SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: APPROACHES
المؤلف:
John Field
المصدر:
Psycholinguistics
الجزء والصفحة:
P257
2025-10-08
331
SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: APPROACHES
Linguistic. In the linguistic tradition, research and analysis are usually based on the assumption that the acquisition of our first language is supported by an innately acquired Universal Grammar (UG). In this context, six different positions can be adopted in relation to second language (L2) acquisition:
The L2 learner retains access to the same UG as was available for L1.
UG supports L1 acquisition only, and is then lost. The process of L2 acquisition is therefore very different.
UG supports L1 acquisition only, but L2 acquisition is able to model itself upon residual traces of our experience of acquiring L1.
UG survives until early adolescence and then decays. There is thus a critical period for second language acquisition.
Universal principles are retained and continue to guide L2 acquisition. However, the user’s parameters are adjusted to L1 values and therefore need to be re-set to L2 values.
Universal linguistic criteria (perhaps based on markedness) determine which linguistic concepts are the easiest to acquire and which are the most difficult.
One research approach is theory-driven: with researchers applying L1 linguistic theory (usually Chomskyan) to second language learning and use. Researchers often ask subjects to make L2 grammaticality judgements, which are said to tap in to their competence. A second approach is observational, with researchers obtaining longitudinal evidence of the order in which particular areas of L2 syntax are acquired and the variants which the learner employs at different stages. The data is then compared with patterns of L1 acquisition and interpreted in a framework of grammatical theory and of concepts such as parameter-switching.
&Cognitive. A theoretical assumption is adopted that language is part of general cognition. It is therefore valid to trace parallels between the techniques adopted by a second language learner and those employed in acquiring other types of expertise. Cognitivist accounts of second language acquisition (SLA) cover both acquisition (how learners construct a representation of L2) and use (how they employ their knowledge of L2 in order to communicate).
There has been discussion of the relationship between explicit knowledge gained in the form of L2 instruction and implicit knowledge gained by acquisition in an L2 environment. The former is likely to provide linguistic information in an analysed form, while linguistic information that is acquired naturalistically is often in the form of unanalysed chunks. A similar contrast exists between circumstances where accuracy is a requirement and the use of L2 may therefore be subject to careful control– and others where fluency is called for and it is desirable to aim for a high degree of automaticity.
If linguistic information is initially acquired in explicit/controlled form, then it has to be reshaped in order to support spontaneous spoken performance in the target language. A case has been put for treating second language acquisition as a form of skill acquisition not unlike learning to drive or becoming an expert chess player. Anderson’s ACT models, which account for how expertise is acquired, have been applied to language learning.
Much attention in SLA research has been given to transfer, the effect of the native language upon performance in L2. Early accounts of transfer drew upon behaviourist theory. Language use was depicted as habitual behaviour, with the habits of the first language having to be replaced by those of the second. Current models treat the issue in terms of the relative cognitive demands made by L2 as against those made by L1. These might reflect the extent to which a grammatical feature is marked in one language but not the other. Or it might reflect differences between languages in the importance attached to linguistic cues such as word order, inflection or animacy.
Another approach considers L2 acquisition in terms of the way in which the learner’s language develops. At any given stage, a learner is said to possess an interlanguage, an interim form of self-expression which is more restricted than the native-speaker target but may be internally consistent. Longitudinal studies have examined changes in interlanguage: for example, the different forms used to express the interrogative or negative. Most learners appear to proceed through similar stages; an explanation is found in the relative difficulty of the cognitive operations involved rather than in constraints imposed by UG.
Some commentators have suggested that SLA involves continual restructuring in which knowledge structures are reorganised in order to accommodate new linguistic insights. The Multi-Dimensional Model sees restructuring as part of a developmental process in which two important cognitive factors determine a learner’s performance. The first is the developmental stage that the learner has reached, development being represented as the gradual removal of limitations upon the linguistic structures that the learner is capable of forming. The second is the extent to which each individual engages in a process of simplification, reducing and over-generalising the L2 grammar so as to make it easy to handle.
Another line of research has concerned itself with the learner as an active participant in the learning process. A non-native speaker’s chief goal in L2 communicative contexts is to extract meaning, but the question arises of whether they also have to specifically ‘notice’ (direct attention to) the form of the words that is used in order to add to their own syntactic repertoire.
A further area of study that is relevant to psycholinguistics considers the way in which second-language learners handle communicative encounters, and the strategies they adopt in order to compensate for their incomplete knowledge of the lexis and grammar of the target language. There has been interest in the communication strategies adopted in spoken production, but rather less is known about the strategies employed in extracting meaning from written or spoken texts.
See also: Communication strategy
Further reading: Ellis (1994); Gass and Selinker (1994); Mitchell and Miles (1998); Ritchie and Bhatia (1996)
الاكثر قراءة في Linguistics fields
اخر الاخبار
اخبار العتبة العباسية المقدسة
