THEME 2.

GENERAL THEORIES ABOUT SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION AND

LEARNING. THE CONCEPT OF INTERLANGUAGE. THE TREATMENT OF
ERROR.

OUTLINE.

1. INTRODUCTION.

2. THEORIES ON FIRST LANGUAGE ACQUISITION.

2.1. Behaviourism.
2.2. Innatism.
2.3. Cognitivism.

3. THEORIES ON SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING.

3.1. Behaviourism.
3.2. Cognitivism.
3.3. Krashen’s Monitor Model.
3.3.1. Acquisition vs. learning hypothesis.
3.3.2. The Monitor hypothesis.
3.3.3. The Natural Order hypothesis.
3.3.4. The Input hypothesis.
3.3.5. The Affective-filter hypothesis.
3.4. Constructivism.

4. SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN L1 ACQUISITION AND L2

LEARNING.

5. THE CONCEPT OF INTERLANGUAGE.

6. ERROR ANALYSIS AND ITS TREATMENT.

6.1. Types of errors.
6.2. Error treatment.

7. CONCLUSION.

8. BIBLIOGRAPHY.

1
1. INTRODUCTION.

No one knows exactly how people learn languages. A great deal of research has been done into
the subject. Certain theories have had a profound effect upon the practice of language teaching
and continue to do so. We will concentrate on 4 major theories: Behaviourism, Cognitivism, The
Monitor Model and Constructivism.
The relevance of the unit to the teaching of foreign languages stems from the fact that theories of
language learning exert a notable influence upon specific methodologies and learning materials.
Moreover, we, as teachers, should incorporate the advantages of each one in our classroom
practice and form a principled basis upon which to develop our own teaching approaches and
avoid becoming slaves of changing fashions. Apart from that, this theme introduces us to errors
and provides some clues as to how we should deal with them.

2. THEORIES ON FIRST LANGUAGE ACQUISITION.

Linguists and psychologists started to use observational and experimental techniques to study the
process of language acquisition. There have been several proposals to explain the process of
learning:

2.1. Behaviourism.

In a book called Verbal Behaviour, the psychologist Skinner applied the theory of conditioning
to L1 learning. He considered language to be a process of imitation and reinforcement. This is a
behaviourist view of learning a language, since language is seen as a form of behaviour. Skinner
applied the procedure: stimulus, response, reinforcement to the way humans acquire a
language. Children learn to speak by copying the utterances heard around them, and by having
their responses reinforced by repetitions, corrections and encouragement that adults provide.
Nowadays, it has become clear that this principle does not fully explain all facts of language
acquisition. Children do imitate sounds and vocabulary, but grammatical ability cannot be
explained in this way.

2.2. Innatism.

The limitations of the imitation view led in the 1960s to an alternative theory: innatism. This
theory came from Chomsky’s generative ideas about language. He maintained that language is
not a form of behaviour. Children are born with an innate capacity for language development,
thanks to their “language acquisition device” (LAD), which is universal and common to all
human beings. But a distinction has to be drawn between knowledge about the language and how
that knowledge is used to construct sentences. That knowledge is called competence, and the
realization of this knowledge is called performance.

2.3. Cognitivism.

Alternative accounts have evolved because the detailed properties of the LAD have been
extremely difficult to explain. The main alternative account is that language acquisition is related
to a child’s intellectual development. For example, before children acquire the structures of
comparison, they need to have developed the conceptual ability to make judgement of size first.
The most influential account comes from the model of cognitive development proposed by the
psychologist Jean Piaget.

2
3. THEORIES ON SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION AND LEARNING.

3.1. Behaviourism.

In a book called Verbal behaviour, the psychologist Skinner applied this theory of conditioning
to the way humans acquire language; it is a form of behaviour in much as the same way as the rat
pressing the bar for food. So, the same model of stimulus-response-reinforcement accounts for
how a human baby learns language.
Behaviourism, which was a psychological theory, was adapted for some time by the language
teaching profession, particularly in America, and the result was the audio-lingual method: this
method used unending drilling of the students followed by positive or negative reinforcement by
the teacher (mistakes were immediately criticized and correct utterances were praised).
A great deal of language learning and teaching in the 1950s and 1960s was influenced by the
tenets of behaviourism. This theory sees learning as the formation of habits through a process of
repetition and reinforcement. Because language development is described as the acquisition of a
set of habits, it is assumed that a person learning a second language starts off with the habits
associated with the first language. These habits interfere with those needed for second language
speech, and new habits must be formed.
Due to this emphasis on interference, behaviourism has often been linked to the "contrastive
analysis hypothesis" (CAH), which predicts that where there are similarities between the two
languages the learner will acquire target language structures with ease; on the other hand the
learner will have difficulty when dealing with differences.
However, researchers have found that not all errors predicted by the CAH are actually made.
Furthermore, learners do make many errors which are not predictable on the basis of the CAH.
What is more, most errors are very similar across learners from a variety of backgrounds. For all
these reasons, the behaviourist account has proven to be a poor explanation of SLA.
Psychologists and language acquisition researchers have moved on to new, more complex
theories of language learning.

