This chapter looks at two main theoretical aspects pertaining to language acquisition: that of the Empiricists and the Rationalists. Two interesting views are: Skinner (Empiricist) a proponent of S-R psychology, supports the idea that language in humans is acquired through a conditioning process; where Chomsky (Mentalist) believes that every human by nature has a universal grammar, and that all humans have the inherent capacity to acquire a language. Through teaching, or your own learning experience, are you able to identify with either of these different approaches, and why?
In your experience with study abroad, which theoretical framework (if any) did you find most pertinent to your teaching and learning while in a foreign country? What factors outside of the classroom do you believe assist and/or impede with the acquisition of a second language? Give examples.
I can personally identify with the first view on behalf of Skinner (Empiricist) which supports the idea of language acquisition through a conditioning process. I do think that the learning process of a foreign language requires practice, use, memorization and skill development. I think that the overall learning of a second language requires practical use in order to retain information. This information that is retained could be considered a foundation of knowledge but does not include vocabulary and grammar. I do think that vocabulary is a required skill that incorporates reading, writing, listening and speaking.
ReplyDeleteThrough personal experience I have found that my level of vocabulary fluctuates given my exposure to the language. With regular exposure, I can then begin to study and learn and that information then becomes applicable and relevant. I also have found that my accent and pronunciation can become more consistent given more practical use and practice. I think that the adaptation to becoming a fluent speaker takes informed exposure and actual practice.
Also in relation to my studies abroad, I find the first view relevant. I think the experience of study abroad allows the student to immerse and therefore gain more regular skills. I think that the daily content of regular exposure can provide a useful basic vocabulary. This type of word usage is acquired and therefore learned. Specific to Spanish, daily use of the language creates a more developed understanding of tenses and grammar clauses. While studying abroad in Spain I found that even looking at a daily newspaper assisted me in developing a vocabulary, which would have been hard to learn as an independent student in a university.
While studying in a foreign nation, the teachers have the opportunity to teach outside the class. I found that brief field trips gave the cultural component of a foreign language a more interesting approach. With the experience to visit a museum or theater in a foreign country, I personally become more interested in learning the actual language. Outside of the classroom, I think that personal hesitancy to speak the language could impede its acquisition.
As a student, it is important to identify your role as a learner. It is helpful to be able to know your skill level and seek to improve. Each additional conversation or article read, actually yields a learning experience. I think that the major and fundamental source of learning is the student. The student must be able to recognize learning approaches and techniques and also proficiency standards. Personally, I think that as a student, when I have noted a personal improvement, I seek to learn more so that I can feel more comfortable as a speaker to broaden my opportunities in the future.
I see where you're coming from when you say that you "think that the learning process of a foreign language requires practice, use, memorization and skill development." While this is certainly true, don't you think it would be more practical to simply learn the underlying morphemes, syntax, and phonemes with which you can create boundless rules for yourself. Simply memorizing many different vocabulary words and sentence structures only takes you so far, but you can really improve your fluency by doing what you did as a child, "acquiring" the language rather than "learning" it.
DeleteI agree with you on the fact that the learning process of a foreign language requires practice, use, memorization, etc. I also have to agree with you that the learning of a second language overall requires practical use in order to retain the information. Your statement about having a larger vocabulary based on the amount of exposure makes sense and honestly should apply to just about everyone. I have never studied abroad but I think it is definitely safe to say that it is the best way for a student to gain advanced fluency, grammar, and vocabulary skills.
DeleteElizabeth, I see you're the only one to identify with Skinner's Behaviorist Psychology! Love the independent thinking!!
DeleteOn another note, since "Cognitive psychology emphasizes knowing rather than responding", what do you think of the notion that based on the Behaviorist Theory rhetoric, learners are merely conditioned to respond to stimuli rather than to truly know the meaning of what they are saying or to what they are responding?
