MIDLANDS STATE UNIVERSITYFACULTY OF ARTS

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH AND COMMUNICATIONBAEH 201: SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

Mangeya H

0913 465 123/0914 435 259

mangeyau@msu.ac.zw/mangeyah@yahoo.com

MODULE SYNOPSIS

Second language acquisition looks at how speakers gradually gain the ability to use another language other than their mother (native) language. In other words, it looks at how speakers gain competence in a language other than their first language.

The course looks at a number of issues related to second language acquisition. These can be sub-divided into three broad areas. That is:

1. Description and explanation of second language acquisition (SLA). This mainly focuses on outlining the various stages (or processes) that a speaker undergoes in process of developing competence in a second language. Secondly, it provides explanation(s) on how it is that speakers develop competence in a second language in the way they do. Such things as age, motivation and the type and amount of language instances (input) play a major role in determining how the acquisition process proceedes. Of particular interest are two areas looked at by Klein (1986). These are, the six dimensions of second language acquisition and the four tasks of a second language learner.

2. SLA Theory. This part of the course looks at the scientific explanation of SLA. In other words, it accounts for why SLA proceeds in the manner that it does. Of major concern in this section are a number of theories (as well as hypotheses) that account for SLA. These include Skinner’s Behaviorism, Selinker’s Interlanguage, Krashen’s Monitor Model and Lennerberg’s Critical Age Hypothesis (CAH). For each of these theories, focus is on outlining and explaining its major tenets (that is, how it explains SLA) and assessing it in terms of its strengths and shortcomings.

3. Second Language Pedagogy. Second language pedagogy focuses specifically on how learners of a second language develop competence in a second language through formal means. That is, through learning the second language in a classroom (or academic) set up. Of major concern in this section is a consideration of the various approaches that are used in the teaching of a second language. At the same time the approaches are looked at in terms of the historical circumstances surrounding their emergence- for a better appreciation of the approach in question. Some of these approaches include:- the grammar-translation ( traditional), the direct method, the audio-lingual, the communicative methods of second language teaching.

MODULE (COURSE) OUTLINE

1. Introduction 2. Klein’s Six dimensions of a second language acquisition.

a. Propensity:i. Social integration

ii. Communicative neediii. Attitudeiv. Education

b. Language faculty:i. Biological determinants of the language processor

ii. Available knowledgec. Access

i. Inputii. Opportunities for communication

d. The structure of the process:i. Symchronisation

ii. Variabilitye. Tempo of acquisitionf. End state:

i. Selectivity in fossilisationii. Backsliding

3. Klein’s Four tasks of a second language learner:a. Analysisb. Synthesisc. Embeddingd. Matching

4. Behaviourism and SLA

5. Interlanguage theory of SLA6. The Monitor model. 7. Second language pedagogy

a. Grammar-translation (traditional) methodb. Direct methodc. Audio-lingual methodd. Communicative method(s)

REFERENCES

Bley-Vroman, R (1986) The fundamental character of foreign language learning in

Rutherford W and Smith M. S (eds) Grammar and second language teaching

Cook G (2003) Applied linguistics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cook V (1996) Second language learning and teaching, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Crystal D (1991) A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics, Oxford: Blackwell

Ellis, R (1985) Understanding second language acquisition, Oxford: Oxford University Press

Ellis, R (1997) Second language acquisition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gitsaki (Unpublished notes) Second language acquisition theories: overview and evaluation

Krashen S.D (1981) Second language acquisition and language teaching, London: Pergamon.

Krashen S.D. (1987) Principles and practice in second language acquisition, London: Prentice

Hall.

Littlewood W.T. (1984) Foreign and language teaching: language acquisition research and

implications for the classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McLaughlin B (1987) Theories of language learning, London: Arnold.

Spada N and Lightbown P. M. (2002) Second language acquisition in Schmidtt N (ed) An

Introduction to applied linguistics, London: Arnorld.

Rivers W.M. (1968) Teaching foreign language skills, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Yule G (1985) The study of language: an introduction, Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

TOPIC ONE

INTRODUCTION

It is very rare to encounter a person who only speaks one language. In more cases than not people typically speak more than one language. Increased mobility and its resultant increase in the instances of interaction has meant that speakers find it necessary to develop linguistic ability in languages other than their mother (or native) language. A native language is one that a speaker learns at childhood. As such it also referred to as a first language. There are a number of factors that have necessitated the development of linguistic ability another language. Such factors include education and employment (economic) reasons. That is to say that, in Zimbabwe for example, it is imperative for scholars to be conversant in English as it is the medium (language) of instruction- academic subjects or courses are taught in English. The same is true in terms of employment purposes. It is almost axiomatic that a an academic pass or an ability to communicate in English is synonymous to the opening of employment opportunities.

The module looks at how speakers develop linguistic competence in a language other than their first or native language. The underlying assumption is the recognition that first language acquisition (FLA) is fundamentally different from SLA. As shall be exposed during the course of the module, there are a number of factors which set SLA apart from FLA. Such factors include motivation, attitude and age, to mention but a few.

SLA, as Ellis (1997) defines, refers to the systematic study of how speakers acquire a language in addition to their native. In SLA, the term ‘second’ is used in two broad respects. Firstly, it is used strictly or specifically to refer to the actual number of language a speaker is learning, or has already learnt. In this respect, we can then refer to a speaker learning their second, third or fourth language (as is the case in South Africa). Secondly, which is the common usage of the term in SLA, the term ‘second’ is used generically or broadly to refer to acquisition of a language, regardless of actual number, in addition to one’s first. Thus, looked at in this second way, the term second refers to the development of competence in language that is addition to the first. It does not matter whether the language in question actually be a second, third or fourth. They are all referred to as second language. Thus, for the purposes of this discussion, the term ‘second’ in SLA, refers to the process of learning any language in addition to one’s native language. As such, a Shona or Ndebele speaker learning English at school is learning a second language. If that same speaker goes on to learn French or Portuguese, in addition to English, we still refer to them as still learning a second language. SLA therefore refers to the systematic study of the way people learn a language other than their mother tongue.

