UNIVERSIDAD AUTONÓMA DEL ESTADO DE MÉXICO

FACULTAD DE LENGUAS

LICENCIATURA EN ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS

ASIGNATURA: ADQUISICIÓN Y APRENDIZAJE DE IDIOMAS

PROFRA. CLAUDIA DOMÍNGUEZ MEDINA

VÍCTOR OCHOA TORRES

FINAL ESSAY
 ESSAY

SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISTION THEORIES

Introduction

English teachers have tested many of the different English learning approaches
and methods which changed over time, beginning with traditional translation
method, to the Social interactionism; they have evolved with different advantages
and disadvantages. In this essay I will mention how second language acquisition
theories have changed over the time and what are advantages and disadvantages
when using each one, nevertheless there are a lot of theories, so this essay is
going to address to some theories only which I think are the most meaningful:
Behaviorism, Contrastive analysis, Innatist theory, Cognitivist, Social and finally
one of the alternative theories to second language acquisition, identity.

Moreover I am going to mention how these theories have been taken to design
school syllabus and programs given that nowadays managing a second language
is a necessity, mainly because of globalization many companies and organizations
request professional bilingual people even trilingual. This provokes that educational
institutions need to add English as one important subject in syllabus, from
kindergarden to University. Especially in Kindergarden, people and institutions
usually have this belief because of the critical period theory which will be
addressed too, to have an idea, this theory states that children are better at
learning languages and that they would be able to speak as a native in the future,
however many migrants have been able to acquire a language even if they have
never been at school or have never read an English course book.

Finally a contrast about the different mentioned theories is going to be done, in

order to understand what new necessities for SLA (Second Language Acquisition)
students are. Also this is aimed to understand some bases to design English
acquisition activities that English teachers could combine in order to keep out each
characteristic from the different theories.
 SECOND LANGUAGE AQCUISTION THEORIES

Behaviorism (1913)

One of the first second language acquisition theories was the behaviorism in 1913,
which stated that the behavior is public and consciousness is private. This theory
aimed to study the observable behavior, and if it is applied a stimuli there will be an
answer so behavior can be changed and conditioning could be positive or negative
reinforcement. This theory is the base to develop the audio-lingual method. Some
applications that are usually done are for example giving a prize to students when
they have a good behavior and this can be obtained with the use of reinforcement
until the time that the reinforcement is not needed anymore.

However behaviorism have been criticized because is considered old fashioned ,

we can look at classrooms reinforcement activities such as prizing and sometimes
punishing, as teachers we should remember that behavior is one important factor
in learning. This theory is helpful for bad behavioral students because its bases
support control in the classroom, also encourage students to participate more, it
helps students to find an interest. However this theory by itself has many
deficiencies because does not promote critical thinking, so learning and knowledge
become automatic but not meaningful.

Cognitivist (1960)

Developed by Ausbel, Piaget and Gardner, it stated that thinking and cognitive
process become crucial in learning. Learning also comes from interest that means,
students learn what they are interested in, topics that they are fond of. Besides
when learning is started there are previous experiences so “Learning is due to
mind processes, so it is necessary to determine how these processes contribute to
what is learning and how is related to what is learnt”. (Silva h, Signoret A, 2013)

Then learning comes from cognitive processes which is calle transfer, firstly new
information is stored in memory after it is used finally the learner understand how
to apply what he has learnt several times, “When a learner understands how to
apply knowledge in different contexts, then transfer has occurred. Understanding is
seen as being composed of a knowledgebase in the form of rules, concepts, and
discriminations”. (Duffy & Jonassen, 1991)

Contrastive analysis

This theory was developed by Robert Lado in 1976, it aims to increase efficiency in
L2 teaching and testing which is a good contribution for applied linguistics. The
theory is based on comparing the languages; this is related to process Stimulus-
respone- reinforcement. According to (Saville-Troike, 2003) acquisition follows the
next process:

1. Imitation.

2. Repetition of language.

3. Reinforcement

4. Learning.

In Second language Acquisition there is a transfer in learning:

-Positive: Same structure in mother and target language.

-Negative: L1 structure is used inappropriately in the L2.

This process seems logical, however I think this could be more related to traditional
approaches and methods as the old translation method, but otherwise we can take
advantages from our first language skills.

