Second Language Acquisition Compiled by Po-Sen Liao Introduction Definition: The systematic study of how people learn a language

e other than their mother tongue. Goals: 1. The description of L2 acquisition: to describe how learner language changes over time, example, grammatical structures, pronunciation, and vocabulary. 2. The explanation of L2 acquisition: to identify the external and internal factors that account for why learners acquire L2 in the way they do; to explain why some learners seem to be better at it than others. a. External factors: the social conditions in which learning takes place; the input that learners receive. b. Internal factors: learners cognitive mechanisms. (e.g. mother tongue; communicative strategies) 3. To improve language teaching: researchers have studied what impact teaching has on L2 learning. First language acquisition It seems that children all over the world go through similar stages of language learning behaviors. They use similar constructions in order to express similar meanings, and make the same kinds of errors. These stages can be summarized as follows: Language stage crying cooing babbling one-word utterances two-word utterances questions, negatives rare or complex constructions mature speech Beginning stage birth 6 weeks 6 months 1 year 18 months 2 years 3 months 5 years 10 years

An important characteristic of child language is that it is rule-governed, even if initially the rules children create do not correspond to adult ones. Children commonly produce forms such as sheeps or breads which they never heard before and therefore

not imitating. Comparing first and second language acquisition One needs to approach the comparison of first and second language acquisition by first considering the differences between children and adults. Four possible categories to compare, defined by age and type of acquisition are presented as follows: Child L1 L2 C1 C2 Adult A1 A2

Cell A1 is of an abnormal situation. There have been few instances of an adult acquiring a first language. The C1-A2 comparisons are difficult to make because of the enormous cognitive, affective, and physical differences between children and adults. The C1-C2 hold age constant, while the C2-A2 hold second language constant. The critical period hypothesis A biologically determined period of life when language can be acquired more easily and beyond which time language is increasingly difficult to acquire. The classic argument is that a critical point for second language acquisition occurs around puberty, (by the age of 12 or 13) beyond which people seem to be relatively incapable of acquiring a native-like accent of the second language. The hypothesis was grounded in research which showed that people who lost their linguistic capabilities, for example as a result of an accident, were able to regain them totally before puberty (about the age of twelve) but were unable to do so afterwards. There is considerable evidence to support the claim that L2 learners who begin learning as adults are unable to achieve native-speaker competence in either grammar or pronunciation. Lateralization: There is evidence in neurological research that as the human brain matures, certain functions are assigned, or lateralized, to the left hemisphere of the brain, and certain other functions to the right hemisphere. Intellectual, logical, and analytic functions appear to be largely located in the left hemisphere, while the right hemisphere controls functions related to emotional and social needs. Lenneberg (1967) suggested that lateralization is a slow process that begins around the age of two and is completed around puberty.

Recent history of second language research Behavioristic approach ( the 1900s -1950s): In the 1950s and 1960s, in the behaviorist view, language learning is seen as the formation of habits, based on the notions of stimulus and response. The response people give to stimuli in their environment will be reinforced if desired outcome is obtained. Through repeated reinforcement, a certain stimulus will elicit the same response time and again, which will then become a habit. When learning a second language, we already have a set of well-established responses in our mother tongue. The L2 learning process therefore involves replacing those habits by a set of new ones. The complication is that the old L1 habits interfere with this process, either helping or inhibiting it. (If the structures in the L2 are similar to those of the L1, then learning will take place easily. If, however, structures are realized differently in the L1 and the L2, then learning will be difficult.) From a teaching point of view, the implications of this approach were twofold. First, language learning would take place by imitating and repeating the same structures time after time (it was strongly believed that practice makes perfect). Second, teachers need to focus their teaching on areas of L1 and L2 difference. Researchers also embarked on the task of comparing pairs of languages in order to pinpoint areas of differences. This was termed Contrastive Analysis (CA). Behaviorist leaning theory: Theories of habit formation were theories of learning in general. A habit was formed when a particular stimulus became regularly linked with a particular response. These theories were applied to language learning. In L1 acquisition children were said to master their mother tongue by imitating utterances produced by adults and having their efforts at using language either rewarded or corrected. It was also believed that SLA could proceed in a similar way. Imitation and reinforcement were the means by which the learner identified the stimulus-response association that constituted the habits of the L2. L2 learning was most successful when the task was broken into a number of stimulus-response links, which could be systematically practiced and mastered one at a time. Criticisms: The creativity of language- children do not learn and reproduce a large set of sentences, but they create new sentences that they have never learned before. This is only possible because they internalize rules rather than strings of words. (e.g. Mummy goed; it breaked.) Why the L2 learner made errors: Old habits get in the way of learning new habits. The notion of interference has
3