Development of competence can proceed in two distinct and independent ways. ‘Acquisition’, according to Krashen (1981 and 1987), can take place in two main ways. That is, naturally and formally.

a. Naturally-this is whereby a speaker develops competence in a second language (L2) through actual communication with the speakers of the L2. That is, as Yule (1985) points out, through meaningful interaction with speakers of the target language. Target language, in SLA, refers to the language that the speaker is developing competence in (for example, for a speaker who is developing the ability to communicate in English- as is generally the norm in for most Zimbabweans- English becomes the target language). The essence of the argument is that for one to be considered as naturally developing competence in a target language, one has to be involved in actual interaction with speakers of the target language whereby they initiate and sustain conversation. This therefore means that there is very little teaching, if any, of the grammatical aspects of the target language. Krashen refers to naturalistic development of competence by the special term ‘acquisition’- reference is made to the Acquisition-learning hypothesis of the Monitor Model. Examples of cases whereby an L2 speaker develops competence naturalistically or through acquisition include a situation whereby one marries into a different culture (which means that, by default, another language is involved. A case in point is a case whereby a Shona first language (L1) speaker marries someone from a Ndebele background. The Shona L1 speaker might then be forced to interact their in-laws in Ndebele. By so doing they would be naturalalistically developing competence in Ndebele. In other words, they would be acquiring Ndebele.

b. Formally- another way of gaining ability in an L2 is a case whereby the speaker is actually taught the grammatical rules of the target language. Those who have taken Shona as an academic subject might recall the notorious and infamous mpanda zvindori (noun classes and copulatives, respectively). More often than not, this usually takes place in a classroom set up. Krashen specifically refers to such development of competence in the target language as ‘learning’ (refer, again, the acquisition-learning hypothesis. Krashen’s main thesis in the acquisition-learning hypothesis is that speakers who follow the learning route in developing competence in a target language do not reach native speaker ability in it. That is, they fall way short of what the first language speakers of the target language are capable of doing in terms of linguistic ability. It is only those who follow the acquisition route who might reach native-speaker ability. This argument makes it easier to appreciate how it is that speakers who might attain higher grades in written language exercises find using the target language in actual verbal interaction a tall order.

This does not mean that the distinction between acquisition and learning is widely accepted. There are some who see this distinction as unnecessary. Cook (1991), for example, does not make this distinction. Rather she refers to instances of development of competence in a second language generally as ‘learning’. Some refer to this process by the blanket term ‘acquisition’. In such instances the two terms are used interchangeably.

There are also cases whereby some scholars make the distinction between a second language and a foreign language. One such scholar is Littlewood (1984). He considers the role played by the target language as major determinant in classifying the target language either as a second or a foreign language. It also invariably brings into consideration whether the target is officially spoken used in that country. As such Littlewood regards/defines a second language as one that is accorded official status in the country in which the acquisition process takes place. An example is whereby English is regarded as a second language in Zimbabwe. In the same vein Portuguese is likewise regarded as a second language in Mozambique. The same holds true of Afrikaans in South Africa. A foreign language, on the other hand, is a case whereby the target language is not used officially in the country in which the acquisition process is taking place. An example is the learning of French, Hebrew or Portuguese in Zimbabwe. The learning of any of these languages is most likely meant towards meeting personal or private goals rather than public ones.

CONCLUSION

The term ‘second’ in SLA can either refer to the numerical number of the language acquired in addition to the first or to any language acquired subsequent to the first or native language. The latter is the most common usage of the term second.

SLA refers to the systematic study of how speakers develop competence in a language that is other than their mother tongue.

A distinction can be made between acquisition and learning. Acquisition refers to development of competence in the L2 through meaningful

interaction with the native speakers of the target language or through the use of the target language among acquirers.

Learning refers to a case whereby the learner develops competence in the target language through being taught its grammatical rules.

One is most likely to reach native-speaker ability through acquisition rather than learning. A second language can be distinguished from a foreign language A second language is a case whereby the target language is officially recognised as a

medium of communication in the country in which the acquisition is taking palce. A foreign language is that which is not recognised as an official medium of

communication in the country in which the acquisition process is taking place.

TOPIC TWO

KLEIN’S SIX DIMENSIONS OF SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

It is a common misnomer (misconception) that an attempt at learning a language automatically translates into a mastery of the target language. Acquiring a language requires much more than simple exposure to the input of the target language. Input refers to the samples of language to which the learner is exposed to. It is a reality that acquirers who are exposed to the same input under the same conditions can manifest different levels of proficiency in the target language. The differences in ability can attributed to a number of factors which include, among others, the kind of drive pushing the acquirer and whether the acquirer feels they have acquired enough. These determining factors are referred to as dimensions of second language acquisition.

The dimensions can be divided into two broad groups.

a. Three components that determine the process of language acquisition- namely: propensity, language faculty and access.

b. Three categories which characterise the process of language acquisition- namely: structure of the process, tempo and end state.

COMPONENTS WHICH DETERMINE THE PROCESS OF LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

1. Propensity

Propensity refers to the urge that drives a language learner to acquire a second language. It covers the totality of factors that induce the learner to apply their language faculty to acquiring a second language. It is not always the case that these factors have a positive effect in terms of determining the effort put in by the acquirer. Some of these factors have a positive influence while others exert a negative influence. The actual propensity of the learner is determined by the outcome of the propensity factors.

Four factors impact on the propensity of the language learner.

a. Social integrationSocial integration is whereby the acquisition of a language is perceived by the acquirer as being synonymous to acquisition of a social identity. We can equate the acquisition of English, for example, as a process of acquiring both a language as well as its culture. Social

integration is a dominant/important factor in first language acquisition whereby the child regards the acquisition of the language as the acquisition of both a social and personal identity.

The importance of social integration as a determining factor seems to diminish as we move away from FLA to other forms of language acquisition. Adults generally would already have formed their social and personal identities by the time they embark on the process of SLA. A student at MSU, for example, would not learn a second language for purposes of being integrated into its culture. A Namibian student might choose to learn Shona/Ndebele not for purposes of being socially integrated into their respective cultures, but for the simple functional reasons of enabling communication. In extreme cases speakers may fear that acquisition of another language results in a corresponding loss of their cultural identity. In such cases ability in a second language is seen as the degree to which the language learner is willing to give up markers of their own cultural identity. This fear of acculturation might cause learners to fossilise early and thereby result in rampant pidginisation. (For an in-depth discussion on fossilisation refer to end state below in 6 below).

This by no means follows that social integration does not play a positive factor in determining the acquisition process. If the learner has a genuine interest in the language, its speakers and its culture, this might drive them to attaining a native speaker-like ability in the second language. Cases of cultural intermarriages present cases whereby social integration is a dominant positive factor in the acquisition process.

b. Communicative needs.This is whereby the driving force behind acquisition of the second language is based on purely functional purpose of enhancing communication/interaction with the speakers of the target language. In this case the learner has no intentions whatsoever of being socially identified with the target language culture.

