SLA Theories

Lightbown & Spada

Behaviorism and Contrastive Analysis

1. Behaviorism

Learning is explained thorugh imitation, practice, reinforcement (feedback), and habit formation.

• language learning was viewed as a formation of habits —→ a person learning a second language should form the same habits as they formed when learning their first language

• second language applications

  • dominated language teaching from the 1940s to the 1970s, especially in North America

  • emphasized mimicry and memorization (e.g.: dialogues, sentence patterns)

  • linked to the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH): posited that similarities between the L1 and L2 would ease learning, while differences would cause difficulty

• criticisms

  • learners often make errors not predicted by CAH

    • errors resembling child language

    • universal patterns accross diverse L1 backgrounds

  • L1 influence is more complex than simple habit transfer —→ learners actively assess similarities and differences between languages

2. Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)

• developed by structural linguists to predict L2 learning challeneges based on L1-L2 comparisons

• rejection of behaviorism as an explanation was partially triggered by Chomsky’s critique of it

• limitations: fails to account for many learner errors, especially those not directly tied to L1 interferenced

Chomsky’s Universal Grammar (UG)

Innate knowledge of Universal Grammar (UG) allows children to acquire language during a critical period. UG consists of principles common to all languages.

• debate about whether UG is fully accessible in L2 acquisition, especially post-critical period

1. Key Themes

• Lydia White: UG is central to understanding L2 acquisition

• Bley-Vroman & Schachter: UG may not explain L2 acquisition for adults, alternative theories are needed

• Vivian Cook: the logical problem of UG of L2 acquisition suggests that learners know more than input alone can explain, which implies UG involvement

2. Variations

• some argue UG remains unchanged in L2 acquisition

• others suggest it is altered by prior language learning

3. Research focus

• examines advanced learners’ grammatical competence (e.g.: through grammaticality judgements)

• investigates whether L2 learners achieve native-like underlying competence

Krashen’s Monitor Model

1. Five hypotheses

• Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis

  • acquisition: subconscious, natural (like L1 acquisition)

  • learning: conscious, rule-based

• Monitor Hypothesis

  • acquired system initiates speech

  • learned system acts as an editor (but requires time, focus, and rule knowledge)

• Natural Order Hypothesis

  • L2 acquisition follows predictable sequences like L1 acquisition

  • the language features that are easiest to state are not always the easiest to acquire (e.g.: third-person “-s” is learned late despite being easy to explain because many advanced speakers get it wrong too)

• Input Hypothesis

  • acquisition occurs via comprehensible input (i+1 = slightly beyond current level of the learner)

  • i = the level of langauge already acquired

  • +1 = language that is just a step beyond that level

• Affective Filter Hypothesis

  • a metaphorical barrier that prevents learners from acquiring language even when appropriate input is available

  • emotional factors, like anxiety or motivation, can block input

2. Criticisms

• circular definitions

• lack of empirical testability

• overemphasis on input: later research shows instruction aids certain features (e.g.: Swain’s comprehensible input)

3. Legacy

• influenced communicative language teaching (CLT) and immersion programs

  • after reaching a certain level of proficiency, students may fail to improve further

Cognitivist Theories

1. Information processing

• learning as gradual automatization of knowledge (declarative → procedural)

• key concepts

  • attention: limited capacity (there is a limit to how much a learner can actively pay attention to), learners prioritize meaning over form initially

  • automaticity: practice (via and exposure/ comprehension) frees cognitive resources for higher level processing = gradually information that used to be new becomes easier to process

  • restructuring: sudden progress or backsliding due to systemic knowledge reorganization (e.g.: over generalizing “-ed” to irregular verbs)

    • backsliding: a systematic aspect of a learner’s language incorporates too much/ wrong things

  • transfer-appropriate processing: recall is better in contexts similar to learning conditions