Innatist theory (1970-1992)

LAD’S THEORY

This was developed by Noam Chomsky, he stated that all human beings have a
device to acquire any kind of language also called (LAD). This device allows
acquiring language in an unconscious way only by being exposed to the language.
Also there is something which is called generative grammar “Generative grammar
is a mind device that controls production and language comprehension at the same
time it allows acquisition automatically and unconsciously” (Baron L, Müller O,
2014).

This theory is more related to language acquisition, and it looks for acquiring a
language as the same way as it was in the first language, nevertheless it is a bit
questionable the idea that if a person is being exposed to a second language he
will acquire a language unconsciously, which is related to the critical period theory,
which states that children are better language learners than adults.

The critical period theory

This theory was developed by Lenneberg in 1967 which stated that there is a
critical period in language learning also based on psychology studies that stated
language acquisition has a critical period which is the most sensible stage to learn.
Then a controversial debate has appeared mainly because of Lenneberg
hypothesis according to the critical period to acquire a language because he
mentioned that there is stage which a person can acquire a language.

According to Pallier (2007) “The critical period hypothesis states that age of
acquisition is an important predictor of ultimate proficiency: the older one starts to
learn a language, the smaller the odds of reaching native-like proficiency.” As the
same way Kroll (2005) stated that the term critical period is attained to the critical
period hypothesis (CPH) which is based on the idea that “language acquisition
from mere exposure (i.e., implicit learning), the only mechanism available to the
young child, is severely limited in older adolescents and adults.

Then critical period is the stage which is the most sensible for learning like
language acquisition, could be first or second language acquisition by mere
exposure to language, however it has a decline or peak where acquiring a
language becomes more difficult. In order to support this Ellis (1994) mentioned six
points that support the critical period hypothesis:
“First, adults’ ability to perceive and segment sounds in L2 has deteriorated. Second, adults’ brain area for language learning
has been lateralized so language learning is less fruitful in comparison to children. Third, children are more motivated and
less anxious about using the target language. Fourth, while children use their language acquisition device to learn an L2,
adults rely on their general problem-solving ability to analyze the language. Fifth, children receive better input than adults,
although adult learners have more negotiation of meaning. Finally, child learners store L1 and L2 knowledge in different
areas whereas adult learners store L1 and L2 information together.” Retrieved from (Hoang, 2009)

Although I do not totally agree with the previous theory because there are a lot
migrants how have acquired a second langue even when they are adults and when
they do not take any English course, the point is that they find a necessity to
communicate daily to support that, Birdsong (1992) did some research that
supports an hypothesis against the CPH. He reported that “15 out of the 20 native
English speakers who began learning French when they were adults fell within the
native speaker range in grammaticality judgment test.” Retrieved from (Hoang,
2009).

Also White and Genesee (1996) are against the hypothesis too:
“In their studies of three groups (near-native speakers of English as a second language, non-native speakers of English as a
second language, and native speakers of English), no significant differences were found between near-native and native
speakers of English. They finally concluded that native-like competence is achievable for even adult learners of second
language at least in the grammatical domain. Research findings seem to suggest that it is possible to achieve native-like
grammatical competence in second and foreign language learning regardless of the age of initial learning experience.”
Retrieved from (Hoang, 2009)

So we have some evidences which support that the critical period is not completely
true, so any person can acquire a second language it does not matter if the learner
is a child, teenager or adult, however it is necessary to find a necessity for
communication.

KRASHEN’S FIVE HYPOTHESIS

The Natural approach has been seen as one of most useful approaches, it was
developed by Terrell and Krashen. This approach is really similar to the Direct
Method, but it has some differences for example the teaching method is not
focused on practice and repetition only, the natural approach is focused on the
input, which is all information students get using different skills like listening and
reading. “In the Natural Approach there is an emphasis on exposure, or input,
rather than practice; optimizing emotional preparedness for learning; a prolonged
period of attention to what the language learners hear before they try to produce
language.” (Richards, 2008)

The Input formula

This approach is based on a formula known as “I+1”, which means that the learner
must have an input one level upper than he has, so it must contain comprehensible
messages, “The input hypothesis states that in order for acquirers to progress to
the next stage in the acquisition of the target language, they need to understand
input language that includes a structure that is part of the next stage.” (Krashen
and Terrell 1983:32) retrieved from (Richards, 2008) Input is comprised by all
vocabulary and structures that are in the lexicon. The lexicon is an abstract device
where all words are loaded to use in different situations “The quantity of
information in the lexicon far outweighs that in any other part of the language, and
if there is anything to the notion of redundancy it should be easier to reconstruct a
message containing just words than one containing just the syntactic relations.”
(Richards, 2008)

The hypothesis

Five hypotheses are the base for the Natural Approach: The acquisition/ learning,
monitor, natural order, input and affective filter hypothesis.