a central place in behaviorist account of SLA. Where the first and second language share a meaning but express it in different ways, an error is likely to arise in the L2 because the learner will transfer the realization device form his first language into the second. Transfer will be positive when the first and second language habits are the same. Thus differences between the first and second language create learning difficulty which results in errors. By comparing the learners native language with the target language, differences could be identified and used to predict areas of potential error. Criticisms of the contrastive analysis hypothesis 1. Empirical research and the predictability of errors: Dulay and Burt (1973, 1974) identified four types of error: a. Interference-like error: those errors that reflect native language structure and are not found in first language acquisition data. b. First language developmental errors: those that do not reflect native language structure but are found in first language acquisition data. c. Ambiguous errors. d. Unique errors: those that do not reflect first language structure and also not found in first language acquisition data. Dulay and Burt (1973) claimed that 85 percent were developmental errors, 12 percent unique, only 3 percent interference. They argued that children do not organize a L2 on the basis of transfer or comparison with their L1, but rely on their ability to construct L2 as an independent system, in much the same way as in L1 acquisition. They suggested that interference might be a major factor only in phonology. The major difficulty in attempts at empirically validating the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis has been the lack of well-defined and broadly-accepted criteria for establishing which grammatical utterances are the result of language transfer. In particular, interference errors are difficult to distinguish from developmental errors. L1 interference is probably not the prime cause of learner errors.

Krashens monitor model (the 1970s) Krashens Monitor Model evolved in the late 1970s in a series of articles (Krashen 1977, 1978) and was elaborated and expanded in a number of books (Krashen 1981, 1982, 1985; Krashen and Terrell 1983). Krashens theory has achieved considerable popularity among second-language teachers in the United States. On the other hand, the theory has been seriously criticized on various grounds by second-language researchers and theorists.
4

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

The five central hypotheses which constitute Krashens theory are as follows: The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis The Monitor Hypothesis The Natural Order Hypothesis The Input Hypothesis The Affective Filter Hypothesis

The acquisition-Learning Hypothesis Krashen claimed that adult learners have two means for internalizing the target language. The first is acquisition, a subconscious and intuitive process of constructing the system of a language, not unlike the process used by a child to pick up a language. The second means is a conscious learning process in which learners attend to form, figure out rules, and are generally aware of their own process. According to Krashen, what is consciously learned through the presentation of rules and explanations of grammar does not become the basis of acquisition of the target language. Learning does not turn into acquisition. Our conscious learning process and our subconscious acquisition process are mutually exclusive. The Monitor Hypothesis The Monitor is a device for watchdogging ones output, for editing and making alterations or corrections as they are consciously perceived. Acquisition initiates the speakers utterances and is responsible for fluency. Thus the Monitor is thought to alter the output of the acquired system before or after the utterance is actually written or spoken, but the utterance is initiated entirely by the acquired system. This hypothesis has important implications for language teaching. Krashen argued that formal instruction in a language provides rule isolation and feedback for the development of the Monitor, but that production is based on what is acquired through communication, with the Monitor altering production to improve accuracy toward target language norms. Krashens position is that conscious knowledge of rules does not help acquisition, but only enables the learner to polish up what has been acquired through communication. The focus of language teaching should not be rulelearning but communication. The Natural Order Hypothesis The Natural Order Hypothesis states that we acquire the rules of language in a predictable order, some rules tending to come early and others late (Krashen 1985).
5