Chris, you have made a very good point. We need to understand that "acquiring" a L2 is very different form "learning" a L2. Most of us have 'learned' a L2 in the traditional classroom setting. So we need to think about the most effective teaching method/approach to L2 teaching and learning. In Chapter 3, we will learn the Natural Approach, which is heavily based on Krashen's Theory. It highlights the important role of INPUT and interaction. It encourages us to move students beyond memorization but how?
DeleteElizabeth, what you've written regarding acknowledging one's role as a L2 student rings true with me. it reminds me of Krashen's point about how when a student has self-confidence, or is otherwise relaxed about the product of their language, they can and do learn a language more readily. There seems to be an interrelation between one's abilities and their anxiety, however, so I wonder how one might be able to get over that "hurdle" in order to learn more easily.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis chapter has made me really think about how people truly learn a foreign language. To me both of the viewpoints from Skinner and Chomsky make sense. I personally identify with Skinner more however. Learning a foreign language is a long, difficult process for adults who have only spoken one language their entire life. Most people in the USA start in high school and I believe that that has a strong correlation to the lack of bilingual Americans. I believe that Chomsky's theory is potentially more accurate for children. It is such a quick and natural process for a child to acquire a language, and it very well could be because humans have a natural ability that makes us a more unique, intelligent species.
DeleteI still am yet to study abroad so I can't give a personal response to the matter however; I would assume that studying abroad tremendously helps acquire a language because you are forced into speaking the language.
I agree with your point that most people begin to study a second language in high school. I think that this process allows for a good foundation in terms of grammar and vocabulary. It does not seem that there is significant movement in this nation to change the current curriculum and its requirements to implement a language requirement. I do not think that this current educational standard puts this nation at a disadvantage but the process to acquire a language is a difficult one. I think that the ability to speak a second language is important and valuable and can be used for employment prospects.
DeleteBryce, I truly hope that you will be able to study abroad. The experience has the potential to improve your language skills and broaden your cultural horizons. It will finally give you the opportunity practice with some native Spanish speakers and improve your skill outside of the classroom -- this is where I believe the most improvement can be made especially because you're an audio learner!
DeleteBryce, I agree with you that Chomsky's UG theory does relate to L1 learning more so than it does L2. Do you think is possible that the same cognitive mechanisms at play in the child's mind when learning L1 are going on when the adult learns L2? in other words, do we draw on our innate abilities when acquiring a L2 or do we primarily work with our understanding of grammatical concepts in our L1 and the corrective instruction on our teachers?
DeleteBryce, I think both theories can definitely complement each other. we have the natural talent to learn a language especially as a child. Also, it is very true that being in the environment and practicing more and more definitely helps acquiring a second language
DeleteBryce, having studying abroad, I cannot stress enough the importance of being in a country with native speakers. It is a very rewarding experience. Mot importantly by the time your study abroad you gained so much confidence to speak the language. That confidence will definitely make you feel you can reach your true potential.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI tend to agree with the views of Chomsky, Krashen, and the rationalists. I think we best learn through immersing ourselves in a language and letting our innate underlying understanding of the structures of a language push us forward. I, having been conditioned to do many of the organizational, syntactical, and phonological tasks required to be able to converse in another language, find that the empiricist approach is much less practical and that when put into practice rarely works how one would hope. Although this approach did give me a valuable underlying knowledge which has helped me to be able to further my fluency, I wouldn't say it is useful in authentic situations. Once I begin conversing naturally, I find myself to simply be letting my brain take me places rather than thinking about what structure to use and why. I already know these structures due to the similarities between English and Spanish. I don't believe young children are conditioned whatsoever to learn a language, they merely use what they know innately about the structures and patterns of language to formulate their own relevant rules and structures. This is why they are able to learn so quickly and accurately.
ReplyDeleteWhile studying in Spain, I experienced the rationalist approach much more so than the empiricist. I was immersed in Spanish and rarely had time to condition myself to the endless number of new tasks that I was facing each day. Situations I had never been conditioned for were abundant, so I was forced to use my underlying understanding of the syntax and what little morphemes I do have to create an endless world of possibilities. I needed to let go of what I conventionally knew before I could advance myself.