3.2. Cognitivism.

This theory views L2 learning as the acquisition of a complex cognitive skill. To learn a L2 is to
learn a skill, because various aspects of the task must be practised and integrated into fluent
performance. This requires the automatisation of component sub-skills. As performance
improves, there is constant restructuring as learners simplify, unify, and gain increasing control
over their internal representations. This learning theory is incomplete without a linguistic
framework of some kind. This has led to some cognitive psychologists to seek collaboration with
linguists so that the aspects of language which are studied will have clearer relevance to the
complex phenomenon of SLA. It is based on Chomsky’s theory of competence and performance.
He published a strong attack upon Skinner’s Verbal Behaviour based on the following questions:
If a language is learnt by behaviour how can children and adults say things they have never said
before? And how can a new sentence be the result of conditioning? According to Chomsky,
language is not a form of behaviour but a set of finite rules which allow us to create an unlimited
number of sentences in a language. This competence makes it possible to use language in a
creative way and say things never said before.
Cognitive approach theorists support a generative grammar, which is based on the belief that
learning involves mental processes, not simply the formation of habits. This grammar supports
learning with both inductive and deductive processes.

3
3.3. Krashen’s Monitor Model.

In the 1980s, an influential theory of SLA was developed by Stephen Krashen. Five central
hypotheses constitute his "Monitor Model".

3.3.1. The acquisition vs. learning hypothesis.

Krashen maintained that second language learners have at their disposal two distinct and
independent ways of developing competence in a second language:
-Acquisition, a subconscious process that involves the naturalistic development of language
proficiency through understanding language and through using language for meaningful
communication. Acquisition is not dependent on the teaching of grammatical rules, since
speakers are not concerned with form but with meaning.
-Learning, a conscious process that results in explicit knowledge about the forms of a language.
Formal teaching is necessary for language learning to occur. One of the central tenets of
Krashen’s theory is that learning cannot lead to acquisition. That is, what is consciously learned
does not become the basis for the acquisition of the target language. Learning, according to this
theory, cannot lead to acquisition. In other words, consciously learnt rules never lead to acquired
knowledge.
Acquiring language is more successful and longer lasting than learning it. So, second language
learners have to be like children acquiring their mother tongue. Children hear and experience a
considerable amount of language in situations where they are involved in communicating and
their gradual ability to use the language is the result of many subconscious processes.

3.3.2. The Monitor hypothesis.

This is a device that learners use to edit their language performance. Learners may use learnt
knowledge to correct themselves when they communicate.
It states that learning can function as a monitor or editor that checks the output of the acquired
system. It uses learnt knowledge by acting upon and modifying utterances generated from
acquired knowledge. We may call upon this monitor to correct ourselves when we communicate.
There are three conditions for its use: enough time, focus on form, not on meaning and the
learner must know the rule.

3.3.3. The natural order hypothesis.

It states that we acquire the rules of language in a predictable order. Certain grammatical
structures or morphemes are acquired before others in L1 acquisition of English, and a similar
sequence is found in L2 acquisition. This natural order is presumed to be independent from the
order in which the rules are taught in classes. That is, the rules that are easiest to state aren’t
necessarily the first to be acquired. This order will be manifest when our pupils are engaged in
natural communication tasks.

3.3.4. The input hypothesis.

It states that acquisition takes place as a result of learners having understood input that is a little
beyond their level of competence (comprehensible input). People acquire languages by being
exposed to comprehensible input, i.e. input which is slightly beyond their current level of
competence. Input should contain language already known by the students and also language
they have not seen yet. This can be done by using contextual information, extra-linguistic
knowledge and the like.

4
3.3.5. The Affective-filter hypothesis.
Krashen sees the learner’s emotional state as a filter that passes or blocks the input which is
necessary for acquisition. A low affective filter is desirable, since it will not block this input. The
affective filter has to do with the learner’s motivation and levels of anxiety.
The affective filter is an imaginary barrier that prevents learners from using input which is
available in the environment. Affective refers to such things as motives, needs, attitudes and
emotional states. A learner who is tense, angry, anxious or bored will screen out input, making it
unavailable for acquisition. On the whole, Krashen’s work has been very influential in
strengthening the recent focus on CLT. However, the Monitor Model, whose intuitive appeal
few teachers and researchers deny, has been seriously criticised for failing to meet certain
minimum standards necessary in scientific research.

