Foundations of Second Language Acquisition 25

Table 2.3 Frameworks for study of SLA

Linguistic Psychological Social
Timeline (Chapter 3) (Chapter 4) (Chapter 5)

1950s and Structuralism Behaviorism Sociocultural Theory

before

1960s Transformational- Neurolinguistics Ethnography of

Generative Information Communication
Grammar Processing Variation Theory

1970s Functionalism Humanistic Acculturation Theory

models Accommodation
Theory

1980s Principles and Connectionism Social Psychology

Parameters
Model

1990s Minimalist Processability Interactionist

Program approaches

2000s Interfaces Complexity Theory Computer Mediated

Communication

SLA which incorporate UG and De Houwer 2009 for findings on the effect
of different socializing environments.)

Frameworks for SLA

Interest in second language learning and use dates back many centuries
(see e.g. McCarthy 2001), but it is only since the 1960s that scholars have
formulated systematic theories and models to address the basic questions
in the field of SLA which were listed in Chapter 1: (1) What exactly does the
L2 learner know? (2) How does the learner acquire this knowledge? (3) Why
are some learners more successful than others? As I noted earlier, different
approaches to the study of SLA can be categorized as primarily based on
linguistic, psychological, and social frameworks. Each of these perspectives
will be the subject of a separate chapter, although we should keep in mind
that there are extensive interrelationships among them.
Important theoretical frameworks that have influenced the SLA
approaches which we will consider are listed in Table 2.3, arranged by the
discipline with which they are primarily associated, and sequenced
according to the decade(s) in which they achieved relevant academic
prominence.
Prior to the 1960s, interest in L2 learning was tied almost exclusively to
foreign language teaching concerns. The dominant linguistic model
through the 1950s was Structuralism (e.g. Bloomfield 1933), which empha-
sized the description of different levels of production in speech: phono-
logy (sound systems), morphology (composition of words), syntax
26 INTRODUCING SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

(grammatical relationships of words within sentences, such as ordering

and agreement), semantics (meaning), and lexicon (vocabulary). The most
influential cognitive model of learning that was applied to language acqui-
sition at that time was Behaviorism (Skinner 1957), which stressed the
notion of habit formation resulting from S-R-R: stimuli from the environ-
ment (such as linguistic input), responses to those stimuli, and reinforce-
ment if the responses resulted in some desired outcome. Repeated S-R-R
sequences are “learned” (i.e. strong stimulus-response pairings become
“habits”). The intersection of these two models formed the disciplinary
framework for the Audiolingual Method, an approach to language teach-
ing which emphasized repetition and habit formation that was widely
practiced in much of the world at least until the 1980s. Although it had not
yet been applied to second language concerns, Vygotsky’s Sociocultural
Theory (1962 in English translation) was also widely accepted as a learning
theory by mid-century, emphasizing interaction with other people as criti-
cal to the learning process. This view is still influential in SLA approaches
which are concerned with the role of input and interaction.

Linguistic
There have been two foci for the study of SLA from a linguistic perspec-
tive since 1960: internal and external. The internal focus has been
based primarily on the work of Noam Chomsky and his followers. It
sets the goal of study as accounting for speakers’ internalized, underly-
ing knowledge of language (linguistic competence), rather than the
description of surface forms as in earlier Structuralism. The external
focus for the study of SLA has emphasized language use, including the
functions of language which are realized in learners’ production at
different stages of development.

Internal focus
The first linguistic framework with an internal focus is Transformational-
Generative Grammar (Chomsky 1957, 1965). The appearance of this work
revolutionized linguistic theory and had a profound effect on the study
of both first and second languages. Chomsky argued convincingly that
the behaviorist theory of language acquisition is wrong because it can-
not explain the creative aspects of our linguistic ability. He called atten-
tion to the “logical problem of language acquisition,” which we dis-
cussed earlier in this chapter, and claimed the necessity of assuming
that children begin with an innate capacity which is biologically
endowed. These views have dominated most linguistic perspectives on
SLA to the present day.
This framework was followed by the Principles and Parameters Model
and the Minimalist Program, also formulated by Chomsky. Specification
of what constitutes “innate capacity” in language acquisition has been
revised to include more abstract notions of general principles and con-
straints that are common to all human languages as part of Universal
Grammar. The Minimalist Program adds distinctions between lexical and
 Foundations of Second Language Acquisition 27

functional category development, as well as more emphasis on the acqui-

sition of feature specification as a part of lexical knowledge.
Another development within this theoretical approach has focused on
the linguistic interfaces between different modules of language such as
lexicon and morphology, syntax and semantics, and semantics and prag-
matics or discourse. Some interface phenomena are more problematic for
L2 learners than others, and may account for developmental delays and
interference between languages.