This natural order of acquisition is presumed to be the result of the acquired system, operating free of conscious grammar, or the Monitor. The principal source of evidence for the Natural Order Hypothesis comes from the so-called morpheme studies (Dulay and Burt 1974) Krashen also maintained that there is a natural sequence for the development of the negative, the auxiliary system, questions, and inflections in English. To conclude, Krashens argument for the Natural Order Hypothesis is based largely on the morpheme studies, which have been criticized on various grounds and which, by focusing on final form, tell us little about acquisitional sequences. The Input Hypothesis This hypothesis postulates that humans acquire language in only one way by understanding messages, or by receiving comprehensible inputWe move form i, our current level, to i+1, the next level along the natural order, by understanding input containing i+1 (Krashen 1985). An important part of the Input Hypothesis is Krashens recommendation that speaking not be taught directly or very soon in the language classroom. Speech will emerge once the acquirer has built up enough comprehensible input (i+1). Comprehensible input is the route to acquisition and information about grammar in the target language is automatically available when the input is understood. Evidence: the silent period during this period, learners are presumably building up their competence in the target language by listening. Krashen argued that they are making use of the comprehensible input they receive. Once competence has been built up, speech emerges. Problem: there is no way of knowing what is comprehensible input. Also, learners make considerable use of formulaic expressions during the process of acquisition. Formulaic constructions enable learners to express communicative functions they have not yet mastered and may be far from mastering. The main function of the second language class according to Krashen is to provide learners with good and grammatical comprehensible input that unavailable to them on the outside, and to bring them to the point where they can obtain comprehensible input on their own in the real world. Krashen argued that the best way to learn a second language is to approach the language as children do when they are acquiring their first language. The Natural Approach: communication competence, or functional ability in a language, arises from exposure to the language in meaningful settings where the meanings expressed by the language are understood. Rules, patterns, vocabulary,
6

and other language forms are not learned as they are presented or encountered, but are gradually established in the learners repertory on the basis of exposure to comprehensible input. Krashen claimed that if input is understood and there is enough of it, the necessary grammar is automatically provided. Speaking is a result of acquisition and not its cause. The ability to communicate in a second language cannot be taught directly but emerges on its own as a result of building competence via comprehensible input. The role of output: Krashen has argued that speaking is unnecessary for acquiring a second language. In his view, the only role that the speakers output plays is to provide a further source of comprehensible input. Other researchers would argue that understanding new forms in not enough; the learner must be given the opportunity to produce the new forms. Swain (1985) has argued for the importance of comprehensible output. Learners can benefit from talking. The Affective Filter Hypothesis According to the Affective Filter Hypothesis, comprehensible input may not be utilized by a second-language acquirers if there is a mental block that prevents them form fully profiting from it (Krashen 1985). The affective filter acts as a barrier to acquisition: if the filter is down, the input reaches the LAD and becomes acquired competence; if the filter is up, the input is blocked and does not reach the LAD. Krashen maintained that acquirers need to be open to the input and that when the affective is up, the learner may understand what is seen and read, but the input will not reach the LAD. This occurs when the acquirer is unmotivated, lacking in confidence, or concerned with failure. The filter is down when the acquirer is not anxious and is intent on becoming a member of the group speaking the target language. Many researchers agree with Krashen on basic assumptions, such as the need to move form grammar-based to communicatively oriented language instruction, the role of affective factors in language learning, and the importance of acquisitional sequences in second-language development. Criticism: 1. Barry McLaughlin (1978, 1990) sharply criticized Krashens rather fuzzy distinction between subconscious (acquisition) and conscious (learning) processes. 2. There is no interface no overlap between acquisition and learning. Instruction in conscious rule learning can indeed aid in the attainment of successful
7