3.4. Constructivism.

It takes elements of both cognitivism and Krashen’s model. It tries to foster both acquisition
and learning. Effective learning must be relevant, new input should be based on our students'
needs, meaningful, our students can relate the new input to their previous knowledge so as to
understand it better and comprehensible, when the gap between previous knowledge and the
new information is bridged by means of social interaction. This process transforms the input into
intake. Constructivism considers errors as an integral part of the learning process. It also
emphasizes the importance of teaching students learning to learn strategies, that is, to focus our
pupil's attention on how they learn in addition to what they learn.
Proponents of this view like L. Vigostky agree with Krashen about the fact that comprehensible
input is necessary for language acquisition. However, they are more concerned with how input is
made comprehensible. They see "interactional modifications" which take place in
conversations between native speakers and non-native speakers as the necessary mechanism for
this to take place. Some examples of interactional modifications are comprehension checks,
clarification requests, self-repetition and paraphrase. Moreover, this type of speech contains
shorter utterances, more imperative directives, and more simplified vocabulary than interaction
between native speakers. Similar adjustments have also been reported in studies of "teacher talk"
in classroom environments. According to M. Long, modified interaction promotes acquisition by
making input comprehensible.

4. SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES between L1 acquisition and L2 learning.

Taking all theories about L1 and L2 learning into account, we can sum up the similarities and
differences between the two processes.

4.1. Similarities.

Both L1 and L2 learning are cognitive processes. Children and L2 learners use their innate
ability to learn a language. Many errors in L1 and L2 learning are similar. Both children and L2
learners need to be exposed to comprehensible input. The receptive skill of listening is central to
their learning. There is a natural order both in L1 and L2 acquisition. Some grammatical forms
are acquired before others. In both processes repetition of the model takes place. Children imitate
the parental model they hear; L2 learners also repeat the teacher’s model.

5
4.2. Differences.

L2 learners are different from children, since there’s already a language present in their minds
that influences L2 learning. Therefore L1 interference errors may come up in the process of
learning. L2 is taught in an artificial situation. The classroom hardly resembles a L1 natural
learning environment. L2 learners have less time and opportunities for language exposure and
practice than a child acquiring his/her mother tongue. The motivation is different as well. The
parallel between the way in which mothers talk to their children (motherese) and the way
teachers talk to L2 learners is uncertain.

4.3. Foreign language teaching implications.

Having taken into account all the theories and hypotheses on L1 and L2 language learning, we
can list the following teaching implications: FL teachers must find all possible ways of
encouraging their pupils in their desire to learn. L2 learning cannot be done simply through
imitation and mechanical repetition; however, learning does have phases of imitation and
repetition. In the early stages, oral receptive skills (listening) are basic. Input must be
comprehensible and the level of difficulty must be slightly beyond the learner’s competence.
Teachers should respect a learner’s natural silent period. Pupils shouldn’t speak until they have
demonstrated a desire to do so and feel ready for it. Learning cannot lead to genuine acquisition
if the learner’s attitude isn’t positive. Classroom atmosphere must be friendly. Errors must be
seen as something natural and logical, since they are a positive evidence of the learning process.
Linguistics and psychology have contributed a great deal to the knowledge of the learning
process, and several methods have been derived from their ideas. However, research has not yet
provided a magic solution that can be applied to contemporary language teaching.

5. THE CONCEPT OF INTERLANGUAGE.

The first language interferes with the learner’s acquisition of the second language. This can
happen in two ways:
-Positive transfer or Zero Interference: Spanish: Noun+ s: ventana-ventanas; English: Noun+ s:
window-windows.
-Interference or Negative Transfer: Spanish: Noun+ Adjective: La casa grande; English:
Adjective+ Noun: *The house big.
Selinker coined the term interlanguage to refer to the systematic knowledge of a L2 which is
independent of both the learner’s L1 and the target language.
The various shapes of the learner’s language competence are called interlanguage. The term
draws attention to the fact that the learner’s language system is neither that of his mother tongue
nor that of the second language, but contains elements of both. We must talk about a continuum
from the source language through successive stages to the acquisition of the target language. All
L2 speakers are on some stage of interlanguage. Beginners are closer to their source language,
experts of L2 are closer to the target language.
The term "interlanguage" was coined by Selinker in 1969 to refer to the interim grammars
constructed by second-language learners on their way to the target language. The term won
favour over similar constructs, such as "approximative system" or "transitional competence".
According to interlanguage theory, learners use their cognitive abilities in a creative way to work
out hypotheses about the structure of the target language. They construct rules, try them out, and
alter them if they prove to be inadequate. This is a gradual process where learners form their own
linguistic system as they establish approximations of the target language and how it is used by
native speakers.