There is a need to distinguish communicative needs from social integration. This is because both these factors imply the satisfaction of certain communicative needs. These two factors can be separated by the fact that they influence language acquisition in very distinct ways. This can be illustrated by the five linguistic domains- phonology, morphology, syntax, vocabulary and discourse.

i. Phonology. One learning an L2 for communicative needs is not concerned with the correct pronunciation of words. Such notions as accent/tone or intonation cease to be of major concern to the L2 learner. In such cases speaking the language in a foreign accent gives away the L2 learner as an ‘alien’ (consider the ‘familiar’ Roman Catholic father joke(s)).

ii. Morphology. Inflectional morphemes are irrelevant, or are at least of little concern, to an L2 learner whose aims are primarily communicative. This is

because inflectional morphemes do not alter the meaning, or category, of lexical items (words). As a result getting the inflectional morpheme wrong does not alter the basic sense conveyed in utterances. Examples of inflectional morphemes include the plural /-z/ and the past tense morpheme /-ed/. Compare these inflectional morphemes with derivational morphemes such as /-ion/ and /-er/.

iii. Syntax. An L2 learner whose aim is sorely that of conveying messages is not worried with syntactic well-formedness. As a result such learner might use purely functional utterances which are syntactically unacceptable (not conforming to the rules of that language). One might come up with utterances such as Toilet where? (for Where is the toilet?).

iv. Vocabulary. Normally an L1’s vocabulary, by and large, covers a wide spectrum. L2 learners who, on the other hand, are learning the language for purely communicative purpose are only interested in the vocabulary that covers those topics/areas they are mostly interested in. As such the vocabulary of such L2 speakers tends to cover those domains that correspond to their needs. Such vocabularies developed for ‘specific purposes’ tend to be one-sided in comparison to that acquired for social integrative purposes.

v. Discourse. Mere communication can do without ritual conversation patterns that dominate speech. Such patterns include standard phrases, routine expressions and figures of speech. As such the L2 learner learning the language for communicative purposes tends to go straight to the point without concerning themselves with the ritual side of conversation.

c. Attitude. Attitude refers to the L2 learner’s subjective perception of the target language and its speakers. Klein observes that learners vary considerably in their attitude to the language they are learning. This in turn determines the rate at which the language is acquired. A learner who regards a particular language as gibberish/inferior and who cannot stand any of its speakers will be less successful in learning it. (Compare this to a situation whereby there is mutual respect between the language learner and the target language community). A negative attitude may be as a result of a fear of loss of social identity-what has been already referred to as acculturation. A negative attitude may cause the L2 speaker to manifest an imperferct command of a language and in the process ‘disgrace’ themselves with inappropriate/awkward or even ridiculous utterances in a bid to distance themselves from the target language. Klein refers to such cases as being instances of ‘ego permeability’.

d. Education. A second language can be learnt in much the same way as any other academic/theoretical subject like mathematics or geography, for example. This partly stems from the fact that

language makes up the educational organisation of any society. According to Western European traditions an educated person is one who has studied Latin and one or two modern Languages such as French, Klein (1986). In most African societies ability in the colonial language is seen as a measure of intellectual capacity. In itself, however, the educational ideal is considered to be the weakest among all the propensity factors. To be effective it needs to be combined with other propensity factors such as social advancement (measured in terms of good marks and passed examinations), avoidance of punishment etc.

2. Language faculty.

Every normal human being is endowed with an innate natural capacity for processing language-both as speakers and listeners (that is, as encoders and decoders of language). This natural capacity is realised through a specialised faculty in the human brain which Chomsky refers to as the language acquisition device (LAD). It is common to look at the language processor in terms of parts of the human brain, motor system and perceptual apparatus that are tuned to processing language. In SLA speakers reorganise the language processor to cope with another language- a feat that increasingly becomes difficult with age, according to the critical age hypothesis.

The functioning of the language processor is dependent upon two factors: (a) certain biological determinants and (b) the knowledge available to the speaker at any one time.

a. Biological determinants of the language processor.Biological components are comprised of articulatory apparatus, auditory apparatus and parts of the central nervous system (especially those that are concerned with perception, memory and higher cognitive functions). These vary during a speaker’s lifetime within certain limits. For example, it is generally assumed that the sensitivity of the ear to the higher sound frequencies tends to decline in old age.

b. Available knowledge.There are two distinct varieties of knowledge: conscious knowledge acquired from other people, from books, at school, etc and tacit knowledge- which is unconscious and, therefore, cannot be verbalised. Together conscious and tacit knowledge make up linguistic knowledge. However, linguistic knowledge alone is not enough in ensuring a full understanding of utterance meaning. One also needs to have a grasp of knowledge that is not explicitly stated in utterances. This knowledge is referred to as contextual or implicit knowledge. Contextual knowledge is constructed from the interlocutors’ knowledge of the situation, from preceding utterances and from their general knowledge of the world. For example, a ‘simple’ utterance like the one below might involve quite a considerable amount of contextual knowledge:

The Red devils won yesterday.

One needs to know, among other things, who the Red devils are, what league they play in, who they were playing against, what winning is and the actual day the game was played. All this contextual knowledge is not explicitly stated in the utterance per se. Rather it is constructed by the interlocutors as part of the communicative event.

Communication is heavily dependent on a combination of contextual (implicit) and linguistically conveyed (explicit) information. In spontaneous SLA there is a gradual shift in the balance of the two kinds of information. In early varieties of the language great weight is placed on contextual knowledge. This derives from the fact that the linguistic knowledge of the learner can only take a small part of the linguistic load. As the learner’s ability gradually improves they will become less dependent on non-linguistic knowledge.

3. Access.The term ‘access’ covers two distinct components which, in spite having many things in common, should be carefully distinguished: (a) amount of available input and (b) the range of opportunities available for communication. a. Input

Exposure to mere sounds of the target alone is not sufficient for a speaker to learner to successfully learn an L2. One needs to consider information received in parallel to the sounds the learner is exposed to. Parallel information encompasses the knowledge of the interlocutors involved (who is speaking to whom), accompanying ‘body language’ (which includes gestures, facial expressions, etc) and the reactions of the listeners (what may be referred to as feedback). The L2 learner must also be able to establish a relationship between identifiable segments of a sound stream and particular pieces of parallel information. Thus one might come to link the sequence njiva whilst pointing at a bird with a particular species of bird.

Patterns of speech and parallel information about the context of each speech event jointly represent the input to the learner’s language processor. This input may be subject to modification, conscious or unconscious, by the native speakers of the target language. Such caretaker speech is a common phenomenon in language acquisition in general- not just in SLA. In FLA it takes the form of motherese. In SLA it takes the form of ‘foreigner talk’ or ‘broken language’. In second language pedagogy/instruction it takes the form of ‘teacher talk’. In SLA native speakers have a general tendency of adjusting their language to the presumed potentialities/ perceived linguistic level of the L2 learner. Such adjustments occur in every linguistic domain:

Phonologically-speech is slowed down deliberately and articulation is exaggerated

Morphologically- verbs used mainly in the infinitiveSyntactically- word order modified and compound clauses avoided.Lexically- certain words avoided or supplemented with paraphrases.