communicative competence in a second language. 3. Krashens Input Hypothesis claims that success in a foreign language can be attributed to input alone. Such a theory ascribes little credit to learners and their own active engagement in the pursuit of language competence. First of all, it is important to distinguish between input and intake. The latter is the subset of all input that actually gets assigned to our long-term memory store. Second language learners are exposed to potentially large quantities of input, only a fraction of which becomes intake. 4. Krashen presents the i+1 formula as if we are actually able to define i and 1, and we are not. 5. The notion that speech will emerge in a context of comprehensible input sounds promising, but we are left with no significant information on what to do about the students for whom speech does not emerge.

The rationalism/ cognitive approach (the 1960s-1970s): Cognitive psychologists sought to discover underlying motivations and deeper structures of human behavior by using a rational approach. They employed the tools of logic, reason, extrapolation, and inference in order to derive explanations for human behavior. They asserted that meaning, understanding, and knowing were significant data for psychological study. Language acquisition is innately determined, that we are born with a built-in device that predisposes us to language acquisition (LAD: language acquisition device). Chomsky believes that natural languages are governed by highly abstract and complex rules that not immediately evident in actual utterances (surface structure). If the child were totally reliant on the data available in the input, he would not be able to acquire these rules. Therefore, the child must possess a set of innate principles which guide language processing. These principles comprise Universal Grammar --- the linguistic features and processes which are common to all natural languages and all language learners. The childs linguistic development is not a process of developing fewer and fewer incorrect structures. Rather, the childs language at any stage is systematic in that child is constantly forming hypotheses on the basis of the input received and then testing those hypotheses. As the childs language develops, those hypotheses get continually revised, reshaped, or sometimes abandoned. Followed in the 1980s and 1990s, new links have emerged with cognitive science (the role of consciousness), with neuropsychology (modularity of the brain, the left hemisphere is associated with logical, analytical thought, with mathematical and liner
8

processing of information. The right hemisphere perceives and remembers visual, tactile, and auditory images), and with sociocultural frameworks which have greatly enriched our perception of the many facets of second language acquisition. Constructivism: (the 1980s-200) Constructivists argue that all human beings construct their own vision of reality, and therefore multiple contrasting ways knowing and describing are equally legitimate. Cognitive factors of second language acquisition Intelligence: There is clear evidence that L2 students who are above average on formal measures of intelligence tend to do well in L2 learning. In addition to traditional sense of intelligence defined and measured in terms of (1) linguistic and (2) logicalmathematical abilities (IQ), Gardner (1983) described five more different forms of knowing as (3) spatial intelligence (to find your way around an environment), (4) musical intelligence (to perceive and create pitch and rhythmic patterns), (5) bodilykinesthetic intelligence(athletic prowess), (6) interpersonal intelligence(to understand others, how they feel, how they interact with one another), (7) intrapersonal intelligence(the ability to see oneself, to develop a sense of self-identity), and (8) naturalist intelligence. By broadly defining intelligence as Gardner has done, we can more easily discern a relationship between intelligence and second language learning. For instance, musical intelligence could explain the relative ease that some learners have in perceiving and producing the intonation patterns of a language. Interpersonal intelligence is of obvious importance in the communicative process. Language aptitude: (Is there really such a thing as a gift for language learning, distinct from general intelligence?) A number of subskills are believed to be predicators of L2 learning success: (1) phonetic coding ability, (2) grammatical sensitivity, (3) memory abilities, and (4) inductive language ability. Language learning strategies: More proficient learners do indeed employ strategies that are different from those used by the less proficient. However, whether the strategies cause the learning, or the learning itself enables different strategies to be used, has not been fully clarified.