External focus
The most important linguistic frameworks contributing to an external
focus on SLA are categorized within Functionalism, which dates back to the
early twentieth century and has its roots in the Prague School of Eastern
Europe. They differ from the Chomskyan frameworks in emphasizing the
information content of utterances, and in considering language primarily
as a system of communication. Some of them emphasize similarities and
differences among the world’s languages and relate these to sequence and
relative difficulty of learning; some emphasize acquisition as largely a proc-
ess of mapping relations between linguistic functions and forms, motivated
by communicative need; and some emphasize the means learners have of
structuring information in L2 production and how this relates to acquisi-
tion. Approaches based on functional frameworks have dominated European
study of SLA and are widely followed elsewhere in the world.

Psychological
There have been three foci in the study of SLA from a psychological per-
spective: languages and the brain, learning processes, and learner differ-
ences.

Languages and the brain

The location and representation of language in the brain has been of
interest to biologists and psychologists since the nineteenth century, and
the expanding field of neurolinguistics was one of the first to influence
cognitive perspectives on SLA when systematic study began in the 1960s.
Lenneberg (1967) generated great interest when he argued that there is a
critical period for language acquisition which has a neurological basis,
and much age-related research on SLA is essentially grounded in this
framework. As we will see in Chapter 4, exploratory procedures associated
with brain surgery on multilingual patients, as well as the development
of modern noninvasive imaging techniques, are dramatically increasing
knowledge in this area.

Learning processes
The focus on learning processes has been heavily influenced by computer-
based Information Processing (IP) models of learning, which were estab-
lished in cognitive psychology by the 1960s. Explanations of SLA phenom-
ena based on this framework involve assumptions that L2 is a highly
28 INTRODUCING SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

complex skill, and that learning L2 is not essentially unlike learning other
highly complex skills. Processing itself (of language or any other domain)
is believed to cause learning. A number of approaches to SLA have been
based on IP, including several that will be discussed in Chapter 4. They
have been especially productive in addressing the question of how learners
acquire knowledge of L2, and in providing explanations for sequencing in
language development. Processability is a more recently developed frame-
work which extends IP concepts of learning and applies them to teaching
second languages.
Connectionism is another cognitive framework for the focus on learn-
ing processes, beginning in the 1980s and becoming increasingly influen-
tial. It differs from most other current frameworks for the study of SLA in
not considering language learning to involve either innate knowledge or
abstraction of rules and principles, but rather to result from increasing
strength of associations (connections) between stimuli and responses.
Because this framework considers frequency of input an important caus-
ative factor in learning, it is also providing a theoretical base for research
on language teaching.
Psychological frameworks which focus primarily on learning processes
have long recognized their complex nature, but twenty-first century theo-
ry and research on SLA has increased emphasis on the nature and effect
of complex systems in their own right (see e.g. Larsen-Freeman and
Cameron 2008). This includes attention to their dynamic and nonlinear
character, their movement toward self-organization, and their interaction
with other complex systems. Traditional definitions of causality are
questioned, and context (as a complex system itself) has greater impor-
tance than in most prior work from a psychological perspective.

Learner differences
The focus on learner differences in SLA has been most concerned with the
question of why some learners are more successful than others. It arises in
part from the humanistic framework within psychology, which has a long
history in that discipline, but has significantly influenced second lan-
guage teaching and SLA research only since the 1970s (see Williams and
Burden 1997). This framework calls for consideration of emotional involve-
ment in learning, such as affective factors of attitude, motivation, and
anxiety level. This focus also considers biological differences associated
with age and sex, as well as some differences associated with aspects of
processing.

