Name: Nunung Mardianti

NIM : 170212859010

CHAPTER II EXPLAINING SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING

By: Patsy M.Lightbown and Nina Spada

If we are talking about second language learning, we need to elaborate what the theories and
experts had said about acquiring the language especially the second language. The theories of
language acquisition initially occured in 1940s (The arise of behaviourism). However, to start
discussing language acquisition theories, we will begin from the context of language learning.

Contexts of Language Learning

Context of language learning includes the characteristics of language learner and learning
condition.
Learner characteristic
Commonly, all second language learner has already acquired one or more languages. Second
language learner is categorized into younger learner and adolescent or adult learner. Young language
learners acquired their first language without congnitive maturity (not aware) that second language
learners have. Since the second language learners intended to learn the language, it allows them to
solve problems and involve in discussion about language. Furthermore, in terms of language attitude
and cultural differences, young learners have greater willingness to use language even when they had
limited proficiency rather than adults who feel anxiety to produce language when they are unable to
express their idea clearly.
Learning condition
In informal setting, young-second language learners are allowed to be silent untill they are
ready to speak. In the other hand, older learners are often forced to speak in some occasions such as
classroom activities, job interviews or even medical visits. Child learners in informal setting usually
obtain great language exposure every day. For older learners especially students in language
classroom commonly had less exposure of second language due to the limited time in contact with
language and smaller range of discourse type. In second language learning outside the classroom, the
errors of grammar and pronunciation might be abandoned because most people think that it is impolite
if they interrupted someone who was trying to have a conversation with them. Nevertheless, the
interlocutors may respond to the error if they are failed to understand what the language learners are
trying to say due to the inappropriate word choice. Thus, the only place where feedback on errors is
typically present is language classroom. Another condition that is common to learners is the exposure
to modified or adapter input. Some people who have frequent interaction with second language
learners seems to have intuitive sense of what adjustment they need to help the learners understand.

Behaviourism
Second language application: Mimicry and memorization
Behaviourism arose on second and foreign language teaching, especially in North America
between 1940s and the 1970s especially. In behaviourism, classroom activities amphasized mimicry,
memorization, and students learned dialogue and sentence patterns by heart. As language
development was viewed as formation of habits-the learning of second language would start off with
the habits formed in the first language. In the same line, Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)
believe that if the first language and target language are similar, the learners will easily acquired the
language, but ut if these are different, the learners should face difficulties.
However, some researchers have found that adult second language learners produce sentence
that sound more like child's. Besides, many of their sentences would be ungrammatical if translated
into their first language. This finding, then, agains behaviourism theory which stated that second
language learning was habit formation from first language. It suggests that the influence of learner's
first language may not only a matter of habits but also more complex process (identifying similarity
and even reflecting). Hence, it convinced many researchers that behaviourism and CAH were
inadequate explanations for SLA which resulted on the growing influence of innatist views.

The innatist perspective: Universal Grammar

According to Chomsky, innate knowledge in the principles of Universal Grammar (UG)
allows all children to acquire the language of their environment during a critical period of their
development. Some researchers support the theory of UG but some others find it less apropriate. They
need to find out an explanation for the evidence that learners eventually know more about the
language that they could reasonably have learned if they had to depend entirely on the input they are
exposed. UG perspectives are usually interested in the language competence of advances (complex
knowledge of grammar) rather than in simple language of beginning learners.

Second language application: Krashen’s ‘Monitor Model’

Stephen Krashen’s Monitor model is a model of SLA that was influenced by Chomsky’s theory. It
was described into five hypothesis;
1. Acquisition-learning hypothesis distinguish between ‘acquisition’ and ‘learning’. Acquisition
is acquiring language subconsciously to language form, while ‘learning’ refers to the
conscious process of learning the language structure.
 2. Monitor hypothesis, the acquired system initiate a speaker's utterences and is responsible for
spontanious language use, while, the learned system acts as an editor or 'monitor' by making
minor changes and improving what the acquired system has produced.
3. Natural order hypothesis, the language learners acquired the rules of language in a
predictable order.
4. Input hypothesis, language acquisition accures because there is comprehensible input (i+1
level)
5. Affective filter hypothesis, the states (feeling, motives, needs, attitudes) that prevent the
learners to acquire the language although there is comprehensible input.
In spite of being criticized by many researchers, Krashen's model had a major influence on
langauge teaching. Moreover, classroom research has confirmed that students can make great deal of
progress through exposure to comprehensible input without direct instruction.

