentation of context, explanation, rewording of unclear parts, the use of visual cues and meaning negotiation. The meaning successfully conveyed constitutes the learning experience.AS TRS HIPTESES MAIS IMPORTANTES DA TEORIA DE KRASHEN, E SUA INTERRELAOA hipteseacquisition-learning,a hiptesemonitore a hipteseinputrepresentam a essncia da teoria de Krashen.De acordo com sua teoria,acquisition responsvel pelo entendimento e pela capacidade de comunicao criativa: habilidades desenvolvidas subconscientemente. Isto ocorre atravs da familiarizao com a caracterstica fontica da lngua, sua estruturao de frases, seu vocabulrio, tudo decorrente de situaes reais, bem como pela descoberta e assimilao de diferenas culturais e pela aceitao e adaptao nova cultura.Learningdepende de esforo intelectual e procura produzir conhecimento consciente a respeito da estrutura da lngua e de suas irregularidades, e preconiza a memorizao de vocabulrio fora de situaes reais. Este conhecimento atua na funo de monitoramento da fala. Entretanto, o efeito deste monitoramento sobre a performance da pessoa, depende muito do perfil psicolgico de cada um.Veja aqui mais sobre os conceitos deacquisitionelearning.A hiptesemonitorexplica a relao entreacquisitionelearningao definir a influncia deste ltimo sobre o primeiro. Os esforos espontneos e criativos de comunicao, decorrentes de nossa capacidade natural de assimilar lnguas quando em contato com elas, so policiados e disciplinados pelo conhecimento consciente das regras gramaticais da lngua e de suas excees.Os efeitos deste monitoramento sobre pessoas com diferentes caractersticas de personalidade sero vrios. Pessoas que tendem introverso, falta de autoconfiana, ou ao perfeccionismo, pouco se beneficiaro de um conhecimento da estrutura da lngua e de suas irregularidades. Pelo contrrio, no caso de lnguas com alto grau de irregularidade (como o ingls), podero desenvolver um bloqueio que compromete a espontaneidade devido conscincia da alta probabilidade de cometerem erros.Pessoas que tendem extroverso, a falar muito, de forma espontnea e impensada, tambm pouco se beneficiaro delearning, uma vez que a funo de monitoramento quase inoperante, est submetida a uma personalidade intempestiva que se manifesta sem maior cautela. Os nicos que se beneficiam delearning, so as pessoas mais normais e equilibradas, que sabem aplicar a funo de monitoramento de forma moderada. Mesmo assim, numa situao real de comunicao, o monitoramento s funcionar se ocorrerem 3 condies simultaneamente:- Tempo suficiente:que a pessoa disponha de tempo suficiente para avaliar as alternativas com base nas regras incidentes.- Preocupao com a forma:que a pessoa concentre ateno no apenas no ato da comunicao, no contedo da mensagem, mas tambm e principalmente na forma.- Conhecimento da regra:que a pessoa tenha conhecimento da regra que se aplica ao caso.A hipteseinputajuda a explicar como o aprendiz assimila uma segunda lngua atravs deacquisition.Comprehensible input linguagem inteligvel o elemento chave para que ocorra a assimilao do idioma. O aprendiz progride na medida em que recebe input inteligvel. Linguagem inteligvel aquela que se situa num nvel ligeiramente acima do nvel de proficincia do aprendiz. a linguagem que ele no conseguiria produzir mas que ainda consegue entender. Vai alm da simples escolha de vocabulrio. Pressupe contextualizao, explicao, uso de recursos visuais, linguagem corporal, negociao de significados e recolocao de pontos obscuros em outras palavras. As ideias efetivamente transmitidas constituem a experincia de aprendizado.Veja abaixo uma demonstrao em vdeo do Prof. Krashen sobrecomprehensible input.

See here an enlightening video by Krashen aboutcomprehensible input.