6
Language learning, in this account, proceeds in a series of transitional stages as learners acquire
more knowledge of L2. At each stage, they are in control of a language system which is
equivalent to neither the L1 nor the L2, i.e. an "interlanguage".
Selinker also noted that many L2 learners fail to reach target language competence. That is, they
cease to elaborate their interlanguages in some respect. This phenomenon is known as
"fossilisation", and cannot be remedied by further instruction. A good example of fossilisation
is the set of pronunciation errors which constitute a foreign accent. Fossilisation may occur
because learners believe that they do not need to develop their interlanguages any further in
order to communicate effectively. But there are more reasons for fossilization, such as:
preserving part of their previous social identity, not realising differences with the Target
Languages, not accepting changes in personality that learning languages involve and facing
physiological changes related to age.
The concept of interlanguage paved the way for communicative teaching methods. Since errors
are considered a reflection of students temporary language system and therefore teachers could
now use teaching activities which did not call for constant supervision of the student’s language.
Group work and pair work became suitable means for language learning.

6. ERROR ANALYSIS AND TREATMENT.

Error analysis plays a central role in interlanguage theory, because errors provide positive
evidence about the process of acquisition. On the one hand, errors provide evidence about the
sequence of development the learners pass through. In addition, errors throw light on the
strategies that learners use to assimilate the rules of the L2; the investigation of errors has a
double purpose: diagnostic and prognostic. Diagnostic tells us the learner’s state of the language
and prognostic can reorient language learning materials on the basis of the learner’s current
problems.

6.1. Types of errors.

A first distinction is made between an error, which is the result of a lack of competence, and
mistake, which is the result of fatigue, lack of attention or some other aspect of performance.
Errors are likely to emerge when learners make wrong deductions about L2, while mistakes are
made by everybody even in their mother language, but they must be able to recognise and correct
them.
Research in the field of error analysis tends to concentrate on psycholinguistic errors, because
they can tell us more about the learners' developmental sequence than linguistic errors, incorrect
utterances at a given point in time.
Psycholinguistic errors are usually classified into interlingual and intralingual errors.
Interlingual Errors are those resulting from L1 interference, it’s a learning strategy known as
transfer. The teacher must always be aware of the possible interactions in order to emphasise
those points that may pose problems to students. Intralingual or Developmental Errors
resulting from partial learning of the target language. As regards the latter, they provide clues
about the kind of strategies that learners employ to simplify the task of learning a second
language. Two examples of such strategies are:
-Overgeneralization, an extension of some general rule to items not covered by this rule: *goed
for went, *cooker for cook).
-Simplification, which occurs when the learner omits grammatical or propositional elements in
production: * He hitting for He’s hitting me.

7
6.2. Error treatment and language learning implications.

An excessive focus on fluency has sometimes resulted in a complete rejection of attention to

form and error correction in foreign language teaching. Foreign language teachers can (and
should) provide guided, form-based instruction and correction in specific circumstances:
-Teachers should not hesitate to correct persistent mistakes which learners seem not to notice.
-Moreover, teachers should be especially aware of errors that the majority of learners in a class
are making when they share the same language background.
-Teachers might also try to become aware of those structures which are beginning to emerge in
their students' interlanguage and provide some guided instruction precisely at that moment.
-It may be useful to encourage learners to take part in the process, e.g. by creating activities
which draw their attention to forms they use in communicative practice, which encourage them
to ask questions about language forms, and which engage the students in self- and peer-
correction. In general, teachers should accept students’ own pace, adapt activities to the problems
of students, grade the communicative demands of the activities, accept communication errors as
more important than grammatical errors, develop a code system for marking written exercises
and finally, treat errors according to class stages, which are: presentation, controlled practice,
free practice, feedback on content and feedback on form.
There are many different procedures and techniques, according to Harmer, that can be used for
the correction of oral and written work:
-Oral work can be corrected by the students themselves, in this case the teacher helps him by
means of: finger correction, questioning, repetition, different intonation, use of rods and
flashcards and mime. Oral work can also be corrected by another student through peer-
correction. And of course, the teacher can also correct the students.
-Written work can be corrected by means of a code, reference grammar books and question
prompts. Some techniques are listing the most important or common errors and listing them in
class, correction games, correction in groups or self-correction.

7. CONCLUSION.

To finish off, I may say that language teaching is a complex process in which we should pay
special attention to the process occurring to each of our pupils, not only to errors but also to their
evolution. In that way, we could decide on how to help them in their attempt to learn the foreign
language.

8. BIBLIOGRAPHY.

Some of the books I have checked to elaborate this unit, all of them published in the 2nd half of
the 20th century, are the following:
HARMER, J. 1983. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Longman
KRASHEN, S. 1981. Second Language Acquisition and Learning.
RICHARDS, J.C. Error Analysis. Longman. 1974.
RICHARDS, J.C.Dictionary of Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics. Longman. 1985.