The acquisition/learning: Acquisition and learning are different ways to manage a

language, “Acquisition refers to an unconscious process that involves the naturalistic development of language
proficiency through understanding language and through using language for meaningful communication. Learning, by
contrast, refers to a process in which conscious rules about a language are developed. It results in explicit knowledge about
the forms of a language and the ability to verbalize this knowledge.” (Richards, 2008)

Then acquisition is how we got naturally our mother language in an unconscious

way, and language learning is the process we normally use at classrooms, when
we get all important structures and analyze the language.
The monitor hypothesis:

This Hypothesis is about how learning is used as a monitor only that means
learning helps to b realize that sentences have been said correctly. Three
conditions are needed to use the monitor correctly: Time, focus on form and
knowledge.
“1. Time. There must be sufficient time for a learner to choose and apply a learned rule.

2. Focus on form. The language user must be focused on correctness or on the form of the output.

3. Knowledge of rules. The performer must know the rules. The monitor does best with rules that are simple in two ways.
They must be simple to describe and they must not require complex movements and rearrangements.” (Richards, 2008)

The natural order hypothesis:

The natural order hypothesis states the some structures and morphemes are learnt
before others, and in language acquisition mistakes are seen as something natural
but opposite to language learning that is why mistakes are seen as problems in
any structure.

“Errors are signs of naturalistic developmental processes, and during acquisition

(but not during learning)”. (Richards, 2008)

The Input hypothesis:

Input is everything that an acquirer is exposed to, according to Krashen there is a

formula that and acquirer must be exposed to I+1. That means that an acquirer
must be exposed to one level more than the current language level he owns.

According to Richards, The input hypothesis is based on some statements:

1) The hypothesis is related to acquisition only

2) People acquire language best by understanding input that is one level up the current level.

3) The ability to speak fluently cannot be taught directly, it emerges naturally.

4) If there is a sufficient quantity of comprehensible input, I+1 will usually be provided automatically.

The affective filter hypothesis

This hypothesis states that depending on motivation, self-confidence and anxiety

the acquirer will get or block the input. “Acquirers with a low affective filter seek
and receive more input, interact with confidence, and are more receptive to the
input they receive. Anxious acquirers have a high affective filter, which prevents
acquisition from taking place.” (Richards, 2008)

Social (1985)

This theory states that we learn from our environment, society and context, we
acquire and learn language because of communication necessity, we need input in
order to express output, that means that we need people for learning, indeed we
learn to communicate from adults, Henschel mentioned: “The child first observes the adults
around him communicating amongst themselves and then later develops the ability himself to communicate. Vygotsky also
theorized that a child learns best when interacting with those around him to solve a problem. At first, the adult interacting with
the child is responsible for leading the child, and eventually, the child becomes more capable of problem solving on his own”.
(Henschel, 2012)

Moreover this theory is based on Ausbel’s meaningful learning which supports the
idea that students learn what is meaningful for them. Ausbel affirmed that
meaningful learning is a process that is related to a new knowledge or information
and cognitive structure that learns not arbitrarily and no literally. This interaction
with cognitive structure is not produced a whole but with relevant aspects that are
in the same structure, they get the name of Subsumption.

Subsumption is a process of learning by which new information is stored in

cognitive structure. Ausbel distinguished three different types:
“1. Subordinate learning (there are two types): Derivative subsumption and correlative subsumption.

In derivative subsumption, new information is linked to superordinate idea A and represents another case or extension of A.
The critical attributes of the concept A are not changed, but new examples are recognized as relevant. (p. 68)

In correlative subsumption, new information y is linked to idea X, but is an extension, modification, or qualification of X. The
critical attributes of the subsuming concept may be extended or modified with the new correlative subsumption. (p. 68)

2. Superordinate learning:

In superordinate learning, established ideas a1, a2, and a3 are recognized as more specific examples of new idea A and
become linked to A. Superordinate idea A is defined by a new set of critical attributes that encompass the subordinate ideas.
(p. 68)

3. Combinatorial learning:

In combinatorial learning new idea A is seen as related to existing ideas B, C, and D but is neither more inclusive nor more
specific than ideas B, C, and D. In this case, new idea A is seen to have some criterial attributes in common with preexisting
ideas. (p. 68)” (Weibell, 2011)

Then according to the previous is clear that the three Ausbel’s types of learning
comes from meaningful learning that means, new relevant information is linked to
aspects that are already in the cognitive structure, thus is utterly important for
teachers design classes that promotes students interests implying feelings,
previous experiences, likes, etc. On this wise learning cannot be an obligation, it
should be something enjoyable and meaningful for students.

