7/30/2019 Language Acquisition and CLT

1/2

Language acquisition and CLTTEACHING INDEX|NEXT

Crucial differences between L1 and L2 acquisition[Robert O'Neill - April 1998]

A great deal of what is called 'Communicative Language Teaching' is based on what is essentially a'nativist' view of second language (L2) acquisition. A 'nativist' view assumes consciously orunconsciously that somehow L2 learning can and should be like learning our native language (L1).This is wishful thinking and is based on a profound misconception about the nature of L2 learning -just as it is a misconception about how L1 acquisition occurs. The best way to explore the differencesbetween the two processes is to view them side-by-side in parallel, as below.

L1 ACQUISITION

1. L1 acquisition is genetically triggered at the most critical stage of the child's cognitivedevelopment.

2. The 'engine' of language its syntactic system is 'informationally encapsulated' whichmeans that children are not even aware of developing a complex, rule-governed, hierarchicalsystem. Most L1 speakers do not even realise this is what they are using.

3. The L1 is typically acquired at the crucial period of cognitive development; pre-puberty, whenL1 and other crucial life-skills are also acquired or learned.

4. Children never resist L1 acquisition, any more than they resist learning to walk.5. Given even minimal 'input' during critical pre-pubescent development, all humans acquire the

L1 of the society or social group they are born into as a natural and essential part of theirlives. Even brain-damaged and/or retarded children usually acquire the full grammatical codeof the language of their society or social group.

6. In short, L1 acquisition is an essential, biologicallydriven process. It is part of everyindividual's evolutionary history and development in the most critical stage of that individual'sacquisition of essential life-skills.

L2 LEARNING

1. L2 learning is not genetically triggered in any way unless the child grows up bi-lingually (inwhich case, it is not really L2 learning at all).

2. The syntax of the L2 is not acquired unconsciously , or at least not in the way L1 syntax isacquired. Few L2 learners develop the same degree of unconscious, rule-governed insight intoand use of the L2 which they demonstrate with the L1.

3. The L2 is not learned as part of the learner's general cognitive development. It is not anessential life-skill in the same way that the L1 is.

4. There is often great conscious or unconscious resistance to L2 learning.5. Many highly intelligent individuals with impressive learning skills often have great problems

learning an L2. Many L2 learners 'fossilise' at some stage, so that even if they use the L2

regularly, and are constantly exposed to input in it, they fail to develop full grammatical or'generative' competence.

6. L2 learning is not a biologically-driven process. It is not an essential aspect of an individual'sgeneral development. especially when the L2 is simply another subject on an alreadyoverloaded school curriculum or something that has to be undertaken by people with busylives and heavy work-loads.

Some Conclusions I Personally Have Drawn From The Foregoing

http://www.tedpower.co.uk/teflindex.htmhttp://www.tedpower.co.uk/teflindex.htmhttp://www.tedpower.co.uk/esl0416.htmlhttp://www.tedpower.co.uk/esl0416.htmlhttp://www.tedpower.co.uk/esl0416.htmlhttp://www.tedpower.co.uk/esl0416.htmlhttp://www.tedpower.co.uk/teflindex.htm

7/30/2019 Language Acquisition and CLT

2/2

1. Speech-act theory, upon which so much of so-called 'Communicative Language Teaching'(CLT) is based, has some importance and should not be ignored. Yet the engine of generativecompetence syntax is just as important. In fact, I would argue that it is even more so, justas I would argue that it is as wrong to ignore the teaching and/or study of syntax as it is to

ignore the pragmatic acts of everyday language-use which are the focus of speech-act theory.In other words, the question is not 'Is syntax important' but 'How if at all can it be taughtand learned in the study of any L2?'

2. I believe that texts typical, naturalistic (but not 'authentic') instances of every-day languageuse should be the central vehicle of my own teaching. Teaching and learning with andthrough texts makes it possible to study both the generative and pragmatic domains oflanguage and also favours 'unconscious' learning. of language as text - language in context.

3. As important as systematic and regular study of the underlying generative system is, it is evenmore important to maintain the interest of learners and to give them a certain degree ofconfidence that they can and will learn the L2 to a reasonable degree of accuracy and fluency.Texts also make this possible, especially if they have 'narrative-drive' that is, if they arousethe interest of learners in what is going to happen next and what may have happened beforethe time-focus of the text.

4. Just as all good 'native-speaker' texts are directed at particular native-speakers and written,spoken and edited with a clear idea of what they are likely to understand and be interested in,so all good 'non-native' texts should be created with the same clear understanding of whatthose non-native speakers are likely to understand and be interested in. Such texts may be

based to some degree on 'authentic' texts, but once any text is adapted or changed in someway, it is no longer 'authentic'. Authenticity for its own sake is an empty and irrelevant fetish.

5. It is essential for the text to be 'accessible'- so that learners do not spend too much timestruggling simply to make sense of the text and all the words or structures they do not know.In real-life with our own language, we usually 'switch off' when we encounter such texts.Typical instances of 'authentic' speech acts and typical 'authentic texts taken from newspapersand other sources are often incomprehensible even to native-speakers when the backgroundcontext is no longer 'here and now'.

6. Texts for classroom use need to be fairly short, so that there can be time in the lesson forvarious activities and exercises that encourage learners to use the language of the text and tomodify it for their own purposes or the purposes of the lesson. Most typical newspaperarticles, even from sources likes 'Newsweek', are simply too long.

7. The text is there not just to be read but to generate language use by the class, and to lead tofurther study. So it will almost always be adapted for these purposes and thus cease to be

'authentic'. Authentic materials

in the narrow sense of the word are often boring and hardlyever as relevant or as useful as texts that have been skilfully-written for specific didactic aims.Of course, such texts are often based on 'authentic' materials. They should reflect differenttypes of such texts just as they should be naturalistic and interesting.

8. The argument that texts should be 'authentic' is as superficial and misconceived as the beliefthat L2 learning can and should be like L1 learning. All genuine 'authentic' texts in the realworld are created with definite purposes and for clearly perceived and defined audiences.Texts created or designed for classroom purposes must have their own purposes and theirown clearly defined audiences, as well.

http://www.tedpower.co.uk/esl0412.html

http://www.tedpower.co.uk/esl0412.htmlhttp://www.tedpower.co.uk/esl0412.htmlhttp://www.tedpower.co.uk/esl0412.html