In making such modifications into speech the native speaker is guided, consciously or unwittingly- by their hypothesis concerning the learner’s defective language skills. By so-doing the speaker may err in two ways. Firstly, these modifications may hinder comprehension if the learner is fairly advanced in the L2 language. Secondly, the L2 learner may interpret the modifications as a sign of social distance and ,may as a result, feel insulted by being addressed in such kind of jargon.

b. Opportunities for communicationSpontaneous SLA requires social interaction. In social interaction the learner is forced to bring to bear all the knowledge available to them. The learner may be expected to speed up the process of language acquisition when the need to communicate becomes stronger and the opportunities more frequent. Firstly, more interaction with the target language community offers more linguistic input to come to the learner at an increased frequency and in a wider range. Secondly, the learner is presented with more opportunities to test their own speech production against that of their environment- for purposes of verifying their hypotheses about the target language. The acquisition effort ceases at a point when the learner no longer notices any differences between their own production and that of their environment. Selective ending of the acquisition process by the learner (even though the learner may not have in actual fact completely mastered aspects of the L2) is known as ‘fossilisation’. Fossilisation is a common phenomenon in adult L2 learners as compared to their younger counterparts. This is because generally younger L2 learners are generally more attentive to their own production. Most importantly, they are not easily affected by such notions as fear of acculturation and bearing negative attitudes towards the L2 and its speakers. Opportunities for communication may also vary according to the actual location where the learning is taking place. There seems to be a distinction between the generally closed spaces of the low density areas as compared to the more open high density environments.

4. The structure of the process

This dimension looks at (a) how the various skills and elements of knowledge that make up language proficiency are synchronised and (b) the kind of variation that cuts aross learners and learner categories observable in the acquisition process. a. Synchronisation

Command of a language involves the acquisition of all kinds of linguistic knowledge. An example, an English L2 learner must be able to make proper use of the following types of information, among others.

i. The ability to distinguish between short and long vowels as in the following words: tin-teen, put-spoon. English has a 16-22 vowel system as compared to the 5-vowel system predominant in most Bantu languages.

ii. Morphologically English verbs have a very limited inflection system. This is in contrast with some European languages whose inflections present an endless source of learning difficulties. Consider conjugation of verbs in Portuguese, for example.

iii. Lexically English makes a distinction between function words (such as for, and, through) and content words (such as man, table, zebra). The L2 learner also has to contend with the repertoire idiomatic expression and figures of speech- most of which of which are peculiar to the language.

As Klein observes, the enumeration of the domains above is by no means exhaustive. However, it does indicate the breath of the problem facing the L2 learner, who must acquire a solid body of knowledge in each of these and several other domains. Yet these domains are not acquired in isolation. Language knowledge is a functional whole, composed of varied yet interrelated elements. This functional interrelatedness of the entire linguistic knowledge poses a problem for the learner. The question is: In what way and to what extent can the learner effectively single out from the whole the elements that need to be acquired? That is, the learner must device a way of assimilating phonological, morphological, syntactic, lexical as well as other kinds of knowledge (discourse, for example) in a synchronised fashion. For example, the acquisition of certain morphemes requires familiarity with certain phonological combinations (phonotactics). Each successive stage of acquisition requires the maintenance of a delicate balance among diverse aspects of linguistic knowledge.

This makes it impossible to determine the structure of the acquisition process. At the surface one might establish an order of acquisition by enumerating the newly acquired forms. To some extent this has been proved to be the case especially as is shown by Krashen’s Natural Order Hypothesis.

b. Variability

It follows that the structure of the acquisition process varies across learner categories. Causal factors of such variability include the biological endowment of the learner, his knowledge and the availability of linguistic input. The interplay of these and other propensity factors form a specific constellation which can never be the exactly the same in any two learners. This variation, however, occurs within certain parameterised boundaries/limits. For further development of this point refer to Krashen’s Natural Order Hypothesis.

5. Tempo of acquisition Tempo of acquisition refers to the speed at which the acquisition process proceeds. It determined by propensity, language processor and access. The pressure of communicative needs is likely to accelerate the learner’s progress (that is, other things being equal). Limited access to linguistic material or limited communication opportunities is likely to slow it down. A poor memory is likely to be a serious hindrance to the acquisition process.

Propensity and access seem to be the more important factors and they both tend to vary in the course of the acquisition process.

6. End stateThe end state marks the point at which the L2 learner4 can no longer learn aspects of the target language regardless of the effort they put in the acquisition process. Ideal it represents a perfect command of the target language. Taking into account the fact that language is comprised of many variants (dialect, register, sociolect, etc) it can be concluded that no single speaker can be in command of all these variants. As a rule, the process of language acquisition ceases long before a true mastery of the language can be claimed. Selinker (1972) refers to the end state as ‘fossilisation’. There are two type of fossilisation: (a) selective fossilisation and (b) backsliding into earlier stages of acquisition.

a. Selectivity in fossilisation.This is a case whereby only affects particular components of language knowledge (in the sense of proficiency) at different points in time. One such example is the premature termination of progress in acquiring the pronunciation of an L2. This happens long before the satisfactory state is reached- progress in syntax and vocabulary will be in actual fact be continuing. There are actually a number of cases whereby speakers profess inability in pronouncing certain words. This shows that they would have given up any further progress in getting the pronunciation of that particular word correct. There are a variety of reasons that cause selective fossilisation. These include:

i. A learner may simply feel it is unnecessary to improve their pronunciation any further, in light of their communicative needs.

ii. The learner may feel the need to keep a distance from their social environment- in a quest to preserve part of their social identity.

iii. The language processor may have undergone physiological changes with age which prevent the learner from acquiring a native pronunciation of the target language.

iv. The learner may no longer notice the difference between his own production and that of the environment

b. Backsliding This refers to a situation whereby, in some instances, a learner may, in the midst of an exchange, slide back into an earlier stage of acquisition. During this state, which may last for only a few sentences, that learner may, for example, ignore appropriate endings of inflected nouns or verbs, etc. Backsliding can be due to fatigue (as a result of prolonged conversation). It can also be as a result of a general sense of insecurity in the language- especially during earlier stages of acquisition.

Conclusion SLA is not a uniform process. No two learners can claim to have the same level of linguistic knowledge in the L2. Variability is a major characteristic of SLA. This variability can be best accounted for in terms of Klein’s six dimension of L2 acquisition.