Identity

Developed by Norton Peirce in 1995; this is a holistic approach to SLA which is

based on post-structuralism and sociocultural theory, in this theory individuals have
a coherent identity. Identity is decentralized and viewed as changeable, multiple,
potentially conflicting and irrefutably social. Norton uses the term identity “to
reference how a person understands his or her relationship to the world, how that
relationship is constructed across time and space, and how the person
understands possibilities for the future” (Atkinson, 2011).

Then identity is built by language construction depending on the person context,

however a person do not develop an identity only, multiple identities can be
developed.

Thus identity is seen as product of language; people develop identity according to

context, necessities, it is considered changeable. For example when a child who is
son of a Mexican immigrant family and lives in the U.S.A, has multiple identities,
with his Mexican family, American friends, etc.

In my opinion this the most modern theory nowadays, because certainly, we live in
a society, we have the necessity to have an identity where we live, we need to
communicate with another people, and I think that is the cause about immigrants
who migrate to another country and even if they do not speak the local language
and that the critical period is not on their side they are able to communicate indeed
as a native speaker after sometime.

Conclusions

In conclusion, learning theories have been used to understand and teach language
learning and language acquisition, highlighting that language learning is different
from language acquisition, as the Innatist theory states that English learning is a
conscious process that is used as a monitor only. Therefore language acquisition
aims to acquire a language as the way as we learn a mother language.

In this way the different theories mentioned previously have contributed

meaningfully to language acquisition, and they are changing continuously.
Even the behaviorist is an old theory as I mentioned, it is still used in many schools
now a days, reinforcements are continuously used by teachers in order to get a
desired behavior on students, so in some cases we can still giving a prize to our
students in order have classroom control and promote English learning.

The contrastive analysis has a useful process that in my opinion has a correct
sequence: Imitation, repetition, reinforcement, learning. I think that this process is
too similar to the way we learnt our first language, firstly by hearing words and
phrases then trying to imitate them and finally using them also as much as we use
utterances we learn more and we acquire a language. Nevertheless I do not totally
agree with contrasting our first language to a target language given that the target
language can have a completely different origin, especially on writing for example it
is really hard trying to learn Japanese or Chinese contrasting Spanish or Italian
because the roots of the languages are different.

The cognitivist theory see language as a cognitive process, states that language
can be learnt as we understand how we store new knowledge in our brains. In my
opinion this is one of the theories that has contributed a lot to academic purposes,
and to learning in general however I do not think that learning a language can be
understood as learning calculus, or biology because language is not a group of
signs, sounds and meanings; a language implies feelings, contexts and purposes.

The innatist theory is supported by Chomsky’s Language Acquistion Device (LAD)

and Krashen’s five hypothesis. In my opinion Chomsky’s theory was correct about
children’s capacity to learn a language because of their brains’ plasticity that is
related to Lenneberg’s critical period, although his theory has been continuously
rejected with some evidences of adult migrants that can acquire a language as
native speaker. Otherwise I think Krashen’s theory is more complex and has more
advantages.

Within some different advantages we can mention: It is really alike the way we
acquire a mother tongue, once we have acquired a language, we own the
language, so translation is not needed because we think our messages in that
language directly in the opposite when we learn a language where utterances are
made in our mother tongue firstly and then changed to the aim language.

The process is naturally so the acquirer does not get frustrated, then skills emerge
automatically until the acquirer can manage completely the language and that
implies he can express and receive any message in the aim language.

As this approach is focus on listening and reading, students are not forced to
speaking which is really helpful because some of them are quite shy and feel
embarrassed when they speak. Finally Students feel more confident to speak
because they are not interrupted or focused on their grammar mistakes, this helps
to make the classroom environment more comfortable.

