• The Natural Approach was developed by Tracy Terrell and Stephen Krashen

and was introduced in the book The Natural Approach in 1983. This method
is based on observations of how children acquire their native language. It
attempts to adapt this process of language acquisition to an adult learning
environment. From this perspective, it is necessary to emphasize the
importance of communicative skills instead of focusing on grammar-based
language learning. This method highlights comprehensible and meaningful
practice activities and introduces the language learner to a great deal of
vocabulary at the beginning rather than the production of grammatically
perfect sentences. Basic rules for implementing this method include not
using the learners' native language and not referring to grammatical
explanations. Language is viewed as a vehicle for communicating meanings
and messages
• NA is in line with traditional natural approaches to language teaching as it
put more emphasis on communicative language use just in L2 without any
grammatical analysis, drilling, or a particular grammatical theory.
These methods are called natural since according to Krashen, they believed adult
L2 learners have two means of internalizing the Target Language:
- Subconscious/ intuitive processes: not unlike the process used by a child,
pick up language intuitively- acquisition
- Conscious processes- learning

According to Chomsky, because of the existence of the Language Acquisition

Device (LAD), even with a minimum amount of input, language acquisition is
triggered and brought about:
Input--- LAD (in mind)--- Output and Acquisition
But unlike Chomsky’s innate hypothesis, in Krashen’s theories, maximum
exposure is needed for optimum acquisition.

The Natural Approach follows a communicative syllabus.

 Krashen and his student believed that methods preceding NA were not actually
built around actual theories of lg acquisition, but theories of something else like
the structure of language.
Unlike CLT, NA paid scant attention to a theory of language.
In this approach, language is viewed as a vehicle for communicating meanings
and messages.
Acquisition can take place only when people understand messages in the target
language.
Despite their claim, they view learning as mastering structures stage by stage.

Krashen’s approach is composed of five major hypotheses:

✓ The acquisition/ learning hypothesis
✓ The monitor hypothesis
✓ The natural order hypothesis
✓ The input hypothesis
✓ The affective filter hypothesis

a) Acquisition (subconscious) Hypothesis:

1)child language learning, 2)learning in the natural context and 3) fluency in
learning.

Comprehension Hypothesis
Subconscious "picking up" of language
Focus on meaning
Implicit
Acoustical-they need to hear it
Provide comprehensible input
Provide interesting input
Provide compelling input
Grammar as aid to immediate communication
Little-to-no error correction

b)Learning (conscious)Hypothesis:
1)adult language learning, 2)learning in the classroom context, and 3) accuracy.

Skill Building Hypothesis

Conscious study of language
Focus on form
Explicit
Intellectual-they need to understand it
Explain grammar rules
Provide rules and practice
Force output above the level of acquisition
Grammar as subject matter
Frequent error correction

• There is no interface between acquisition and learning. Thus, learning

cannot lead to acquisition or vice versa.
Monitor hypothesis:
1)The rules of the language that the learner learns (conscious learning) do not
contribute much to the learner's language ability.
2)They can be used to monitor and clean up the language learner output (repair
output).
3) Rules learned through error correction and direct instruction in grammar may
have only a small effect on language production.
4)Even if the learner learns all the rules of the language, their usefulness is
limited.

There are three limitations in using the monitor:

- Time of processing: for choosing a rule and applying it
- Focus on form
- Knowledge of rules (competence vs. performance)

1) Monitor Over-Users: Learners are so anxious and focused on correctness that

they cannot speak with any real fluency.

2) Monitor Under-Users: These learners do not focus on correctness because

they have not consciously learned the rules or have chosen not to use their
conscious knowledge of the target language.

3) Optimal Monitor -Users: These learners can maintain a balance between self-
correction and fluency, so error correction is not an obstacle in their work.
(These learners use their knowledge appropriately.)
The natural order hypothesis:
1) It argues that the acquisition of grammatical structures, or morphemes occurs
in a predictable sequence.
2) It applies to both first-language acquisition and second-language acquisition
3) The order of acquisition of a first language is different from the order of
acquisition of that same language as a second language.

However, regardless of native language, all language learners of any single

second language appear to follow the same predictable order.
Eg. :
(learners of English as a second language generally acquire the grammatical
structure of yes-no questions before the grammatical structure of wh-
questions.)
🟢 explicit teaching and learning cannot change the natural order of acquisition.

• Natural order hypothesis

-it’s the second criticism of the monitor model surrounds the evidence in
support of natural order hypothesis
-children acquiring English as a second language acquire the morphemes of a
language in a predictable sequence similar but not identical. Acquiring English
as a first language confirms the validity of the natural order hypothesis
-other morpheme studies on adults acquiring English as a second language
show similar result

Kevin R. Gregg
To generalize the result of a study on limited English morphemes to second
language acquisition as a whole is “fallible”.
Second language learners acquire other linguistic features too; like phonology,
syntax, semantics, and pragmatism in any predictable sequence.

• Input

How the learner acquires a second language (how second language acquisition
takes place)
The Input hypothesis is only concerned with 'acquisition', not 'learning'.
the learner improves and progresses along the natural order
Since not all of the learners can be at the same level of linguistic competence at
the same time, Krashen suggests that natural communicative input is the key to
designing a syllabus.

• The affective filter hypothesis

It says that a number of affective variables play a facilitative but non-casual role
in second language acquisition.
Variables: motivation, self-confidence, anxiety and personality traits.
~ learners with high motivation, self-confidence, a good self image and with
low level of anxiety and extroversion are more successful in second language
acquisition.
~ learners with low motivation, low self-esteem, anxiety, introversion and
inhibition can face the “mental block” that prevents comprehensible input from
being used for acquisition.