TOPIC THREE

KLEIN’S FOUR TASKS OF AN L2 LEARNER

The process of acquiring a second language is by far not any one. The L2 learner has to assimilate quite a considerable amount of information- almost all at once. That is, the acquisition of an L2 is not such that the learner learns aspects of the L2 in a systematic chronological manner. As such the learner is faced with the problem of sorting out information of the L2 in such a way that the learning process becomes less burdensome. Klein characterises the learner’s task as that of overcoming four problems. The learner faces these problems at one and the same time and must therefore cope with them together. The learner is basically faced with the problems of analysis, synthesis, embedding and matching.

Learners solve these problems by utilising:

a. Shared world knowledgeb. Situational knowledgec. Contextual information from preceding discourse

Ellis comes up with a table that summarises the four tasks.

Problem/Task DescriptionAnalysis The learner has to segment the stream of acoustic signals into constituent

units and to bring the latter into line with parallel information or concurrent events which constitute the situational context of the utterance.

Synthesis The learner has to try to put the sounds (phonotactics) and words he has learnt together in order to produce and comprehend second language utterances.

Embedding The learner has to make utterances fit the context – situational and linguistic- in which they occur. This requires “a sort of balance of linguistic and contextual information. (discourse skills)

Matching The learner must continuously compare his current language variety with the target variety. The acquisition process ends at a point whereby the learner no longer notices any differences between his interlanguage and the target variety.

TOPIC FOUR

BEHAVIOURISM

Introduction to SLA theory in general

According to Klein (1986: 1) second language acquisition appears to be a process which:

a. Exhibits certain regularities. The acquisition process is not haphazard. It is systematic.

b. Is constrained by a number of factors determining its course, rate of progress and final outcome. It is these factors which make the acquisition of a second language a systematic process.

c. Is subject, within certain limits, to external influences such as type of input received and methods of instruction.

Theory enables the provision of explanations of how the process of acquiring a second language takes place. It also enables the identification of the variables that are responsible for second language acquisition and the offering of guidance to second language teachers.

Over the past decades there has been a number of different theories of second language acquisition. Each theory accounts for language acquisition from a different perspective. As such it is important to identify the main tenets (major assertions and/or assumptions of a theory- or hypothesis-) and be able to assess each theory in terms of its strengths and weaknesses. This ultimately makes it to make comparisons amongst individual theories and hypotheses.

Behaviourism and FLA

Behaviourism is a learning theory that propounded by B.F Skinner (1957) in his “Verbal Behaviour” only focuses on objectively observable behaviour. It discounts an independent activity of the mind. According to this theory, learning is thus seen as nothing more than the acquisition of new behaviour based on environmental conditions (input). Conditioning is seen as a universal learning process.

There are two types of conditioning; (a) classic and (b) behavioural/operant

a. Classic conditioning occurs when a natural reflex responds to a stimulus. We are biologically “wired” so that a certain stimulus will produce a specific response. One of the more common examples of classical conditioning in the educational environment is in situations where students exhibit irrational fears and anxieties like  fear of failure, fear of public speaking (some sweat all over the show) and general school phobia.

b. Behavioral or operant conditioning occurs when a response to a stimulus is reinforced. Basically, operant conditioning is a simple feedback system: If a reward or reinforcement follows the response to a stimulus, then the response becomes more probable in the future. For example, clapping of hands when a child gets an utterance right.

Language acquisition is mainly concerned with the second type- behavioural/operant conditioning. Language is not seen as as mental phenomenon but as behaviour. Just like any other forms of behaviour, language is learnt by a process of habit formation. The main components of habit formation are:

a. The child imitates the sounds and patterns which he hears around him. b. People recognise the child’s attempts as being similar to the adult models and

reinforce the sounds either by approval or some other desirable reaction. c. In order to obtain more of these rewards, the child repeats the sounds and patterns, so

that they become habitsd. In this way the child’s verbal behaviour is conditioned (or shaped) until it coincides

with the adult models.

It is clear that within this framework the child’s own utterances are not seen as possessing a system in their own right. Mistakes are therefore seen as simply the result of imperfect learning. That is the process of habit formation had not yet had the time to run its full course.

Inadequacies of behaviourism.

a. Characterising language simply as verbal behaviour falls short of accounting for speakers’ creative construction.

b. What children learn is therefore abstract knowledge of rules (linguistic competence). Since the children are only exposed to performance, habit formation cannot adequately account for the process of building up competence.

c. The learning task is too complex and is typically complete at an early stage (by 3 and-a-half years the child would have mastered the language) to be accounted for by the simple process of habit formation.

d. The fact that children arrive at more or less the same underlying system (competence) in spite of their ‘location’ and the amount and type of input they receive discounts the assertions of habit formation.

Behaviourism and SLA

In SLA the learner is no longer a novice. He already knows a language. That is, he already has a set of habits. In this sense the learner is no longer regarded as a tabula rasa (blank/clean slate). The leaner will make use of the set of habits he already has (of the native language) to help him in acquiring aspects of the L2. This is not to say that the native language is always helpful in the acquisition of the L2. Some of the habits of the native language may be a hindrance in the acquisition of the L2.

Transfer of experience

First language habits may be helpful to the acquisition process. A case of point is whereby the first language has phrase structures to the second. This makes acquisition of syntax of the L2 a little bit easier. When acquisition of a second language is aided by similarities between the native and the L2 it is referred to as positive transfer. By extension, differences between the first and second languages are seen as causing difficulties in the acquisition process. Ungrammaticality occurring as a result of the influence of the native language is referred to as negative transfer or interference. It is interference in the sense that the native language is seen as the source of learning difficulties. Under the behaviourist approach the task of the learner is to overcome the learning difficulties that arise as a result of the differences between the two varieties.

Conclusion

The behaviourist approach treats language learning like any other kind of human that involves habit formation. Habits are formed when learners respond to stimulus in the environment and subsequently have their responses reinforced so that they are remembered. SLA is thus seen as the acquisition of new behaviour through conditioning. The theory has three basic assumptions:

a. Learning is manifested by a change in behaviour.b. The environment shapes behaviour.c. The principle of contiguity (how close in time two events must be for a bond to be

formed) and reinforcement (any means of increasing the likelihood that an event be repeated).

Thus at the core of behaviourism are three basic principles:

i. Imitationii. Reinforcement

iii. Repetition.

The approach has the shortfall of treating language, which is a complex phenomenon, just like any other activity that can be simply imitated. Thus it fails to account for how speakers build competence and how they make use of that competence in creative construction.

It is apparent from the foregoing discussion that the behaviourist learning theory emphasised only what can be directly observed. That is, input to the learner and output from the learner. It ignores what goes on in the ‘black box’ of the learner’s mind. Learners do much more than merely responding to input.