Current psychological theories : The cognitivist/developmental perspective

Since the 1990s, psychological theories have become central to research in second language
development. These are information processing, connectionism theory, the competition models and
ect.

Information processing
It concerned with the mental processes involved in language learning and use. In fact, there is
a limit to how moch a learner pay attention to. The earlier stages learners tend to most of their
resources to understand the main words in the message rather than being noticed to the grammatical
morphemes attached to some of the words, especially the words which do not affect the
meaning.Gradually, through experience and practice, the information which was new would be
processed easily.
In line with information processing approach, 'learning skill' suggested that language learning
starts with declarative knowledge (knowledge of 'that'). Based on the hypothesis, trough practice,
declarative knowledge may become procedural knowledge. In SLA, the path from declarative to
procedural knowledge is sometimes associated with the kind of learning that takes place in a
classroom, where rule learning is followed by practice. With enough practice , procedure knowledge
would be faded and replaced by declarative knowledge, which is time may be forgotten.
According to 'transfer appropriare processing', information is best retrieved in situations that
are similar to those in which it was acquired (Blaxton 1989). Since when we learn something our
memories also record the context in which it was learned and even about the way we learned it. The
knowledge that is acquired mainly in rule learning or drill activities may be easier to access on tests
that resemble the learning activities than in communicative situations.
Connectionism
Connectionists has given greater importance to the role of the language environment than to
any specific innate knowledge in the learner. Many connectionists argue that innate is simply the
ability to learn, not any specifically linguistic principles. They argue that learners gradually build up
their knowledge of language through exposure to the thousands of examples of the linguistic features
they have hear. After hearing language features in specific situational or linguistic contexts over and
over again, learners develop a stronger and stronger network of 'connections' between these elements.
Eventually, the presence of one situational or linguistic element will activate the other(s) in the
learner's mind.

The competition model

The competition model is closely related to the connectionist perspective. Elizabeth Bates and
Brian MacMhinney (1981) described the competition model as an explanation for language
acquisition that takes into account not only language form but also language meaning and language
use. The competition model is proposed as an explanation for both first and second language
acquisition. Through the exposure to thousands of examples of language associated with particular
meanings, learners come to understand how to use the 'cues' in which a language signals specific
functions. For example, the relationship between words in a sentence may be signalled by word order,
for instance, most English sentences have the order Subject-Verb-object (SVo). That is, the typical
English sentence mentions the subject first, then the verb, then the object. According to the
competition model, second language acquisition requires that learners learn the relative importance of
the different cues appropriate in the language they are learning (MacThinney 1997).