TheNatural Orderhypothesis is based on research findings (Dulay & Burt, 1974; Fathman, 1975; Makino, 1980 cited in Krashen, 1987) which suggested that the acquisition of grammatical structures follows a 'natural order' which is predictable. For a given language, some grammatical structures tend to be acquired early while others late. This order seemed to be independent of the learners' age, L1 background, conditions of exposure, and although the agreement between individual acquirers was not always 100% in the studies, there were statistically significant similarities that reinforced the existence of a Natural Order of language acquisition. Krashen however points out that the implication of the natural order hypothesis is not that a language program syllabus should be based on the order found in the studies. In fact, he rejects grammatical sequencing when the goal is language acquisition.Finally, the fifth hypothesis, theAffective Filterhypothesis, embodies Krashen's view that a number of 'affective variables' play a facilitative, but non-causal, role in second language acquisition. These variables include: motivation, self-confidence and anxiety. Krashen claims that learners with high motivation, self-confidence, a good self-image, and a low level of anxiety are better equipped for success in second language acquisition. Low motivation, low self-esteem, and debilitating anxiety can combine to 'raise' the affective filter and form a 'mental block' that prevents comprehensible input from being used for acquisition. In other words, when the filter is 'up' it impedes language acquisition. On the other hand, positive affect is necessary, but not sufficient on its own, for acquisition to take place.O CONSTRUTIVISMO NO ENSINO DE LNGUASA teoria de Krashen fornece substrato ao Natural Approach e ao Communicative Approach, verses norte-americana e britnica, respectivamente, do construtivismo no ensino de lnguas.O construtivismo preconiza o desenvolvimento de habilidades e conhecimento como resultado de ao e interao do ser inteligente com o meio scio-ambiental. Portanto, o ambiente fator determinante. No caso de lnguas estrangeiras, o ambiente apropriado aquele que oferece convvio multicultural.AMBIENTES MULTICULTURAISDE CONVVIO: Ambiente de convvio multiculural ou bicultural aquele composto de pessoas de diferentes nacionalidades e culturas, que proporciona o desenvolvimento do conhecimento necessrio e das habilidades bsicas necessrias para que todos possam se comunicar em qualquer situao e nele se sintam vontade. Quanto maior o grau de afinidade entre seus integrantes, mais completa ser a assimilao.

The Role of Grammar in Krashen's ViewAccording to Krashen, the study of the structure of the language can have general educational advantages and values that high schools and colleges may want to include in their language programs. It should be clear, however, that examining irregularity, formulating rules and teaching complex facts about the target language is not language teaching, but rather is "language appreciation" or linguistics.The only instance in which the teaching of grammar can result in language acquisition (and proficiency) is when the students are interested in the subject andthe target language is usedas a medium of instruction. Very often, when this occurs, both teachers and students are convinced that the study of formal grammar is essential for second language acquisition, and the teacher is skillful enough to present explanations in the target language so that the students understand. In other words, the teacher talk meets the requirements for comprehensible input and perhaps with the students' participation the classroom becomes an environment suitable for acquisition. Also, the filter is low in regard to the language of explanation, as the students' conscious efforts are usually on the subject matter, onwhatis being talked about, and not the medium.This is a subtle point. In effect, both teachers and students are deceiving themselves. They believe that it is the subject matter itself, the study of grammar, that is responsible for the students' progress, but in reality their progress is coming from the medium and not the message. Any subject matter that held their interest would do just as well.O PAPEL DA GRAMTICA SEGUNDO KRASHENDe acordo com Krashen, o estudo formal da estrutura de uma lngua pode vir a oferecer certos benefcios, fazendo com que escolas secundrias bem como cursos de nvel universitrio (letras e lingustica) tenham interesse em incluir o estudo da gramtica em seus programas de lnguas estrangeiras. Deve ficar claro, entretanto, que a anlise das complexidades da lngua, a formulao de regras e o estudo de suas excees no se constituem em ensino e aprendizado que produzam proficincia comunicativa, mas apenas "apreciao" da lngua, ou, simplesmente, lingustica.A nica situao na qual o ensino da gramtica pode resultar em assimilao e desenvolvimento da proficincia, ocorre se duas condies forem atendidas: os alunos tm interesse no assunto gramtica; a lngua usada na sala de aula pelo professor a lngua estrangeira.Normalmente, quando isso ocorre, ambos, professor e alunos, acreditam que o estudo formal da gramtica essencial para a assimilao e o desenvolvimento da proficincia. Alm disso, o professor hbil o suficiente para apresentar suas explicaes unicamente na lngua estrangeira, de maneira que os alunos entendam. Na verdade, o que ocorre que a linguagem usada pelo professor se configura em perfeitocomprehensible inpute, com a natural participao dos alunos devido ao seu interesse, acaba criando-se na sala de aula um ambiente adequado para que quelanguage acquisitionocorra. Em paralelo a isso, oaffective filter baixo, uma vez que a ateno dos alunos se concentra no assunto em si, naquilo a respeito de que se fala, e no na forma da linguagem usada.Essa questo muito sutil e curiosa. Na verdade, professores e alunos podem estar iludindo-se a si prprios. Ambos acreditam ser o conhecimento metalingustico adquirido atravs do estudo da gramtica responsvel pelo desenvolvimento da proficincia do aluno, quando na realidade o desenvolvimento vem do exerccio comunicativo e no do contedo da mensagem. Qualquer tema que venha a despertar o interesse do aluno e cativ-lo, que seja apresentado dentro de seu nvel de competncia, produzir o mesmo resultado. E se alm do interesse intelectual, houver envolvimento no plano psicolgico e afetivo, o resultado ser surpreen

