Chapter 3 Interlanguage

Q: Explain the behaviorist learning theory

In Behaviorist psychology (Skinner, 1957; Brown, 1980)… The human being is an organism capable of a wide repertoire of behaviors A stimulus triggers a response Reinforcement serves to mark the response as being appropriate or inappropriate and encourages the repetition (or suppression) of the response in the future

Q: Any criticism about the behaviorist learning theory?

Q: Explain the mentalist theory of language learning

Q: What is LAD?

The Language Acquisition Device (LAD) Psycholinguist Noam Chomsky (1964) The device or organ within the brain which houses human’s innate ability to acquire and produce language. To explain how children acquire internalized knowledge of grammar with remarkable speed on the basis of fragmentary and degenerate input data.

Q: What is interlanguage? What does it entail?

Discussion topics Why do learners sometimes employ an L1 transfer strategy and sometimes an L2-driven strategy (e.g., overgeneralization)? .

Q: Explain the computational model of L2 acquisition.

1. The frequency hypothesis (Hatch & WagnerGough 1876) Research based on the computational model of L2 acquisition 1. The frequency hypothesis (Hatch & WagnerGough 1876) The order of L2 acquisition is determined by the frequency with which different linguistic items occur in the input. The vocabulary remembered by beginner L2 learners in a classroom context in Sweden reflected the frequency of the items in the textbook (Palmberg 1987)

2. The input Hypothesis Krashen (1985) relates only to acquisition (not learning). We acquire language in one way only: when we are exposed to input that is comprehensible to us. Comprehensible input is the necessary but also sufficient condition for language acquisition to take place. It requires no effort on the part of the learner.

Comprehension Hypothesis Comprehension Hypothesis. Learners acquire language when they are exposed to input at i+1, where i is the current state or stage of language proficiency. Given comprehensible input at i+1, acquisition will take place effortlessly and involuntarily.

Krashen’s theories of second language acquisition The input hypothesis. Input "i+1“ ("i" : the learner's interlanguage, "+1" : the next stage of language acquisition) The acquisition–learning hypothesis Improvement in language ability is only dependent upon acquisition (a purely subconscious process) and never on learning(a conscious process). The monitor hypothesis Consciously learned language can only be used to monitor language output; it can never be the source of spontaneous speech. The natural order hypothesis Language is acquired in a particular order, and that this order does not change between learners, and is not affected by explicit instruction. The affective filter hypothesis Learners' ability to acquire language is constrained if they are experiencing negative emotions (when the affective filter goes up). (Krashen 1982)

Q: Krashen (1998) rejects any direct role for output in L2 learning Q: Krashen (1998) rejects any direct role for output in L2 learning. He believes that high levels of linguistic competence can be achieved without output. Output does not lead to acquisition. What do you think?

Criticism against Krashen’s Input hypothesis Understanding does not necessitate close attention to linguistic form (Rost 1990) Acquisition takes place ONLY WHEN there is a gap between the input and the learner’s current interlanguage and more importantly, ONLY WHEN the learner perceives the gap (Faerch & Kasper 1986)

Failure to understand a sentence may force the learner to pay closer attention to its syntactical properties … driving force is that input is incomprehensible (White 1987) Interaction can facilitate acquisition. Negotiation for meaning facilitates ATTENTION to form (Long 1996)

3. The comprehensible output hypothesis Comprehensible input alone was not sufficient for acquisition. Even learners in the immersion classrooms full of input failed to develop marked grammatical distinctions. It might be because the learners had limited opportunity to talk in the classroom and were not pushed in the output. Production (pushed output) may encourage learners to move from semantic (top-town) to syntactic (bottom-up) processing (Swain 1985)

4. The noticing hypothesis Krashen’s input hypothesis rejects a role for consciousness, claiming that acquisition is a subconscious process. Attention to input is a conscious process. Noticing and noticing-the-gap is essential processes in L2 acquisition (Schmidt 1990)

Cognitive model of L2 acquisition Connectionist theory of language acquisition This disputes the view that linguistic competence is comprised of rules derived from the innate language acquisition device and instead views linguistic knowledge in terms of a network of interconnected nodes.

Connectionist theory of language acquisition -focus on the concept of neural networks -spreading activation -nodes that interact via weighted connections

Activation Mechanism in Bilingual Mental Lexicon Language Tag

L2 L1 Actor/ Actress Sharp Talent Activation threshold Hash/Pound key Konglish Hash/Pound key Talent competitor competitor competitor competitor Talent sharp Actor L2 샵 재능 L1 탤런트 competitor competitor Lexical association