Second Language Acquisition: Cognitive Perspectives
COMPLEXITY THEORY IMPLICATIONS
A dynamic framework is crucial to understand the intricate nature of Second Language Acquisition (SLA). While a definitive physical flow model remains elusive, we recognize that SLA arises from complex interactions between individuals and their environment. Language learning is a personalized process, potentially unique to each learner. Authentic language use, encompassing input, output, and interaction, is essential for pattern recognition and full development. Static analysis of rules alone is insufficient.
COGNITIVE ACCOUNTS OF SLA
Analogies for the learner include information processors like computers, repositories of knowledge like books, and individual trees within a larger forest ecosystem. Knowledge transfer is likened to sharing information (book), shaping behavior (behaviorist), or guiding exploration (constructivist).
GENERAL OVERVIEW: Applying First Language Acquisition (FLA) Accounts to SLA
BEHAVIORISM (1940s – 1950s) – SKINNER
- Learning involves changing behavior by adding new routines through imitation and practice.
- Operant conditioning emphasizes stimulus-response-reinforcement for habit formation.
- The nature of language input from the environment shapes language behavior.
Example: A baby’s inaccurate imitation of adult speech demonstrates selective repetition based on developmental readiness.
OVRGNERALZTION
- Children use language creatively and prioritize meaning.
- They acquire more language than their direct input would suggest, highlighting the “logical problem of language acquisition.”
- Errors may persist despite correction, indicating selective learning.
SLA Implication: Habits formed in FLA interact with those needed for SLA, influencing error patterns.
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS (1960s)
This approach sought to predict SLA errors based on L1 interference, but it failed to explain many errors and the limited role of L1 transfer, particularly in later stages.
INNATISM (1960s-1970s) – CHOMSKY
Chomsky’s theory, focused on FLA, posits an innate Language Acquisition Device (LAD) containing universal grammar (UG) rules. Exposure to language triggers the LAD, leading to language acquisition.
IMPLICATIONS IN SLA
- View 1: UG applies equally to SLA, requiring only input to activate the LAD.
- View 2 (Krashen’s Monitor Model):
Krashen’s 5 Hypotheses:
- Learning/Acquisition: Questions the clear distinction between conscious and unconscious processes.
- Monitor Hypothesis: Explores the role of monitoring in language development.
- Natural Order Hypothesis: Suggests a predictable sequence of language acquisition.
- Comprehensible Input: Emphasizes the importance of understandable input for acquisition.
- Affective Filter: Highlights the impact of emotional factors on language learning.
Chomsky critiques the Monitor Model and suggests a role for conscious learning.
COGNITIVISM (1970s ONWARDS)
This perspective links cognitive development stages to language acquisition:
- Sensorimotor Stage (0-2 years): Interaction with the environment.
- Preoperational Stage (2-7 years): Symbolic representation.
- Concrete Operational Stage (7-12 years): Rule learning.
- Formal Operational Stage (12+ years): Abstract thinking.
Cognitive development and knowledge result from the interplay between brain development and experience.