Stephen Krashen's Theory of Second Language Acquisition

Language acquisition does not require extensive use of conscious grammatical rules, and does not require tedious drill.Acquisition 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.The best methods are therefore those that supply 'comprehensible input' in low anxiety situations, containing messages that students really want to hear. These methods do not force early production in the second language, but allow students to produce when they are 'ready', recognizing that improvement comes from supplying communicative and comprehensible input, and not from forcing and correcting production.In the real world, conversations with sympathetic native speakers who are willing to help the acquirer understand are very helpful.IntroductionStephen Krashen (University of Southern California) is an expert in the field of linguistics, specializing in theories of language acquisition and development. Much of his recent research has involved the study of non-English and bilingual language acquisition. During the past 20 years, he has published well over 100 books and articles and has been invited to deliver over 300 lectures at universities throughout the United States and Canada.This is a brief description of Krashen's widely known and well accepted theory of second language acquisition, which has had a large impact in all areas of second language research and teaching since the 1980s.Description of Krashen's Theory of Second Language AcquisitionKrashen's theory of second language acquisition consists of five main hypotheses: the Acquisition-Learning hypothesis; the Monitor hypothesis; the Natural Order hypothesis; the Input hypothesis; and the Affective Filter hypothesis.TheAcquisition-Learningdistinction is the most fundamental of all the hypotheses in Krashen's theory and the most widely known among linguists and language practitioners.According to Krashen there are two independent systems of second language performance: 'the acquired system' and 'the learned system'. The 'acquired system' or 'acquisition' is the product of a subconscious process very similar to the process children undergo when they acquire their first language. It requires meaningful interaction in the target language - natural communication - in which speakers are concentrated not in the form of their utterances, but in the communicative act.The "learned system" or "learning" is the product of formal instruction and it comprises a conscious process which results in conscious knowledge 'about' the language, for example knowledge of grammar rules. According to Krashen 'learning' is less important than 'acquisition'.(Veja o texto ao lado e tambm outra pgina em portugus sobreAcquisition/Learning).TheMonitorhypothesis explains the relationship between acquisition and learning and defines the influence of the latter on the former. The monitoring function is the practical result of the learned grammar. According to Krashen, the acquisition system is the utterance initiator, while the learning system performs the role of the 'monitor' or the 'editor'. The 'monitor' acts in a planning, editing and correcting function when three specific conditions are met: that is, the second language learner has sufficient time at his/her disposal, he/she focuses on form or thinks about correctness, and he/she knows the rule.It appears that the role of conscious learning is somewhat limited in second language performance. According to Krashen, the role of the monitor is - or should be - minor, being used only to correct deviations from "normal" speech and to give speech a more 'polished' appearance.Krashen also suggests that there is individual variation among language learners with regard to 'monitor' use. He distinguishes those learners that use the 'monitor' all the time (over-users); those learners who have not learned or who prefer not to use their conscious knowledge (under-users); and those learners that use the 'monitor' appropriately (optimal users). An evaluation of the person's psychological profile can help to determine to what group they belong. Usually extroverts are under-users, while introverts and perfectionists are over-users. Lack of self-confidence is frequently related to the over-use of the "monitor".TheNatural Orderhypothesis is based on research findings (Dulay & Burt, 1974; Fathman, 1975; Makino, 1980 cited in Krashen, 1987) which suggested that the acquisition of grammatical structures follows a 'natural order' which is predictable. For a given language, some grammatical structures tend to be acquired early while others late. This order seemed to be independent of the learners' age, L1 background, conditions of exposure, and although the agreement between individual acquirers was not always 100% in the studies, there were statistically significant similarities that reinforced the existence of a Natural Order of language acquisition. Krashen however points out that the implication of the natural order hypothesis is not that a language program syllabus should be based on the order found in the studies. In fact, he rejects grammatical sequencing when the goal is language acquisition.TheInputhypothesis is Krashen's attempt to explain how the learner acquires a second language. In other words, this hypothesis is Krashen's explanation of how second language acquisition takes place. So, the Input hypothesis is only concerned with 'acquisition', not 'learning'. According to this hypothesis, the learner improves and progresses along the 'natural order' when he/she receives second language 'input' that is one step beyond his/her current stage of linguistic competence. For example, if a learner is at a stage 'i', then acquisition takes place when he/she is exposed to 'Comprehensible Input' that belongs to level 'i + 1'. Since not all of the learners can be at the same level of linguistic competence at the same time, Krashen suggests thatnatural communicative inputis the key to designing a syllabus, ensuring in this way that each learner will receive some 'i + 1' input that is appropriate for his/her current stage of linguistic competence.Finally, the fifth hypothesis, theAffective Filterhypothesis, embodies Krashen's view that a number of 'affective variables' play a facilitative, but non-causal, role in second language acquisition. These variables include: motivation, self-confidence and anxiety. Krashen claims that learners with high motivation, self-confidence, a good self-image, and a low level of anxiety are better equipped for success in second language acquisition. Low motivation, low self-esteem, and debilitating anxiety can combine to 'raise' the affective filter and form a 'mental block' that prevents comprehensible input from being used for acquisition. In other words, when the filter is 'up' it impedes language acquisition. On the other hand, positive affect is necessary, but not sufficient on its own, for acquisition to take place.The Role of Grammar in Krashen's ViewAccording to Krashen, the study of the structure of the language can have general educational advantages and values that high schools and colleges may want to include in their language programs. It should be clear, however, that examining irregularity, formulating rules and teaching complex facts about the target language is not language teaching, but rather is "language appreciation" or linguistics.The only instance in which the teaching of grammar can result in language acquisition (and proficiency) is when the students are interested in the subject andthe target language is usedas a medium of instruction. Very often, when this occurs, both teachers and students are convinced that the study of formal grammar is essential for second language acquisition, and the teacher is skillful enough to present explanations in the target language so that the students understand. In other words, the teacher talk meets the requirements for comprehensible input and perhaps with the students" participation the classroom becomes an environment suitable for acquisition. Also, the filter is low in regard to the language of explanation, as the students" conscious efforts are usually on the subject matter, onwhatis being talked about, and not the medium.This is a subtle point. In effect, both teachers and students are deceiving themselves. They believe that it is the subject matter itself, the study of grammar, that is responsible for the students" progress, but in reality their progress is coming from the medium and not the message. Any subject matter that held their interest would do just as well.References Crystal, DavidThe Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language.Cambridge University Press, 1997. Krashen, Stephen D.Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition.Prentice-Hall International, 1987. Krashen, Stephen D.Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning.Prentice-Hall International, 1988.