Second language applications: Interacting, noticing, and processing

 The interaction hypothesis
Velyn Hatch (1978), Michael Long (1983, 1996),Teresa Pica (1994) and Susan Gass (1997)
have studied about the ways the speakers has modify their speech and their interaction patters in order
to help learner participate in a conversation understand some information. Long (1983) agreed with
Krashen that comprehensible input is necessary for language acquisition, however, he also questioned
how the input can be comprehensible. He insisted that modified interaction is necessary mechanism
for making the language comprehensible. Thus, what the learner required is that the opportunity to
interact with other people to reach mutual comprehension rather than simplification of linguistic
forms. Modified interaction includes elaboration, slower speed of utterance, gesture and others . Some
examples of these conversational modification are comprehension checks, clarification request and
self repetition or paraphrase.
  The noticing hypothesis
Richard Schmidt (1990, 2001) proposed the 'noticing hypothesis', suggesting that nothing is
learned unless it has been noticed. Although noticing does not result on acquisition, but it is the
essential starting point. Nevertheless, criticisms has arise, stated by Susan Gass (1988) whether the
learners must be aware that they are 'noticing' something in the input. According to information
processing theories, anything that uses up our mental 'processing space', even if we are not aware of it
or attending to it 'on purpose', can contribute to learning.
From the study conducted Bill VanPatten (2004) who observe American university students
learning foreign languages. The result shows that the American university misinterprate the sentences.
VanPatten argued that the problem arose in part from the fact that learners have limited processing
capacity and cannot pay attention to form and meaning at the same time. When the context in which
they hear a sentence helps them make sense of it, they do not notice details of the language form.
 Processibility theory
Processibility theory refers to the sequence of development for features of syntax and
morphology was affected by how easy these were to process. It depends on the large extent on the
position of those feature in the sentence. Generally, the features that occure at the beginning or end of
the sentence were easier to process than those the middle. Pienemann (1992, 2003) developed his
processibility theory on the basis of his continued research with learners of different languages in a
variety of setting, both instructional and informal. He stated that his theory explains a widely reported
phenomenon in SLA; learner do not simply transfer features from their first language at early stages
of acquisition, but they have to develop certain level of processing capacity in second language before
using the knowledge of the language features that already exist in their L1.

The Sociocultural perspective

Sociocultural theory views speaking and thinking as tightly connected. Speaking (and
writing) is mediate thinking, which means the people can gain control over their mental processes as a
consequence of internalizing what others say to them and what they say to others. Learning is thought
to occur when an individual interacts with an interlocutor within his or her zone of proximal
development (ZPD)-the situation in which the learner is capable of performing at a higher level
because there is support from an interlocutor. The ZPD represents 'site' in which learners co-construct
knowledge in collaboration with an interlocutor. In Krashen's i+l the input comes from outside the
learner and the emphasis is on the comprehensibility of input that includes language structures which
are beyond the learner's current level. The emphasis in ZPD is on development and how learners co-
construct knowledge based on their interaction with their interlocutor or in private speech. Interaction
facilitates their cognitive processes by giving learners access to the input they need to activate internal
processes.
Second Ianguage applications: Learning by talking
Jim Lantolf (2000), Richard Donato (1994) and others are interested in showing how second
language learners acquire language when they collaborate and interact with other speakers. In
preparing to speak or write, they must pay more attention to how meaning is expressed through
language than they do for the comprehension of language. Swain (1985) first proposed the
'comprehensible output hypothesis' in response to Krashen' comprehensible input hypothesis, based
on the observation that French immersion students were considerably weaker in their spoken and
written producrion than in their reading and listening comprehension. Swain's (2000) early work on
the output hypothesis was influenced by cognitive theory, but more recent work has been motivated
by sociocultural theory. Using the term 'collaborative dialogue', Swain and Lapkin and their
colleagues have carried out a series of studies to determine how second language learners co-construct
linguistic knowledge while engaging in speaking and writing.
Therefore, the difference between the sociocultural perspective and interaction in second
language acquisition is that sociocultural theorists assume that the cognitive processes begin as an
external socially mediated activity and eventually become internalized. Other interactionist models
assume that modified input and interaction provide learners with the raw material for internal
cognitive processes.

Theory into practice

In the end, all the theories related to language acquisition that have been given are intended to
identify the ability of language learners to acquire the language within a variety of instructional
environments. Many claims from behaviourist theory were based on experiments with animals
learning a variety of responses to laboratory stimuli. lnteractionists emphasize the role of modification
in conversational interations. This perspective, as well as the sociocultural perspective, provides
insights into the ways in which learners can obtain access to new knowledge about the language when
they have support from an interlocutor. Research that has theory development as its goal has
important long-term significance for language teaching and learning, but agreement on a 'complete'
theory of language acquisition is probably, at best, a long way off. A growing body of applied
research draws on a great amount of theoretical orientations. This research may provide information
that to guide teachers' reflections about pedagogy.