TOPIC FIVE

INTER-LANGUAGE

Introduction

The discussion on behaviourist learning theory revealed one major shortcoming of that theory in that it does not account for what goes on in the mind of the learner, what is referred to as the ‘black box’ of the speaker’s mind. It fails to take congniscence of the fact that human beings are endowed with the innate ability to process language. The brain is specialised to process language through its language faculty called the language acquisition device (LAD). There is therefore need to have SLA theories that take into account this innate capacity of human beings to process language. Language learning should therefore not to be treated as simply a response to stimulus (the environment). There is need to move away from a ‘nurture’ perspective and move towards a perspective that recognises ‘nature’. That is, a shift towards a ‘nativist’ or mentalist paradigm.

Interlanguage Theory

The term ‘interlanguage’ (more explicitly known as interim language) was coined by Larry Selinker (1972) in recognition that second language learners construct their own second language linguistic systems that draw in part on the learner’s first language but is also different from it and is also different from the target language. Selinker proposed the term interlanguage after having noted that in a given situation the utterances produced by second language learners are different from those native speakers produce had they attempted to convey the same meaning. This observation reveals a separate linguistic system that L2 construct. Learners generally preserve some features of their first language or overgeneralise target language rules. What comes out is the fact that an interlanguage is idiosyncratically based on the learner’s experiences with the target language. It does not follow that learners necessarily reach native speaker ability in the target language. Learner grammars can fossilise in any of their developmental stages.

The concept of interlanguage is premised on the following assumptions:

a. Learners construct a system of abstract linguistic rules which underlies comprehension and production of the second language. This mental grammar is called interlanguage.

b. Learner grammars are permeable. That is, they are open to influence both from the outside (second language input) and the inside (learner’s first language)

c. Learner grammars are transitional in the sense that learners change their grammar from one time to another by adding, deleting and reconstruction of the whole system.

This results in an interlanguage continuum as they gradual increase the complexity of their second language.

d. The system contains variable rules which are likely to be competing at any given stage of development. This may account for inconsistent use of linguistic elements by learners.

e. Learners employ various learning strategies o develop their interlanguage. Different kinds of errors reflect different learning strategies. Learning strategies include omission, overgeneralisation and transfer.

f. Learner grammars are likely to fossilise. Selinker notes that only 5% manage to reach native speaker ability in the target language. The majority of learners fall short. There is also prevalence of backsliding.

Conclusion

The interlanguage theory is based on the theory that there is psychological structure latent in the brain which is activated when we attempt to learn a second language. Thus it is both a psychological and cognitive theory. It is psychological in the sense that it recognises the importance of the brain in the language learning process. It is cognitive in the sense that it recognises that learners employ various learning strategies in trying to make sense of the target language input.

TOPIC SIX

THE MONITOR MODEL

Introduction

The Monitor Model (also referred to as the Monitor Theory) was propounded by Stephen Krashen in the late 1970s. It is an ‘overall’ theory of second language acquisition that is comprised of five hypotheses. These hypotheses are; the acquisition-learning, the monitor, the natural order, the input and affective filter hypotheses. Each of these hypotheses focuses on different variables/factors that influence SLA. Together they make up a macro theory that attempts to provide answers on the nature of SLA and the important factors that influence the development of a learner’s proficiency.

a. The acquisition-learning hypothesis

The hypothesis posits that adults have two distinct and independent ways of developing competence in a second language: language acquisition and language learning.

i. Language acquisition. Acquisition is a subconscious process, similar if not identical to the children develop ability in their first language. Language acquirers use the language in actual meaningful interaction. They are usually not aware of the fact that they are acquiring a language. They are only aware of the fact that they are using the language for actual communication. Acquirers are generally not consciously aware of the grammatical/formal rules of the language they are acquiring. Instead they only have a feel for correctness. That is, grammatical sentences ‘sound’/’feel’ right and errors feel wrong even though they may not be aware of of the rule that has been violated. Such type of learning results in acquired competence. The acquisition process can also be referred to as implicit/informal/natural learning. A second language acquirer who has developed ability in a language through acquisition is said to have picked up a language.

ii. Language learning. Refers to the conscious knowledge of a second language. That is, knowing the rules, being aware of them and being able to talk about them. It is, therefore knowing about a language. Learners are pre-occupied with error detection and correction. It involves knowing the grammar or the formal rules of the language. As such learning is referred to as formal/explicit learning.

Some theorists have argued that children acquire while adults learn. The acquisition-learning hypothesis claims, however, that adults do not lose the ability to acquire. This does not mean that adults will always be able to achieve native-like levels in the second language. It means that adults can access the language acquisition device that children in language acquisition.

b. The Monitor hypothesis. This hypothesis is regarded as a development of the acquisition-learning hypothesis. It spells out/specifies how acquisition and learning are used in second language performance. That is, acquisition and learning are used in very specific/distinct ways. Acquisition is used to initiate utterances in a second language and is responsible for fluency. Learning, on the hand, has only one function; that of the monitor/editor. Learning comes into play only to make changes in the form of the utterance after it has been initiated/produced by the acquired system. Monitoring/editing can happen before speech/writing or after. It therefore involves self-correction. The underlying assumption is therefore that acquired and learned competences are stored separately. It also implies that formal rules or conscious learning play only a limited role in second language performance.

The monitor is only used when three conditions are met. These conditions are necessary, but not sufficient, for monitoring to take place. That is, performers may not fully utilise their conscious grammar even when all the conditions are met. The conditions for monitor use are:

i. Time. Learners need sufficient time to think about and use rules effectively. The only drawback is that for most people time is not available in normal conversation. Overuse of rules in conversation can lead to hesitation in speech and not paying attention to what a fellow interlocutor is saying- as one would focussing on what to say next.

ii. Focus on form. Effective use of the monitor entails a focus on form or thinking about correctness. Speakers may have sufficient time but be so engrossed on what they are saying that they may not be attentive to how they say it.

iii. Knowledge of the rule. This is regarded as a formidable requirement as language is extremely complex- linguists have only described a small fragment of a language’s grammar. This may account for why there are so much errors characterising second language performance. (FLA are generally unconsciously aware of their language’s grammar). Second language students are only exposed to a small fragment of grammar such that even the best students only learn part of the rulkes they are exposed to.

Two general observations can be made regarding the monitor hypothesis. Firstly, use of the conscious monitor has the effect of allowing performers to supply items that are not yet acquired. Secondly, the monitor does a better job with some parts of grammar than with others. That is, the monitor is more effective with rules that can be classified as ‘simple’.