Krashen's 6 HypothesesIn her reflection Marguerite mentions how her students are apprehensive to produce spoken language. She states that they are anxious about using the TL. Language teachers and learners alike know that producing oral language can be a challenge but that it is a necessary part of learning a language. Like Marguerite's students many language students may feel worried about the level of their language. This often prevents them from speaking or taking in the language at all. In addition, many learners tend to monitor their use of the language too much, focusing more on accuracy than fluency which in turn prevents them from using the language in a communicative manner. In this section, we will look at the work of Stephen Krashen, specifically his 6 hypotheses on language acquisition, in order to better understand the challenges that might arise during the language learning process.back to case study

What are Krashen's Hypotheses?Krashen's theory of second language acquisition consists of six main hypotheses: the Acquisition-Learning hypothesis the Monitor hypothesis the Natural Order hypothesis the Input hypothesis the Affective Filter hypothesis the Reading HypothesisHow do Krashen's Hypotheses apply to the SL/FL classroom?Explanation of HypothesisApplication for Teaching

The Acquisition-Learning hypothesisAccording 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.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 hypothesisThis 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.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 asCommunicative competency.

The Natural Order hypothesisAccording 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.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 usescaffoldingto introduce more difficult concepts.

The Input hypothesisThis 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 asi+ 1, in order to allow learners to continue to progress with their language development.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 hypothesisAccording 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, self-confidence, motivation and stress.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, clickhere.

The Reading HypothesisThis hypothesis basically states that the more we read in a SL the greater our vocabulary will be.It is important to involve reading in the language classroom to increase knowledge of the language and the way it is used in real-life contexts.

What do Krashen's Hypotheses look like in the classroom?Look at the cartoon and decide which of Krashen's Hypotheses apply to this student. Explain your answers.

Theinput hypothesis, also known as themonitor model, is a group of five hypotheses ofsecond-language acquisitiondeveloped by the linguistStephen Krashenin the 1970s and 1980s. Krashen originally formulated the input hypothesis as just one of the five hypotheses, but over time the term has come to refer to the five hypotheses as a group. The hypotheses are the input hypothesis, the acquisitionlearning hypothesis, the monitor hypothesis, the natural order hypothesis and the affective filter hypothesis. The input hypothesis was first published in 1977.[1][2]The hypotheses put primary importance on the comprehensible input (CI) that language learners are exposed to. Understanding spoken and written language input is seen as the only mechanism that results in the increase of underlyinglinguistic competence, and language output is not seen as having any effect on learners' ability. Furthermore, Krashen claimed that linguistic competence is only advanced when language is subconsciouslyacquired, and that consciouslearningcannot be used as a source of spontaneous language production. Finally, learning is seen to be heavily dependent on the mood of the learner, with learning being impaired if the learner is under stress or does not want to learn the language.Krashen's hypotheses have been influential inlanguage education, particularly in theUnited States, but have received criticism from some academics. Two of the main criticisms are that the hypotheses are untestable, and that they assume a degree of separation betweenacquisitionandlearningthat has not been proven to exist.