Oftentimes we impede our own advancement by too often relying on what we have been conditioned to do. In English, we never did this. We tried new things and created new possibilities all the time by inventing words with the morphemes and roots we had. We created new sentences based on the sentence structure we knew to be always correct (Noun phrase+Verb phrase). If I let my guard down more often and used what it was that I really know, I would progress so much faster, but it is my fear of making mistakes and looking unintelligent that holds myself and many others back. It helps to converse with people you are extremely comfortable with, but who are also native speakers of course. You are going to have less anxiety and a higher motivation to speak up and let them know your opinions. The features of rationalism show its practical use for language learners to naturally acquire language rather than force it upon themselves.
I do agree with you regarding how we impede our advancement by often relying on educated guesses. I think that is a part of the conditioning process, that is not accounted for in written texts. Basically, I think that we do rely on guessing and attempting to make a word by suggesting its sound and/or spelling. I think that this type of conditioning it advantageous because habits are developed and incorrect use of the language is not corrected. I do not think that regular correction actually leads to progressive and consistent learning. I think that identifying a mistake utilizes a different type of learning adaptation.
DeleteThe only issue I personally have with only learning via immersion is that you people will find themselves speaking with a lot of errors. You see every day people using poor grammar when talking in English because we find ourselves so conditioned to using the wrong grammar. For example, how often someone will say "he did good" instead of "he did well". If you don't focus on learning the correct grammatical formation of the sentence you'll see a lot of errors that overall just bring down your "skill" as a speaker.
DeleteIt is very interesting to hear about what the different situations you had to go through while studying abroad. I think the aggressive immersion is a great way for people to advance in their fluency once they've learned the rules of the language to muscle memory.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteChris, it makes me so nostalgic reading about your experience in Spain. My first trip abroad was to Spain and I remember feeling exactly the same as how you convey in your writing. I found myself completely immersed in the language and culture and began to actually forget that I was speaking in Spanish only to realize I was doing so purely por costumbre. I imagine this realization moment happens in all speakers who achieve the autonomous stage of the skill acquisition. I find that being conscious of my skill level really helps me to internalize the learning process and make it a perpetual part of my day-to-day life.
DeleteOne thing that I've already told my students is that while fluency is important, accuracy cannot be ignored. In most cases, we acquire fluency by just doing a lot of talking/speaking, and accuracy through writing and receiving linguistic feedback from advanced speakers or teachers. Native speakers do not necessarily know how to help you with accuracy because they often do not have metalinguistic skills. In other words, they don't know how to explain grammar rules.
DeleteChris, your post makes me think of another reason why Skinner's behaviorist approach does not succeed in explaining L1 acquisition. If a child is learning their L1, and receives corrections on their language by an adult, how are they to comprehend the correction to their "behavior" if they are unable to comprehend the language?
DeleteChris, Tis is the perfect way to put it. When it come to acquiring a second language, Lack of confidence and the fear of making mistake can truly impede us from reaching our true potential. This why I think studying abroad can definitely someone overcome all the issues
DeleteThrough teaching, or your own learning experience, are you able to identify with either of these different approaches, and why?
ReplyDeleteI am able to more readily identify with the viewpoint of the Mentalist camp and Chomsky, though the theoretical framework that seems to mirror most my experience would be Krashen’s monitor theory.
Though there may be similarities in the way in which animals and human learn how to perform certain functions, language acquisition appears to be unique to humans in a number of ways. Firstly, there are certain abilities that the human child is capable of that are not learned behaviors, but rather abilities that with which the human child is born. One cannot, for example, teach a child how to distinguish non-language vocalizations and language. The ability to create meaningful (though not always grammatically correct) sentences cannot be conditioned, as the process of creation (or generation) is internalized. This being said, I have difficulty reconciling the idea of grammatical categories as having a biological basis, and this might require further reading on my part.