Individual variation in monitor use

There are three basic types of monitor performers:

i. Over-users. These are performers who attempt to monitor all the time. They are constantly checking their output with their learned system. Resultantly, they may speak hesitantly, often self-correcting in the middle of utterances. They are so concerned with correctness that they cannot speak with any real fluency. This can be as a result of the type of exposure to the second language or a speaker’s personality (some speakers do not just trust their acquired system. They monitor just to be sure).

ii. Under-users. These are performers who have not learned, who prefer not to use their conscious knowledge even though the conditions allow it. Such type of performers are typically uninfluenced by error correction. They only sef-correct by feel. That is, they rely on their acquired system. Under-users pay lip service to the value of conscious grammar.

iii. Optimal monitor users. These are performers who monitor only when it is appropriate and when it does not interfere with communication. They do not use conscious grammar in ordinary conversation where it might interfere with communication. The learned system is used only to complement/supplement the acquired system.

c. The natural order hypothesis.

The natural order hypothesis states that the acquisition of grammatical structures proceeds in a predictable order. Acquirers of a particular language tend to acquire certain grammatical structures early and others late.

The natural order hypothesis predicts the developmental errors made by second language performers en-route to language mastery/proficiency.

English morphology is by far the most studied. The average acquisition order is shown below:

d. The input hypothesis

The input hypothesis can be regarded as the development of the natural order hypothesis. It

attempts to explain how language learners move from one stage to another. It therefore answers

the question of how a language acquirer develops competency over time. At any given time an

acquirer’s current level of competence is represented as ‘i’. The hypothesis explains how it is

that acquirers move from i to the next level of competence. They do so by receiving input that

contains structure that is a little bit beyond their current level of competence. Such input is

ING (progressive)

PLURAL

TO BE (COPULA)

AUXIALLIARY (TO BE)

ARTICLES (A/AN THE)

IRREGULAR PAST

REGULAR PAST

3RD PSN SINGULAR

POSSESSIVE

referred to as comprehensible input. It is at a level represented as ‘i + 1’. That is to say that a

necessary, but not sufficient, condition to move from one stage of linguistic competence to the

next is by understanding comprehensible input. ‘Understand’ in this context means that the

acquirer is focus on meaning not on the form of an utterance. Acquisition is therefore possible

when acquirers understand language structure that is a little beyond their current level of

competence.

The paradox of understanding structure that is a little bit beyond an acquirer’s current level of

competence is accounted for by the fact that learners use more than their linguistic competence

to help them understand comprehensible input. Learners make use of:

i. The situational context

ii. Knowledge of the world

iii. Extra-linguistic and parallel information.

Comprehensible input does not necessarily have to contain i + 1. If the acquirer can understand

the input and there is enough of it, i + 1 is automatically provided.

Fluency is not taught. It emerges on its own. The best way to teach speaking is to provide

comprehensible input. The learner should not be pressured into producing before they are ready

to do so.

Input should not be fine-tuned in a bid to provide comprehensible input. It can, however, be

roughly-tuned to the level of the learner. This usually takes the form of caretaker speech which

takes any of these various forms, depending on the type of language acquisition:

i. Motherese

ii. Foreigner talk

iii. Teacher talk.

e. The affective filter hypothesis.

It can be seen as a development of the input hypothesis. Comprehensible input does not

necessarily lead to intake. The affective filter hypothesis states how affective variables relate to

the second language acquisition process. The concept of the affective filter was first proposed by

Dulay and Burt (1977). Three variables are identified:

i. Motivation. High motivation leads to better chances of the input being converted to

acquired competence/intake.

ii. Self-confidence. High self-confidence and a positive self-image leads to higher chances

of acquisition.

iii. Anxiety. Low anxiety favours acquisition.

These variables play a facilitative but non-causal role in second language acquisition.

Acquirers vary with respect to the strength level of their affective filters. The affective filter can

either be high or low. A low filter is comprised of attitudes that are more conducive to second

language acquisition. Attitudinal that make up a low filter are high motivation, high self-

confidence and low anxiety. A low filter drives a language learner to seek and obtain more input

for acquisition. A learner with a low filter is more open to the input such that the input strikes

deeper. It is apparent that a low filter represents optimal conditions needed for language

acquisition.

A high filter, on the other hand, is caused by low motivation, low self-confidence and high

anxiety. Learners with a high filter seek less input. A high filter causes what is called a mental

block- a condition whereby the input does not reach the language acquisition device. The input

will thus not be available for intake even if the learner understands in.

It can be concluded that the affective filter can facilitate or impede in the acquisition process. It

can therefore explain why it is possible for an acquirer to obtain a great deal of comprehensible

input and yet stop short of the native speaker level. In other words it can be used to account for

early fossilisation before the required proficiency levels are achieved.

Input acquired competenceLADup

down

The filter determines:

i. What model of language acquisition is to be used by the learner.

ii. Parts of the language to be attended to during acquisition.

iii. The rate at which the acquisition process procedes.

iv. When the language acquisition efforts should cease

The table below is a summary of Krashen’s 5 hypotheses of second language acquisition.

Krashen’s Monitor Model of Second Language Acquisition

Hypothesis Description

1. The Acquisition Order Hypothesis

There are two ways of developing a second language. Acquisition is a subconscious process and learning a conscious process that results in ‘knowing about’ the language.

2. The Monitor Hypothesis Acquisition and learning are used in producing language. Acquired competence (subconscious knowledge) allows the learner to produce utterances while learned language (conscious language) serves as a monitor. The monitor allows correction of the language.

3. The Natural Order

Hypothesis

The rules of the language are acquired in a predictable order, some rules tending to come early and others later.

4. The Affective Filter Hypothesis It consists of the affective filter, a mental block that prevents the acquirer from fully utilizing the comprehensible input they receive for language acquisition.

5. The Input Hypothesis Humans acquire language by understanding messages, or by receiving comprehensible input.

Conclusion

Krashen’s Monitor Model represents a micro theory which tries to account for language

acquisition in general. The hypotheses themselves are not independent. They are related in the

sense that some of the hypotheses are developments of earlier ones. For example, the monitor

hypothesis is a development of the acquisition-learning distinction whilst the input and affective

filter hypotheses are developments of the natural order hypothesis.

TOPIC SEVEN

CRITICAL PERIOD HYPOTHESIS

The Critical Period Hypothesis was first proposed by Montreal neurologist Wilder Penfield and co-author Lamar Roberts in a 1959 paper Speech and Brain Mechanisms, and was popularised by Eric Lenneberg in 1967 with Biological Foundations of Language. Lenneberg states that there are maturational constraints on the time a first language can be acquired. First language acquisition relies on brain plasticity and can no longer be accomplished once hemispheric development is complete. If language acquisition does not occur by puberty, some aspects of language can be learnt but full mastery cannot be achieved.[1]. This was called the "critical period hypothesis."

There is consensus in the field of second language acquisition research that a period of time exists in which the acquisition or The critical period hypothesis is the subject of a long-standing debate in linguistics and language acquisition over the extent to which the ability to acquire language is biologically linked to age. The hypothesis claims that there is an ideal 'window' of time to acquire language in a linguistically rich environment, after which this is no longer possible.