Krashen's Five Hypotheses

TheNatural Order Hypothesis'we acquire the rules of language in a predictable order'

TheAcquisition/ Learning Hypothesis'adults have two distinctive ways of developing competences in second languages .. acquisition, that is by using language for real communication ... learning .. "knowing about" language' (Krashen & Terrell 1983)

TheMonitor Hypothesis'conscious learning ... can only be used as a Monitor or an editor' (Krashen & Terrell 1983)

TheInput Hypothesis'humans acquire language in only one way - by understanding messages or by receiving "comprehensible input"'

TheAffective Filter Hypothesis'a mental block, caused by affective factors ... that prevents input from reaching the language acquisition device' (Krashen, 1985, p.100)

AcquisitionLearning

implicit, subconsciousexplicit, conscious

informal situationsformal situations

uses grammatical 'feel'uses grammatical rules

depends on attitudedepends on aptitude

stable order of acquisitionsimple to complex order of learning

Combined model of acquisition and productionTaken from Cook (1993)The learner hears comprehensible input; however some of it is filtered out by an Affective Filter set by preconceptions about language etc. This input is converted by a Language Acquisition Device (LAD) into Acquired Knowledge; i.e. Krashen builds in a Chomskyan black-box that automatically acquires language and he does not specify it in more detail. In the actual production of speech, seen on the right of the figure, Acquired Knowledge is used to produce utterances and any Learned Knowledge that the person has acquired by other means is used to Monitor this process or the Output itself.Evidence for the Input Hypothesis(chiefly Krashen 1985)i)people speak to children acquiring their first language in special ways

ii)people speak to L2 learners in special ways

iii)L2 learners often go through an initial Silent Period

iv)the comparative success of younger and older learners reflects provision of comprehensible input

v)the more comprehensible input the greater the L2 proficiency

vi)lack of comprehensible input delays language acquisition

vii)teaching methods work according to the extent that they use comprehensible input

viii)immersion teaching is successful because it provides comprehensible input

ix)bilingual programs succeed to the extent they provide comprehensible input

Academic reactions to KrashenEllis (1990, p.57): 'the lucidity, simplicity, and explanatory power of Krashen's theory'.Lightbown (1984, p.246): a combination of 'a linguistic theory (through its "natural order" hypothesis), social psychological theory (through its "affective filter" hypothesis), psychological learning theory (through its acquisition-learning hypothesis), discourse analysis and sociolinguistic theory (through both the comprehensible input hypothesis and the "monitor" hypothesis)'.Mitchell & Myles (1998, p.126): 'The concepts of 'understanding' and 'noticing a gap' are not clearly operationalised, or consistently proposed; it is not clear how the learner's present state of knowledge ('i') is to be characterised, or indeed whether the 'i+1' formulation is intended to apply to all aspects of language, from lexis to phonology and syntax.'Gregg (1984, p.94): 'each of Krashen's hypotheses is marked by serious flaws: undefinable or ill-defined terms, unmotivated constructs, lack of empirical content and thus of falsifiability, lack of explanatory power'McLaughlin (1987, p.56): 'Krashen's theory fails at every juncture ... Krashen has not defined his terms with enough precision, the empirical basis of the theory is weak, and the theory is not clear in its predictions)Ellis (1985, p.266): the Monitor Model 'poses serious theoretical problems regarding the validity of the 'acquisition-learning' distinction, the operation of Monitoring, and the explanation of variability in language-learner language'The Natural Approach(Krashen & Terrell, 1983; Terrell et al, 1997)General premises1. The goal is 'the ability to communicate with native speakers of the target language'2. Comprehension precedes production the Silent Period3. Production 'emerges'4. Acquisition activities are central, though some Monitoring may be useful for some people sometimes5. Lower the Affective Filter: they won't learn if their affective barrier is too high(6. Speech emerges in stages. Terrell et al 1997)

(7. Group work encourages speech. Terrell et al 1997)

