Student’s Name/ ID Student’s Name/ ID ： ： Vivian 9722607Vivian 9722607

Betty 9722609Betty 9722609

Yuri 9722616 Yuri 9722616

InstructorInstructor ：： Philip LinPhilip Lin

DateDate ：： Dec. 22, 2008Dec. 22, 20081

Q2 ： What is the weakness of Krashen's Hypotheses?

2

3

My own bias… is to avoid use of the terms conscious and unconscious in second language theory. I believe that theses terms are too laden with surplus meaning and too difficult to define empirically to be useful theoretically. Hence my critique of Krashen’s distinction between learning and acquisition- a distinction that assumes that it is possible to differentiate what is conscious from what is unconscious.

McLaughlin (1990a, p627)

4

In McLaughlin’s view, then, a language acquisition theory appears to conscious/subconscious distinction is greatly weakened by our inability to identify just what that distinction is.

In McLaughlin’s view, then, a language acquisition theory appears to conscious/subconscious distinction is greatly weakened by our inability to identify just what that distinction is.

5

Krashen’s play fast and loose with the definitions…If unconscious knowledge is capable of being becoming to unconscious- and this seems to be a reasonable assumption- then there is no reason whatever to accept Krashen’s claim, in the absence of evidence. And there is an absence of evidence.

(Gregg 1984, p.82)

6

7

1. The dichotomies in human behavior almost always define the endpoints of a continuum, and not mutually excusive categories.

2. Second language learning clearly is a process in which varying degrees of learning and of acquisition can both beneficial, depending upon the learner’s own style and strategies.

3. Krashen’s “zero option” (don’t ever teach grammar ) is not support in the literature.

8

9

10

11

There are no significant information from Krashen’s theory on what to do about the other half(or more) of the students whom speech doesn’t “emerge” and for whom the “silent period” might last forever.

12

13

14

15

Output HypothesisSwain (2005,1995)suggested three major functions

of output in SLA1. learners may notice their erroneous attempts to

convey meaning, and the act of producing language itself can prompt learners to recognized linguistic shortcomings. Here learners become self-informed through their own output.

2. Out put serve as a means to “try out” one’s language , to test various hypotheses that are forming.

3. Speech (or writing) can offer a means for learner to reflect (productively) on language itself in the interaction with peers.

16