The critical period hypothesis states that the first few years of life is the crucial time in which an individual can acquire a first language if presented with adequate stimuli. If language input doesn't occur until after this time, the individual will never achieve a full command of language — especially grammatical systems.

Learning of a second language can be accomplished more rapidly and easily than times falling outside of this period (Brown, 1994; Larsen-Freeman & Long, 1991; Scoval, 1998). Specifically, the hypothesis posits that children between birth and somewhere around the age when a child enters puberty can more easily acquire language than post-pubescent children. Learners of a second language that begin the learning process after this "critical period" (around age 10 or 12) are indeed still able to acquire a second language. According to research, however, individuals who begin their study of a second language after this critical period show marked performance deficits in the language, most notably the lack of a native-like accent (Brown, 1994).

The foundation of the critical period hypothesis rests on neurological research that suggests that brain functions become lateralized after puberty. As we know there are two sides of the human brain - the right and the left. Some language functions appear to be controlled or stationed in the right while others are located in the left portion. Language functions appear mainly controlled by the left side. It is believed that, before puberty, these functions are not completely assigned to either portion of the brain. The brain is viewed as elastic. The specific assignment or lateralization of brain functions is believed to be complete and set sometime during or just after puberty. According to this theory, the pre-pubescent brain is like a "sponge" - - all learning, knowledge, and experiences are merely "absorbed." This "absorption" of aspects of language to non-specific locations in the brain supposedly makes the learning of language, first or second

language, easier for children than adults or older adolescents.

Fromkin and Rodman (1993) provide several examples to support this hypothesis. Genie was a young girl who received very little contact with other humans from birth to the age of 14. As a result, she did, once re-introduced to society, begin to acquire some language, but she was never able to fully acquire the syntax and morphology of children who do receive input from a very age.

So if this critical period does indeed exist, what does this mean for teachers of second language? First of all, this hypothesis states that post-pubescent learners are not going to be likely to acquire a native-like pronunciation and possibly not be able to fully acquire the syntax and morphology of the second language as implied by the Genie case study. As a high school teacher Spanish teacher should I resign to the notion that my students will never acquire a native-like pronunciation? On the contrary, I will use the critical age hypothesis in order to restructure the way in which I teach pronunciation of these post-pubescent learners. As Brown (1994) states, "some adults have been known to acquire an authentic accent in a second language after the age of puberty, but such individuals are few and far between" (p. 56). As such, rather than expecting my students to naturally acquire the pronunciation as they did easily as children learning their native language, I will give the structured pronunciation drills and compare phonemes from the second language to those in the first language. Teachers of second languages should view this theory with caution, however. Though the "few and far between" individuals who acquire critical period skills after the critical period may be few, the empirical support of this theory, in my view, appears to be just as "few and far between." The research in this area has not employed the tight experimental controls required to draw inferences on how and when children learn second languages best. Until more and better research in this area emerges, we are again left to best guesses or gut feelings in terms of student learning.

TOPIC SEVEN

SECOND LANGUAGE PEDAGOGY (INSTRUCTION)

Second language pedagogy/instruction looks at the formal teaching of language to second language learners. Formal instruction looks at the teaching methods that are used in making learners aware of the grammar of a language. There are a variety of teaching methods that can be used by second language instructors. Each teaching method can be linked to specific perceptions about how second language acquisition proceeds. That is, theory on SLA is used to inform second language teaching. A number of language teaching methods will be looked at in the section. These include; the grammar-translation approach, direct method, audio-lingual approach and communicative language teaching methods.

a. The grammar-translation approachThis is the most traditional approach. It puts language instruction at par with any other academic subject. Rules pertaining to the target language are taught. The rules are applied together with translation to and from the mother tongue and the target language. This is done in the form bilingual word lists. Long word lists and a set of grammatical rules have to be memorised. There is therefore extensive use of the dictionary with little attention on register. One drawback of this method is that it does not provide enough comprehensible input to enable learners to be proficient in the second language. More emphasis was placed on written language, with little attention paid to speech. It therefore developed reading and writing skills at the expense of speech and listening skills. This approach has been described as a literature approach in that its goal appears mainly not that of language learning but for reading literature (compare with missionary education whereby literacy was linked with Christianity- reading of the bible). Grammar is taught deductively and it is vital to demonstrate accuracy by repeating taught rules/structure- there is prevalence of rote learning. This means that the method does not encourage creative construction. The most predominant medium of instruction is the learner’s native language. Assessment

i. The method leads only to knowledge about a language leaving students ignorant on how language is used. Yule (1985) and French students who attained high passes in written exercises but could not use the language in actual communicative events.

ii. Lack of interaction characterising this approach means that the learner has little confidence in language use and it also takes away the constructive nature that is provided by the process of negotiation of meaning (scaffolding and ZPDs).

iii. Language is taught in a vacuum as a set of skills with no immediate utility. As a result the learner will always have grammatical competence which remains in perpetual potentiality.

The grammar translation approach therefore assumes that the learner needs a basic knowledge of the language system (grammar and vocabulary) which would then provide the essential basis for communicative behaviour when the learner finds himself in a situation which requires him to use the language communicatively.

b. The direct methodThis method was developed to take care of some of the shortcomings of the grammar-translation method. It represents a collection of teaching methods which use the target language as the medium of instruction. Language lessons are carried out exclusively in the target language. The learner’s native language is strictly forbidden. This method is based on observations of first language acquisition whereby the child is not overtly taught the rules of their mother tongue. Children induce (guess) the rules of their language from using it in actual communicative situations. This is considered the natural way of learning language. As such in the direct method, the language instructor does not explain any rules of grammar to the learner. Nor does he attempt to correct any errors that the learner might make during the learning process. The learner has to induce the grammar of the language by themselves. The instructor use realia or may resort to mime for cases whereby the learner may need some explanations on concepts that he is not familiar with. AssessmentAs an alternative to the grammar-translation approach the direct method has a number of advantages over its predecessor. These include:

i. its inductive approach increases the chances of the learner actually ‘knowing’ the language.

ii. There is a marked increase in teacher-pupil interaction.iii. Increased interaction increases the chances of the instructor in determining the

learner’ ZPD and enable him to provide scaffolding to the learner. iv. It mainly concerned itself with speaking and listening skills which are of practical

use to the learner in real communicative situations.

It also has its shortcomings. These include:

i. It still pre-occupies itself with the teaching of grammar. This is not the best way of effectively learning a language (refer to the acquisition-learning hypothesis).

ii. Overly depended on the teacher who carefully grades the learning material. This limits the scope of the topics to be learned thereby affecting the learner’s competence.

iii. Grading of learning material affects the learner’s ability to produce speech spontaneously.

The audio-lingual method.