Social
Some of the frameworks that I categorize within a social perspective can
also be considered linguistic, since they relate to language form and func-
tion; some can also be considered cognitive, since they explore learning
processes or attitude and motivation. We will review them in this section
because (in addition to linguistic and cognitive factors) they all emphasize
the importance of social context for language acquisition and use.
 Foundations of Second Language Acquisition 29

There are two foci for the study of SLA from this perspective: micro-
social and macrosocial.

Microsocial focus
The concerns within the microsocial focus relate to language acquisition
and use in immediate social contexts of production, interpretation, and
interaction. The frameworks provided by Variation Theory and
Accommodation Theory include exploration of systematic differences in
learner production which depend on contexts of use, and they consider
why the targets of SLA may be different even within groups who are osten-
sibly learning the “same” language. Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory also
contributes to this focus, viewing interaction as the essential genesis of
language. The Interactionist framework which received a renewed surge
of interest in the 1990s is tied directly to the Sociocultural Theory of the
1950s and before. Much of the revitalization of this approach is credited
to enriched translation and interpretation of Vygotsky’s earlier work, and
much to intensive research on the role of interaction in SLA within socio-
linguistic traditions.
Computers as tools for L2 teaching and learning date back more than fifty
years, but the systematic study of their processes and outcomes in SLA are
much more recent. The approach generally called Computer Mediated
Communication (CMC) is of most interest for this social perspective on SLA
because it emphasizes L2 production and interpretation within a virtual com-
munity, interaction among its participants, and often both formal and func-
tional goals. The variety of L2 instructional programs now being implemented
with computer mediation is yielding vastly divergent results. The answers to
why this is so should enlighten both theory and practice. This framework
provides a bridge to concerns which are macrosocial in nature, considering
the community of interaction.

Macrosocial focus
The concerns of the macrosocial focus relate language acquisition and use
to broader ecological contexts, including cultural, political, and educa-
tional settings. The Ethnography of Communication framework extends
the notion of what is being acquired in SLA beyond linguistic and cultural
factors to include social and cultural knowledge that is required for appro-
priate use, and leads us to consider second language learners as members
of groups or communities with sociopolitical as well as linguistic bounds.
The frameworks provided by Acculturation Theory and Social Psychology
offer broader understandings of how such factors as identity, status, and
values affect the outcomes of SLA.
We will consider the foci and frameworks since 1960 in the next three
chapters (see Table 2.4). As we now start to explore each of these in more
depth, we should remind ourselves that no one perspective or framework
among those surveyed in this book has the “final answer” or is more
privileged, and that all are needed to provide an adequate understanding
of SLA.
30 INTRODUCING SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

Table 2.4 Perspectives, foci, and frameworks

Perspective Focus Framework

Internal Transformational-Generative Grammar

Principles and Parameters Model
Linguistic Minimalist Program
Interfaces

External Functionalism

Languages and the Neurolinguistics

brain

Learning processes Information Processing

Psychological Processability
Connectionism
Complexity Theory

Individual differences Humanistic models

Microsocial Variation Theory

Accommodation Theory
Sociocultural Theory
Social Computer Mediated Communication

Macrosocial Ethnography of Communication

Acculturation Theory
Social Psychology

Chapter summary

For a variety of reasons, the majority of people in the world know more
than one language. The first language is almost always learned
effortlessly, and with nearly invariant success; second language
learning involves many different conditions and processes, and success
is far from certain. This may be at least partly because older learners no
longer have the same natural ability to acquire languages as do young
children, and because second language learning is influenced by prior
knowledge of the first and by more individual and contextual factors.
This chapter has identified a number of theoretical frameworks
which provide the bases for different approaches to the study of SLA
that we will consider. All of these approaches address the basic what,
how, and why questions that we posed, but they have different foci of
interest and attention. Linguistic frameworks differ in taking an
internal or external focus on language; psychological frameworks
differ in whether they focus on languages and the brain, on learning
processes, or on individual differences; and social frameworks differ
in placing their emphasis on micro or macro factors in learning. Like
the lenses with different color filters used in photographing Mars,
these complement one another and all are needed to gain a full
spectrum picture of the multidimensional processes involved in SLA.
Even so, much remains a mystery, stimulating continued research.