Finally I would like to link the social theory and identity theory because they are
really alike, I believe that those theories are those which we as teachers can pick
up a lot of bases to design our teaching material, because as I mentioned,
language is not a group a signs, sounds and meanings, language implies different
roles in society, we use language to be heard, when we need to negotiate, when
we want to express our feelings. The identity theory mentioned “imaginary
communities” which I think we should promote in classroom so students can
develop their different identities.

References
Atkinson, D. (2011). Alternative Approaches to Second Language. New York, USA: Routledge.

Barón Birchenall, L., Müller, O., & Labos, E. (2013). Los conceptos innatos en la obra de Chomsky:
definición y propuesta de un método empírico para su estudio. Avances en Psicología
Latinoamericana.

Da Silva Gomes Helena, S. D. (2013). Temas sobre la adquisición de una segunda lengua. México:
Trillas.

Franklin, M. M. (2010). Primera infancia bilingüismo y educación infantil . México: Trillas.

Henschel, K. (03 de 02 de 2012). www.brighthubeducation.com. Obtenido de

http://www.brighthubeducation.com/esl-teaching-tips/90410-the-interactionist-theory-
of-language-acquisition-in-esl/

Judith, K. (2005). Handbook of Bilingualism Psycholinguistic approaches. London: Oxford.

McKinney, B. N. (11 de 08 de 2010). APPROACHES TO SLA. Obtenido de

http://faculty.educ.ubc.ca/norton/Norton%20&%20McKinney%20in%20Atkinson
%202011.pdf

Newby, P. A. (1993). Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing. Performance

Improvement Quarterly. Obtenido de
http://www.csiss.org/SPACE/workshops/2007/UCSB/docs/ertmer_newby1993.pdf

Pallier, C. (2007). Pallier.org. Obtenido de

http://www.pallier.org/papers/Pallier.critical.period.attrition.chapter.2007.pdf

Richards, J. C. (2008). Teaching listening and speaking. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Saville-Troike, M. (2003). Introducing Second Language Acquisition. Arizona. U. S. A: Cambridge.

Tran-Hoang-Thu. (2009). THE CRITICAL PERIOD AND SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION. Alliant
International University.

Weibell, C. J. (4 de July de 2011). https://principlesoflearning.wordpress.com. Obtenido de

https://principlesoflearning.wordpress.com/dissertation/chapter-3-literature-review-2/
the-cognitive-perspective/subsumption-theory-david-p-ausubel-1962/

Cited references
Atkinson, D. (2011). Alternative Approaches to Second Language. New York, USA: Routledge.

Barón Birchenall, L., Müller, O., & Labos, E. (2013). Los conceptos innatos en la obra de Chomsky:
definición y propuesta de un método empírico para su estudio. Avances en Psicología
Latinoamericana.

Da Silva Gomes Helena, S. D. (2013). Temas sobre la adquisición de una segunda lengua. México:
Trillas.

Franklin, M. M. (2010). Primera infancia bilingüismo y educación infantil . México: Trillas.

Henschel, K. (03 de 02 de 2012). www.brighthubeducation.com. Obtenido de

http://www.brighthubeducation.com/esl-teaching-tips/90410-the-interactionist-theory-
of-language-acquisition-in-esl/

Judith, K. (2005). Handbook of Bilingualism Psycholinguistic approaches. London: Oxford.

McKinney, B. N. (11 de 08 de 2010). APPROACHES TO SLA. Obtenido de

http://faculty.educ.ubc.ca/norton/Norton%20&%20McKinney%20in%20Atkinson
%202011.pdf

Newby, P. A. (1993). Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing. Performance

Improvement Quarterly. Obtenido de
http://www.csiss.org/SPACE/workshops/2007/UCSB/docs/ertmer_newby1993.pdf

Pallier, C. (2007). Pallier.org. Obtenido de

http://www.pallier.org/papers/Pallier.critical.period.attrition.chapter.2007.pdf

Richards, J. C. (2008). Teaching listening and speaking. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Saville-Troike, M. (2003). Introducing Second Language Acquisition. Arizona. U. S. A: Cambridge.

Tran-Hoang-Thu. (2009). THE CRITICAL PERIOD AND SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION. Alliant
International University.
Weibell, C. J. (4 de July de 2011). https://principlesoflearning.wordpress.com. Obtenido de
https://principlesoflearning.wordpress.com/dissertation/chapter-3-literature-review-2/
the-cognitive-perspective/subsumption-theory-david-p-ausubel-1962/