(8. Speech emergence is characterized by grammatical errors. Terrell et al 1997)Techniques(all acquisition activities)a) Affective-Humanistic activitiesdialogues short and useful - 'open' dialogues interviews pairwork on personal information personal charts and tables preference ranking opinion polls on favourite activities etc revealing information about yourself e.g. what I had for breakfast activating the imagination e.g. give Napoleon advice about his Russian campaignb) Problem-solving activities task and series e.g. components of an activity such as washing the car charts, graphs, maps e.g. busfares, finding the way developing speech for particular occasions e.g. What do you say if advertisementsc) Games,e.g. What is strange about a bird swimming?'d) Content activities,e.g. academic subject matter such as mathsSOME ANTI-KRASHEN OPINIONS FROM CALIFORNIAtaken fromKrashenBurn(see end)Alice Callaghan (Episcopal priest), ...a parasite on the backs of poor Latino children.Isaac Cubillos, editor of Latino Beat ...more than 2.5-million kids statewide have not made it as a result of bilingual education. What an atrocious situation, and Krashen helped create this."Isaac Cubillos, editor of Latino Beat, I discovered that Dr. Krashen has done no research. It is purely a theory. There is no test data, there are no schools where it's been proved, and it's based on thin air.Christine Rossell "Krashen denied having ever criticized that study. He will say anything to win over a room."David Tokofsky, "This is how every administrator in the state got promoted from assistant principal to principal, or from teacher to bilingual coordinator, or from regional supe to district supe: By chanting the Mantra of 'Rama, Rama, Krashen, Krashen, Rama, Rama.'one stunned non-educator in the audience: "An impromptu receiving line formed of teachers lining up for a chance to touch their guru, their Pied Piper. It was eery. It was the Church of Krashen."

The Affective Filter Hypothesis: Definition and Criticism

More Information :affective filter hypothesis,language acquisition,language learning,monitor modelLinguist and educator Stephen Krashen proposed the Monitor Model, his theory of second language acquisition, inPrinciples and practice in second language acquisitionas published in 1982. According to the Monitor Model, five hypotheses account for the acquisition of a second language:1. Acquisition-learning hypothesis2. Natural order hypothesis3. Monitor hypothesis4. Input hypothesis5. Affective filter hypothesisHowever, in spite of the popularity and influence of the Monitor Model, the five hypotheses are not without criticism. The following sections offer a description of the fifth and final hypothesis of the theory, the affective filter hypothesis, as well as the major criticism by other linguistics and educators surrounding the hypothesis.Definition of the Affective Filter HypothesisThe fifth hypothesis, the affective filter hypothesis, accounts for the influence of affective factors on second language acquisition. Affect refers to non-linguistic 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.Criticism of the Affective Filter HypothesisThe final critique of Krashens Monitor Model questions the claim of the affective filter hypothesis that affective factors alone account for individual variation in second language acquisition. First, Krashen claims that children lack the affective filter that causes most adult second language learners to never completely master their second language. Such a claim fails to withstand scrutiny because children also experience differences in non-linguistic variables such as motivation, self-confidence, and anxiety that supposedly account for child-adult differences in second language learning.Furthermore, evidence in the form of adult second language learners who acquire a second language to a native-like competence except for a single grammatical feature problematizes the claim that an affective filter prevents comprehensible input from reaching the language acquisition device. As Manmay Zafar asks, How does the filter determine which parts of language are to be screened in/out? In other words, the affective filter hypothesis fails to answer the most important question about affect alone accounting for individual variation in second language acquisition.Although the Monitor Model has been influential in the field of second language acquisition, the fifth and final hypothesis, the affective filter hypothesis, has not been without criticism as evidenced by the critiques offered by other linguists and educators in the field.SourcesGass, Susan M. & Larry Selinker. 2008.Second language acquisition: An introductory course, 3rd edn. New York: Routledge.Gregg, Kevin R. 1984. Krashens monitor and Occams razor.Applied Linguistics5(2). 79-100.Krashen, Stephen D. 1982.Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.http://www.sdkrashen.com/Principles_and_Practice/Principles_and_Practice.pdf.Lightbrown, Patsy M. & Nina Spada. 2006.How languages are learned, 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Zafar, Manmay. 2009. Monitoring the monitor': A critique of Krashens five hypotheses. Dhaka University Journal of Linguistics 2(4). 139-146.Share25Tweet1444Share6.7K

Previous post:Linguistic Definition of Adjective Phrase ModifierNext post:Linguistic Definition of Predicate NominativeYou might also like: Grammatical Forms of English Determiner Phrases Objects Pronouns in English Grammar The Ideology of Teaching English Prepositions Spanish Pronouns: Subject, Object, Reflexive, and Prepositional Pronouns Using Postpositions as Postpositional Phrase HeadsLinkwithin Share this post: image: http://www.linguisticsgirl.com/wp-content/themes/cadabrapress/images/icons/facebook.png

image: http://www.linguisticsgirl.com/wp-content/themes/cadabrapress/images/icons/twitter.png

image: http://www.linguisticsgirl.com/wp-content/themes/cadabrapress/images/icons/digg.png

image: http://www.linkwithin.com/pixel.png

image: http://www.linguisticsgirl.com/wp-content/uploads/userphoto/2.thumbnail.jpgAuthor:Heather JohnsonHeather earned a BA in English studies with a minor in creative writing from Illinois State University in May 2007 and an MS in library and information science from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in May 2009. In December 2011, she finished an MS in English studies with an emphasis in linguistics at Illinois State University for which she wrote a thesis on multiple modals in American English.