I would relate the differences in these two theoretical aspects of SLA to the distinction between competence and performance. A student who has been taught by an instructor who follows an Empiricist line of rationale might be asked to perform rote memorization exercises, “repeat-after-me” learning, or asked to mimic pre-generated phrases in response to other phrases. A parrot that learns how to repeat phrases through conditioning may perform remarkably well at asking for food, but we cannot say that they have any meaningful competence of the actual meaning of the phrase, or is constituent grammatical components, apart from that it will garner a desired response. This, I would say, is not actual acquisition of a language.
In your experience with study abroad, which theoretical framework (if any) did you find most pertinent to your teaching and learning while in a foreign country? What factors outside of the classroom do you believe assist and/or impede with the acquisition of a second language? Give examples.
DeleteAs I have not studied abroad, I can only speak to me experience traveling to Puerto Rico for a few weeks last Spring. My instruction, then, was not of academic subjects, but rather of colloquial terms, local vocabulary, and polishing my pronunciation to fit the ear of the Puerto Rican. Throughout my “studies” I found that when a native speaker was overly critical in correcting my grammar, word choice, or pronunciation, it would impede conversation to the point where I did not learn much at all. The most success that I had in polishing my Spanish while abroad was in those conversations where the interlocutor and myself built upon each other in our conversation, where corrections were made not by negation but rather redirection (a gentle rephrasing in response to something I had said incorrectly in the right way), and simply listening intently to what and in what manner things were said.
Secondly, I have had the privilege to tutor Spanish at several different levels of difficulty, but the most unique experience was with a man of 70+ years, who I will call John. Through inference I concluded that John was a man who had been incarcerated for much of his life, and was now free on a work-release program. I was told that he was learning spanish in order to reach another level in his job and perhaps the next pay grade. It soon became clear that the level of proficiency that John required to perform his job in Spanish would take years of rigorous study.
I began teaching John in a tentative and straightforward manner: we began by learning subject pronouns and basic vocabulary. Repetition and memorization were methods that I would use. John repeatedly mispronounced Spanish words with a French pronunciation (I later learned from John that he was taught french by his native-French grandmother at an early age, a realization that led to much exposition on his part about his childhood). I realized that this method literally bored John to sleep.
What little success I had with John came when we would actively apply what I was trying to teach him to real-world experiences (that involved walking around and identification). By relating the content to the real world and his job, and not a whiteboard in a poorly-ventilated study room in Dimond Library, I was able to draw upon John’s seemingly innate ability to construct language. That being said, his advanced age did prove to create a very, very steep learning curve.
I understand your situation regarding the impedance when being corrected to retain correct information and then practically apply it. I also have had that experience when corrected, I lose valuable information out of personal intimidation. But I think that with practice that situation and speaking in general improve. I also understand the circumstance regarding how each individual constructs their personal language use and development. I think that is a key point that you made as it relates to actual personal difference, needing to incorporate both environmental and personal aspects. The process of learning is both external and internal. I think your example regarding your tutoring is helpful to understand the ways in which we learn.
DeleteI agree with you that language acquisition is a unique to humans in many ways. I as well were having a hard time grasping the concept of grammatical categories in a biological basis. Study abroad is the next venture in my education as I am going next semester. It is very interesting to hear about how your "abroad" experience helped you train yourself in many ways. Your experience with John sounds like a very unique one for sure and also very interesting.
DeletePat -- what is your opinion on one of Krashen's central hypotheses which states "that comprehensible input can have its effect on acquisition only when affective conditions are optimal: (1) the acquirer is motivated; (2) he has self-confidence and a good self-image; and (3) his level of anxiety is low"? I contend that these conditions are certainly "optimal", but does that mean that one who does not possess such optimality is unable to comprehend language that is more advanced than his proficiency level? Sounds like hogwash to me -- I don't see how by lacking one of the behavioral qualities from Krashen's affective filter triad a learner can be fashioned unable to comprehend input from a higher level. What do you think?