Affective domain of second language acquisition Affect refers to emotion or feeling. The affective factors are the emotional side of human behavior in the second language learning process. The development of affective states or feeling involves a variety of personality factors, feeling both about ourselves and about others with whom we come into contact. Understanding how human beings feel, respond, believe, and value is an important aspect of a theory of second language acquisition. Specific affective factors are discussed as follows: Anxiety: Anxiety is associated with feelings of uneasiness, frustration, self-doubt, apprehension, or worry. Anxiety can be experienced at various levels. At the deepest, or global, level, trait anxiety is a more permanent predisposition to be anxious. Some people are predictably and generally anxious about many things. At a more momentary, or situational level, state anxiety is experienced in relation to some particular event or act. Foreign language anxiety focuses more specifically on the situational nature of state anxiety. Three components of foreign language anxiety have been identified: (1) communication apprehension, arising from learners inability to adequately express mature thoughts and ideas; (2) fear of negative social evaluation, arising from a learners need to make a positive social impression on others; and (3) test anxiety, or apprehension over academic evaluation. (Horwitz et al., 1986) Yet another important insight to be applied to our understanding of anxiety lies in the distinction between debilitative and facilitative anxiety (Scovel, 1978). We may be inclined to view anxiety as a negative factor, something to be avoided at all costs (e.g. test anxiety). But the notion of facilitative anxiety is that some concern over a task to be accomplished is a positive factor. So the next time your students are anxious, you do well to ask yourself if that anxiety is truly debilitative. It could well be that a little nervous tension in the process is a good thing. Both too much and too little anxiety may hinder the process of successful second language learning. Empathy Empathy is usually described as the projection of ones own personality into the personality of another in order to understand him or her better. Language is one of the primary means of empathizing. In order to communicate effectively, you need to understand the other persons affective and cognitive states. For instance, in a second language learning situation, not only must learner-speaker correctly identify cognitive and affective sets in the hearer, but they must do so in a language in which they are insecure.

10

 Motivation: Motivation is commonly thought of as an inner drive, impulse, emotion, or desire that moves one to a particular action. In second language learning, a learner will be successful with the proper motivation. 1. Instrumental motivation: To learn an L2 for some functional reason- to pass an examination, to get a better job, reading technical material, translation, and so forth. 2. Integrative motivation: Learners are interested in the people and culture represented by the target language group. Learners wish to integrate themselves within the culture of the second language group, to identify themselves with and become a part of that society. However, some learners may be influenced by a Machiavellian motivation- the desire to learn the L2 in order to manipulate and overcome the people of the target language. 3. Resultative motivation: This motivation is the result of learning. Learners who experience success in learning may become more, or in some contexts, less motivated to learn. 4. Intrinsic motivation: Motivation involves the arousal and maintenance of curiosity and can ebb and flow as a result of such factors as learners particular interests and the extent to which they feel personally involved in learning activities. There is no apparent reward except the activity itself. Intrinsically motivated behaviors are aimed at bringing about certain internally rewarding consequences, namely, feelings of competence and self-determination. 5. Extrinsic motivation: Extrinsically motivated behaviors are carried out in anticipation of a reward from outside and beyond the self. Typical extrinsic rewards are money, prizes, grades, and even certain types of positive feedback. These five types of motivation should be seen as complementary rather than as distinct and oppositional. Most situations involve a mixture of each type of motivation. However, growing stockpile of research on motivation strongly favors intrinsic motivation, especially for long-term retention (Brown, 1990).

Sociocultural perspectives on second language acquisition Culture is a way of life. It is the context within which we exist, think, feel, and relate to others. Culture might also be defined as the ideas, customs, skills, arts, and tools that characterize a given group of people in a given period of time. But culture is
11