Read more at http://www.linguisticsgirl.com/the-affective-filter-hypothesis-definition-and-criticism/#BlfHWFFmjykED8fa.99

affective-filter hypothesis: Krashen argues thatcomprehensible inputis not enough to ensure language acquisition. Language learners also have to be receptive to that input. When learnersare bored, angry, frustrated, nervous, unmotivatedor stressed, they may not be receptive to language input and so they 'screen' the input. This screen is referred to as theaffective filter. This suggests that when learners are bored, angry, frustrated, nervous, unmotivatedor stressed, they may be unsuccessful at learning a second language. This has very practical implications for language teachers: lower their affective filters. One problem with this hypothesis is the difficulty in determining cause and effect: Are language learners unsuccessful because they are bored, angry, and stressed? Or are language learners bored, angry, and stressed because they are unsuccessful?

Theorder of acquisitionis a concept inlanguage acquisitiondescribing the specific order in which all language learners acquire the grammatical features of their first language. This concept is based on the observation that all children acquire their first language in a fixed, universal order, regardless of the specific grammatical structure of the language they learn. Linguistic research has largely confirmed that this phenomenon is true for first-language learners; order of acquisition for second-language learners is much less consistent. It is not clear why the order differs for second-language learners, though current research suggests this variability may stem from first-language interference or general cognitive interference from nonlinguistic mental faculties.

The Monitor Hypothesis: Definition and Criticism

More Information :language acquisition,language learning,monitor hypothesis,monitor modelStephen Krashen is an educator and linguist who proposed the Monitor Model as his theory of second language acquisition in his influential textPrinciples and practice in second language acquisitionin 1982. The Monitor Model posits five hypotheses about second language acquisition and learning:1. Acquisition-learning hypothesis2. Natural order hypothesis3. Monitor hypothesis4. Input hypothesis5. Affective filter hypothesisHowever, despite the popularity and influence of the Monitor Model, the five hypotheses are not without criticism. The following sections offer a description of the third hypothesis of the theory, the monitor hypothesis, as well as the major criticism by other linguistics and educators surrounding the hypothesis.Definition of the Monitor HypothesisThe third hypothesis, the monitor hypothesis, complements the acquisition-learning hypothesis by claiming 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.However, according to the monitor hypothesis, explicit knowledge of a language rule is not sufficient for the utilization of the Monitor; a language user must also have an adequate amount of time to consciously think about and apply learned rules. Additionally, the three conditions required by the Monitortime, focus, and knowledgeare, as Krashen asserts, necessary and not sufficient, meaning that, despite the convenement of all three conditions, a language user may not utilize the Monitor.Criticism of the Monitor HypothesisThe major critique of the monitor hypothesis expands on the critique of the acquisition-learning hypothesis. According to the monitor hypothesis, the main purpose of language learning is to function as a Monitor for output produced by acquired system. However, as critics reveal through deeper investigation of the acquisition-learning distinction, to separate language learning clearly and adequately from language acquisition is impossible. Consequently, determining that the function of the learned system is as a Monitor only remains likewise impossible to prove.Additionally, that the claim of learning-as-Monitor applies only to output after production invites further criticism of the hypothesis; second language learners can and do use the learned system to produce output as well as to facilitate comprehension. Such questions and evidence, therefore, invalidate the central claim of the monitor hypothesis.Therefore, in spite of the influence of the Monitor Model in the field of second language acquisition, the third hypothesis, the monitor hypothesis, has not been without criticism as evidenced by the critiques offered by other linguists and educators in the field.ReferencesGass, Susan M. & Larry Selinker. 2008.Second language acquisition: An introductory course, 3rd edn. New York: Routledge.Gregg, Kevin R. 1984. Krashens monitor and Occams razor.Applied Linguistics5(2). 79-100.Krashen, Stephen D. 1982.Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.http://www.sdkrashen.com/Principles_and_Practice/Principles_and_Practice.pdf.McLaughlin, Barry. 1978. The monitor model: Some methodological considerations.Language Learning28(2). 309-332.Zafar, Manmay. 2009. Monitoring the monitor': A critique of Krashens five hypotheses. Dhaka University Journal of Linguistics 2(4). 139-146.Share10Tweet931Share5K

Previous post:Yoda Muses on SyntaxNext post:Linguistic Definition of Verb Phrase Modifier Share this post: image: http://www.linguisticsgirl.com/wp-content/themes/cadabrapress/images/icons/facebook.png

image: http://www.linguisticsgirl.com/wp-content/themes/cadabrapress/images/icons/twitter.png

image: http://www.linguisticsgirl.com/wp-content/themes/cadabrapress/images/icons/digg.png

image: http://www.linkwithin.com/pixel.png

image: http://www.linguisticsgirl.com/wp-content/uploads/userphoto/2.thumbnail.jpgAuthor:Heather JohnsonHeather earned a BA in English studies with a minor in creative writing from Illinois State University in May 2007 and an MS in library and information science from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in May 2009. In December 2011, she finished an MS in English studies with an emphasis in linguistics at Illinois State University for which she wrote a thesis on multiple modals in American English.