DeletePat, very interesting story about John. I would like to hear more about his L2 learning with you. As Chomsky points out that age is a crucial element of language acquisition. I wonder if John's case has something to do with his advanced age. If so, can he only acquire L2 by drills and repetitions; part of behavioral learning theory, which operates on a principle of 'stimulus-response" and memorization is the key for L2 learning.
DeleteEmpiricism comes from the nurture camp of the familiar nature vs. nurture discourse while rationalism originates from the nature camp. Based off this evaluation, empiricist dialogue is fallacious chiefly for its absence of content. Contending that all humans are in one way or another products of our environment is irrefutable. Skinner’s evaluation that “The command of a language is a matter of practice… language learning is overlearning: anything else is no use”, is only half wrong. While he reiterates the common American expression practice makes perfect, he fails to recognize other factors such as biology, cognition and the individual peculiarities that come with cognition. Noam Chomsky’s Universal Grammar theory depicts the nature faction of aforementioned discourse, and while provides little practical theory in language acquisition, it prepared the way for other more practical theories such as Cognitive Theory. Cognitive Theory, which differs from behaviorism in that instead of being dictated by “operant conditioning” where the learner simply receives stimuli through an “automatic conditioning process” through which the learner has no control of what she receives, acknowledges that language learning is a skill which involves the learner to remain conscious of her learning process, thus being able to establish, strategize and personalize her very own understanding of the language. Due to the personalization of the Cognitive Theory and especially the Larsen-Freeman and Long treatise explaining the interactionist approach uncover why it is the most ideal and developed theory discussed in the chapter.
ReplyDeleteI see language learning acquisition as a skill much as I see reading or playing soccer as skills; it takes practice and strategic thinking to master any obtained ability. In my quest to conquer the Spanish language, weather Stateside and abroad, I employ the following strategy: classroom learning, personal/isolated teaching/learning, and interactive learning. During classroom learning, I am taught formally about grammar and the rules of the language in addition to (but much less) Hispanic culture. In personal teaching, I employ what I learn from the classroom (mostly grammar) and read books in Spanish, watch Spanish language movies & television, and listen to Hispanic music. This develops my competence in all areas of the language: reading improves my understanding of the grammar while boosting my vocabulary, watching movies betters my ability to understand native talkers as well as my pronunciation and vocabulary. Lastly, I interact with native speakers which polishes all facets of competence and performance. This process works for me, however I do not suggest it for all. Language learning is a completely personal experience that must be tailored to the learner.
Ii totally agree with you. It is a skill and it up to the individual to develop and practice this skill in order to reach his or her true potential. I trained my self almost the same way and I definitely can say that I was able to see some results.
DeleteI agree with you that language acquisition is a skill similar to those of playing sports. To start you need to learn the fundamentals(grammar, vocabulary, the basics), condition yourself (practice reading, writing, in class), then lastly playing the game (speaking to another person in a real life context). Learning Spanish through reading books, watching a movie or listening to music in the foreign language that you're learning are great ways to condition yourself. Overall, you are correct that learning is a completely personal and organic experience that is unique to each individual.
ReplyDeleteBryce, You have pointed something important for L2 learning that is INPUT. I truly believe that without INPUT, one cannot really produce good OUTPUT. That's why teachers need to provide a lot of opportunities for students to receive meaningful and authentic INPUT (listen to music, watch films) both inside and outside the classroom. With advent of new technologies, teachers and students alike can use endless online resources to teach and learn the target language. Don't you think?
ReplyDeleteTim, agree with you that Chomsky's UG theory does much to explain the biological source of our L1 acquisition. The innate ability to comprehend verbal meaning cannot be underestimated, and truly with a greater understanding of the process we might be able to better teach an L2.