more than the sum of its parts. It is a system of integrated patterns, most of which remain below the threshold of consciousness, yet all of which govern human behavior (Condon, 1973). Culture, as an ingrained set of behaviors and modes of perceptions, becomes highly important in the learning of a second language. A language is a part of a culture and a culture is a part of a language. The acquisition of a second language is also the acquisition of a second culture. Sapir-Whorf hypothesis It refers to the idea that language shapes (rather than reflect) ones world view. It can be summed up as follows: the background linguistic system of each language is not merely a reproducing instrument for voicing ideas but rather is itself the shaper of ideas, the program and guide for the individuals mental activity, for his analysis of impressions, for his synthesis of his mental stock in trade (Whorf, 1956). Schumanns acculturation model Acculturation is defined by Brown (1980) as the process of becoming adapted to a new culture. Linton (1963) described the general process of acculturation as involving modification in attitude, knowledge, and behavior. The overall process of acculturation demands both social and psychological adaptation. John Schumann (1978) characterized the relationship between acculturation and second-language acquisition in the following way: Second language acquisition is just one aspect of acculturation and the degree to which a learner acculturates to the target language group will control the degree to which he acquires the second language. In this view, acculturation and hence second-language acquisition is determined by the degree of social and psychological distance between the learner and the target-language culture. It is assumed that the more social and psychological distance there is between the second-language learner and the target-language group, the lower the learners degree of acculturation will be toward that group. Social and psychological distance influence second-language acquisition by determining the amount of contact learners have with the target language and the degree to which they are open to the input that is available. In a negative social situation, the learner will receive little input in the second language. In a negative psychological situation, the learner will fail to utilize available input. Schumann lists the various factors which determine social and psychological
12

distance. An example of a good learning situation is when (1) the target language and L2 groups view each other as social equal; (2) the target language and L2 groups are both desirous that L2 group will assimilate; (3) both the target language and L2 groups expect the L2 group to share social facilities with the target language group; (4) the L2 group is small and not very cohesive; (5) the L2 groups culture is congruent with that of the target language group; (6) both groups have positive attitudes to each other; (7) the L2 group envisages staying in the target language area for an extended period. The psychological factors are affective in nature. They include (1) language shock; (2) culture shock; (3) motivation; and (4) ego boundaries. In Schumanns model, acculturation is the causal variable in the second language learning process. He argued that the early stages of second language acquisition are characterized by the same processes that are responsible for the formation of pidgin languages. When there are hindrances to acculturation when social and/or psychological distance is great the learner will not progress beyond the early stages and the language will stay pidginized. Schumann documented this process in a case study of a 33-year-old Costa Rican immigrant, Alberto. Albertos interlanguage was characterized by many simplifications and reductions. These simplifications and reductions Schumann saw to be a form of pidginization, which leads to fossilization when the learner no longer revises the interlanguage system in the direction of the target language. This process occurred not because of a cognitive deficit, but because of a minimal amount of acculturation to the target language group. Pidginization is characteristic of all early second language acquisition. Evaluation: 1. The question of causality: The acculturation hypothesis assumes a causal model in which attitude affects access to input which in turn affects second language acquisition. Attitude, or the perception of distance between the learner and the target group, is seen to control behavior. It is possible, however, that successful learners may be more positively disposed toward the target language group because of their positive experience with the language. Their success may be more a function of intelligence, social skills, and language learning ability than of perceived distance form the target language group. Most likely, the line of causality is bi-directional. Perceived distance affects second language acquisition and is affected by success in second language acquisition.

13

2. One of the difficulties in Schumanns hypothesis of social distance is the measurement of actual social distance. William Acton (1979) devised a measure of perceived social distance. His contention was that it is not particularly relevant what the actual distance is between cultures since it is what learners perceive that forms their own reality.