Read more at http://www.linguisticsgirl.com/the-monitor-hypothesis-definition-and-criticism/#cWiCjW6CB3d0R2dT.99

Monitor ModelBrief OverviewThis is a brief overview of the monitor model for the reader to understandthe main points. Readers are encouraged to study more in-depth to gain a full appreciation of the history, development, and implementation of this theory.At the end are guiding questions for the educator to contemplate about instruction and the monitor model.The monitor model is an interesting set of hypotheses that were developed by Stephen Krashen in the late 1970s. The monitor model is interesting because some of its premises have been disproved, but during the 80s and 90s the monitor model was adopted by some educational systems much to their chagrin. However, this is not to say that this theory is unusable for the language educator, but what is taken from the theory and applied to the classroom must be weighted accordingly.Acquisition-Learning HypothesisThe origin of this hypothesis is completely flawed and science has disproved the basis, but if examined from a different aspect, can be beneficial to instruction.Krashen sawacquisitionassubconscious learningthat was facilitated by something Chomsky had proposed in universal grammar (UG Theory) called the language acquisition device (LAD). The LAD was a feature in the brain that helped people learn languages, but Chomsky would have to later admit that there was no such thing.If acquisition was subconscious, then thelearningpart of the hypothesis was what actually happens in the classroom. Since the educator is making the students consciously aware of the information, this was considered learning which is not as affective as acquisition.Although there is no LAD as Krashen had considered when penning this hypothesis, many researchers do note there can be a difference between subconscious learning (acquisition) and conscious learning (learning).How Not To Use Explicit Teaching Needed: The educational systems that adopted the monitor model were damaged by acquisition-learning hypothesis because grammar was not explicitly taught. As a result, writing suffered immensely because direct instruction of grammar is essential for academic/school writing.Find out more information on how to not to use Monitor Model in our online SLA course. Get information and discounts on our course HERE.How To Use Learning: Teenagers, young adults, and adults can really benefit from actually learning strategies and explicit grammar instruction. Writing is one of the four skills that benefits most from grammar instruction in older students, so make it part of the curriculum.Find out more information on how to use Monitor Model in our online SLA course. Get information and discounts on our course HERE.Monitor HypothesisThe monitor hypothesis involves the acquisition center being monitored by the learning system. So the acquisition center would produce language and what the student is/has been learning will allow the student to monitor output. If the output matches, then no problem, but if the language produced is not correct, then the monitoring of the learning system will help correct the acquisition center.However, Krashen warns that over-monitoring can cause language production to be more geared towards accuracy than fluency.How To Use Accuracy/Fluency:Krashen is correct in stating too much monitoring will impede fluency at the benefit of being accurate. A balance should always be central as being too far on either end of the spectrum is not good for communication.Natural Order HypothesisKrashen states that there is a natural order to acquiring language rules.Morpheme order studiescovers this in more detail along with strategies for use.Input HypothesisThe input hypothesis revolves around students receiving an appropriate amount of input. However the hypothesis believes it is not just input, but comprehensible input that is easily understood by the learner that will deliver the grammar needed.How Not To Use Adults:Input and grammar acquisition works for young learners as they have the ability pick up language with proper interaction, but adults do not possess the ability to learn naturally like children. Instead, adults use cognitive strategies to learn complex systems like grammar and benefit from well structure taught input.How To Use Proper Input:This can be utilized across all instruction and not just grammar. Students not only need input, but they need input that is easy to understand. Teaching language or teaching materials that are too high for the students do little to progress their language ability or understanding.This is a major key to instruction.Every educator needs to put this near the top of his list of teaching beliefs.Affective Filter HypothesisThis hypothesis suggests affective filter is a mental screen that filters input from reaching the language acquisition center in the brain. There are many things that can trigger the mental filter such as conscious learning, motivation, stress, classroom environment, confidence, etcHow Not To Use Broken Record:As stated before, conscious learning of grammatical features is not bad. Conscious learning is beneficial for older learners with the ability to use cognitive reasoning. For young learners, conscious learning will not be as beneficial.How To Use Factors Decrease Learning:Although there is no actual filter in the brain, it is well documented that issues such as motivation, stress, classroom temperature, confidence, etc do contribute to a decrease in learning. Any educator who has taught in a sweltering classroom will understand this point. The educator should try to address as many of these issues as possible as environment has a big influence on learning.