ReplyDeleteYou stated above that "Language learning is a completely personal experience that must be tailored to the learner." How would you respond to Krashen's assertion that "we all learn language the same way"? Of course every person has preferred methods of obtaining and retaining information, but I find that the similarities in learning that Krashen outlines . -- comprehensible input, a relaxed environment, etc. -- are undeniable.
Pat, what I believe Krashen to have outlined is directed for classroom learning, and is perhaps the most developed theory (from what we have read, at least) in that aspect. However, from my experience, 90% of language learning and acquisition is matured from outside of institutional instruction. To master any skill, one cannot remain in a comfortable and relaxed environment where things flow smoothly and naturally -- no; one must thrust himself into embarrassing circumstances that force him out of his Comfort Zone, thus obliging him to abandon all prior notion of himself and the world. To learn another language is to learn another viewpoint, way of life, set of norms and mores, facial expressions, hand gestures. For these reasons, I conclude that anxiety is necessary to master any skill, an anxiety ignited by one's burning desire to reach the summit of whatever goal he is aiming to achieve. Neither Skinner nor Chomsky nor Krashen make any reference to the acquisition of such elements of language; only do they hypothesize about the linguistics and cerebral function elements of language acquisition. This is why I so strongly identify with the cognitive theory, because it accentuates the importance of self surveilling. Conquering a second language must be viewed as mastering any skill -- it requires total dedication and desire. Let's be honest, Pat; you and I aren't taking Spanish classes at the University of New Hampshire for the sole purpose to expand our knowledge of the Spanish language and culture. The truth is that we need money in this world to survive and we each need a way to "make a living", as they say. You wish to be a Spanish teacher in secondary school and I to continue in research, but we are not going to class to sincerely totally vanquish the language. Here lies the problem with the theories that we have learned from our reading. They are merely designed to help the learner become proficient enough so that he can become a researcher or secondary school teacher when in fact the cognitive theories are meant to aid the learner to understand how to gain total knowledge of said language.
ReplyDeleteWithout a doubt the theories we have examined, especially those advanced by Skinner, Chomsky and Krashen, are perpetuated by the spectre of capitalism. They are hypothesized, researched, developed and presented in a manner which holds in mind a key ingredient of capitalism: that financial gain is more valuable than understanding the meaning of life. These theories are not meant to help us master a second language, but to create the next generation of industrious, obedient American workers. Perhaps this is the reason why cognitive theories of language acquisition are so often looked over. Perhaps this is the reason why funding for humanities studies has been cut in favor of STEM fields.
DeleteLearning a second language is a process that relies on diverse factors in order to achieve that goal. For each individual, it is a different approach. I personally think Skinner’s and Chomsky’s theories complement each other; although, I would agree more with Skinner’s empiricist theory. According to Chomsky’s theory (Mentalist), he believes that every human by nature has a universal grammar, and that all humans have the inherent capacity to acquire a language. I do think that we as humans we are gifted to learn languages not only our first language but also a second language. That natural gift may explain why children are able to learn a language easily. When it comes to languages, core grammar and basic rules are easily and quickly learned when exposed to a foreign language. Also, I agree with the Empiricist theory. I believe all that can be acquired through some form of conditioning. It is possible to learn through your environment. Being immerse in a culture is one of the best ways to learn. Learning a second language can be possible through practice and repetition. I think a combination of both theories can hint us on how we acquire a second language.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was studying abroad, I felt like the Empiricist theory definitely played a huge factor. By being in the environment and through practice and repetition I was able to increase my vocabulary, have a better understanding of the language and culture. Also, I gained more confidence to speak the language. I think the lack of practice and immersion in the culture can definitely impede someone with the acquisition of a second language.
Very Informative! Thanks for sharing your experience. You are doing great work. All of your articles are great and informative.
ReplyDeleteAlso, Please Check out my New Android Application Blood Pressure Simulator and Check Your Blood Pressure easily with this application.