    • our memories record context in which the material was learnt —

• information processing —→ language acquisition = learning a skill

  • learning starts with declarative knowledge referred to as “that“

  • through practice, declarative knowledge may become procedural knowledge - “how“

  • procedural knowledge overtakes declarative language knowledge

2. Connectionism

• rejects innate linguistic modules, learning is frequency-based —→ frequency with which learners encounter specific linguistic features in the input and the frequency with which features occur together

• key ideas

  • exposure to linguistic patterns strengthens neural connections (e.g.: subject-verb agreement through repeated input)

    • hearing it over and over in a specific linguistic contexts→ connections between these elements that occur together frequently

    • comes from the observation that much of the language we use in ordinary conversation is predictable, in some cases even formulaic

  • language is learned is chunks, not just word-by-words

• evidence: generalization and overgeneralization errors

• the competition model

  • an explanation for language acquisition that takes into account not only language form but also language meaning and language use

  • exposure to examples of language associated with particular meanings → understanding of how to use the “cues” with which the language signals specific functions

3. Interaction Hypothesis

• modified interaction (negotiation for meaning) aids comprehension and acquisition

  • how speakers modify their speech and their interaction patterns in order to help learners participate in a conversation/ understand some information

• comprehensible input it necessary for language acquisition (as seen in Krashen’s theory)

• Michael Long: modified interaction is the necessary mechanism for making language comprehensible

  • what learners need is not simplification of the linguistic forms but rather an opportunity to interact with other speakers → working towards mutual comprehension

  • interlocutors figure out what they need to do to keep the conversation going and make the input comprehensible

• modified interactions: elaboration, slower speech rate, gesture, provision of additional contextual cues

• examples of conversational modifications:

  • comprehension checks (native speaker) - do you understand?

  • clarification requests (learner) - could you repeat please?

  • self-repetition/paraphrasing (native speaker)

• revised version: emphasizes corrective feedback during interaction (Swain’s comprehensible output hypothesis - the demands of producing comprehensible output push learners ahead in their development)

  • when learners must produce language that their interlocutor can understand that they most likely to see the limits of their second language ability and the need to find better ways to express their meaning

4. Noticing Hypothesis

• argues that learners must consciously notic linguistic features to acquire them

  • Richard Schmidt: theorized that second language learners could not begin to acquire a language feature until they had become aware of it in the input

• debate: some argue subconscious processing also contributes

5. Processability Theory

• learners acquire language features in a set sequence based on processing ease

• Bill VanPatten:  learners have limited processing capacity and cannot pay attention to form and meaning at the same time

• Manfred Pienemann

  • developed his processability theory —→ basis: continued research with learners of different languages in a variety of settings, both instructional and informational

  • earners don’t transfer features from their first language right away → they need to first build enough understanding of the second language before they can start using what they know from their first language to help them

Sociocultural Theory (Vygotsky)

1. Social interaction as the foundation of learning

Learning arises from social interaction, cognition is mediated by language

• sociocultural theory views thinking and speaking as intertwined: speaking mediates thinking

2. Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)

The gap between what a learner can do independently and what they can achieve with guidance from a more knowledgeable person (expert or peer).

• in L2 learning:

  • a learner might struggle to form a grammatical sentence alone but succeed with scaffolding (e.g., prompts, corrections) from a teacher or peer

  • Example: a learner co-constructs a sentence in French ("Je me lave" vs. "Je lave") through dialogue

• collaborative dialogue: learners co-construct knowledge thorugh intercations (Swain & Lapkin’s work on French immersion)

3. Mediation and tools

Language is a cultural tool that shapes thought. Other tools include writing, gestures, and technology.

• in L2 contexts:

  • learners use private speech (self-talk) to practice language internally

4. Key differences from other theories

• Krashen: ZPD is co-constructed, not just input driven

• Interaction Hypothesis: focuses on social activity as the source of learning, not just cognitive processes

5. Applications

• emphasizes pair/ group task where learners negotiate meaning (e.g.: reflexive verbs in French)