The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Learning
Introduction
Controversial issue: the significance of conscious and unconscious processes in second language acquisition. This controversy stems from differing perspectives on how learners internalize and utilize linguistic knowledge. Some theories emphasize the necessity of conscious awareness and rule application, while others highlight the role of implicit, subconscious processes.
One view: conscious understanding is crucial for the development of correct linguistic forms and their appropriate usage. This perspective posits that errors in language production arise from deficits in explicit knowledge, such as grammatical rules or vocabulary, as well as from instances of forgetting or attentional lapses. This traditional viewpoint lacks robust theoretical support, as contemporary theories generally do not consider conscious grammar study either necessary or sufficient for successful language learning.
Bialystok (1978): introduced a framework that allows for a role for conscious knowledge in second language learning, suggesting that learners can access and utilize explicit linguistic information.
Rutherford and Sharwood Smith (1985): proposed the concept of 'consciousness-raising,' suggesting that activities designed to enhance learners' awareness of specific linguistic features can facilitate language learning. This involves drawing learners' attention to aspects of the target language that they may not have noticed otherwise.
Another view: language learning is primarily an unconscious process. This perspective emphasizes the role of implicit learning mechanisms, whereby learners acquire linguistic knowledge without conscious effort or awareness.
Seliger: suggests that language learning predominantly occurs at the unconscious level (Seliger 1983: 187), implying that learners internalize linguistic patterns through exposure and usage, rather than explicit instruction.
Krashen (1981, 1983, 1985): developed a theory based on the distinction between 'acquisition' (a subconscious process) and 'learning' (a conscious process). According to Krashen, 'learning' is of limited utility in real-world language use, as fluency and spontaneous communication rely primarily on acquired knowledge.
A third position: advocates for circumventing the issue of consciousness altogether, focusing instead on observable behaviors and cognitive processes. This perspective seeks to avoid the complexities and ambiguities associated with defining and measuring consciousness in the context of language learning.
McLaughlin, Rossman, and McLeod (1983): argue against Krashen's acquisition/learning distinction, deeming the divide between conscious and unconscious knowledge to be unsustainable. They propose a more integrated view of cognitive processing in second language learning.
Odlin (1986: 138): recommends divorcing explicit and implicit knowledge from the 'notoriously slippery notion of consciousness,' suggesting that research should focus on the characteristics and interactions of these two types of knowledge, regardless of whether they are consciously accessible.