Instruction and second language acquisition Researchers have studied what impact teaching has on L2 learning. 1. Whether teaching learners grammar has any effect on their interlanguage development. Do learners learn the structure they are taught? (Initial gains in grammar accuracy disappear over time) Teachability hypothesis: Second language learners follow a fairly rigid route in their acquisition of certain grammatical structures. Instruction can only promote language acquisition if the interlanguage is close to the point when the structure to be taught is acquired in the natural setting (so that sufficient processing requirements are developed). Instruction does not subvert the natural sequence of acquisition but rather helps to speed up learners passage through it. (Teachers are not likely to know which learners in their class are ready to be taught a particular structure and will have no easy way of finding out.) 2. The same instructional option is not equally effective for all L2 learners. Learners learn better if the kind of instruction they receive matches their preferred ways of learning an L2. (learning styles and learning strategies) Learning styles and strategies Learning styles Learning styles might be thought of as cognitive, affective, and physiological traits that relatively stable indicators of how learners perceive, interact with, and respond to the learning environment (Keefe, 1979). Learners styles are determined by the way they internalize their total environment, and since that internalization process is not strictly cognitive, we find that physical, affective, and cognitive domains merge in learning style. 1. Reflectivity and impulsivity Reflective learners are slower but more accurate than impulsive learners in reading. Teachers tend to judge mistakes too harshly, especially in the case of a learner with an impulsive style who may be more willing than a reflective
14

learner to gamble at a correct answer. On the other hand, a reflective learner may require patience from the teacher, who must allow more time for the student to struggle with responses. 2. Visual and auditory styles Visual learners tend to prefer reading and studying charts, drawings, and other graphic information, while an auditory style is characterized by a preference for listening to lectures and audiotapes. Most successful learners utilize both visual and auditory input, but slight preferences one way or the other may distinguish one learner from another. (e.g. listen to TV or read captions, Korean students were significantly more visually oriented than native English-speaking Americans.) 3. Field independence and field dependence A field independent style enables you to distinguish parts from a whole, to concentrate on something, to analyze separate variables without the contamination of neighboring variables. On the other hand, too much field independence may result in cognitive tunnel vision: you see only the parts and not their relationship to the whole. Field independence is closely related to classroom learning that involves analysis, attention to details, and mastering of exercises, drills, and other focused activities. Field dependence is the tendency to be dependent on the total field so that the parts embedded within the field are not easily perceived, although that total field is perceived more clearly as a unified whole. Primarily field dependence persons will, by virtue of their empathy, social outreach, and perception of other people, be successful in learning the communicative aspects of a second language. 4. Ambiguity tolerance It refers to the degree to which you are cognitively willing to tolerate ideas and propositions that run counter to your own belief system or structure of knowledge. In second language learning a great amount of contradictory information is encountered. Successful language learning necessitates tolerance of such ambiguities, at least for interim periods or stages, during which time ambiguous items are given a chance to become resolved. However, excess tolerance has the effect of hampering or preventing meaningful subsumption of ideas. Learning strategies Over the last few decades, within the field of second /foreign language education, a gradual but marked shift in the focus of language research and instruction
15

has taken place. There has been less stress on teachers teaching and greater emphasis on students learning. This change has been reflected in increasing numbers of studies undertaken from the learners perspectives, particularly in research on language learning strategies. More and more foreign language educators have now recognized that effective learning strategies can enhance students efforts to reach their language goals. Thus, students are often being encouraged to learn how to learn English, rather than to depend heavily on their teachers instructions. Learning strategies are defined by Oxford (1990) as specific actions taken by the learner to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more transferable to new situations. These strategies encompass a wide range of learning behaviors that can help learners become more autonomous, self-regulated, and goal-oriented, resulting in improving their progress in developing foreign language skills. Oxfords (1990) has developed a learning strategies system as well. She divided learning strategies into two major classes that can be further subdivided into six strategy categories. The first class refers to direct strategies that involve the language itself in a variety of tasks and situations, and these include memory, cognitive, and compensation strategies. The second class refers to indirect strategies that deal with the general management of learning, including metacognitive, affective, and social strategies. Generally speaking, cognitive strategies involve manipulation or transformation of learning materials or tasks in order to enhance comprehension. Examples include practicing, analyzing, reasoning, or reorganizing information. Memory strategies are devices that help learners link new information with something already known, such as creating mental linkages, using imagery or physical responses. Compensation strategies help learners make up for inadequate knowledge in the target language through guessing or using gestures or a circumlocution. Metacognitive strategies refer to higher order executive skills that involve planning, monitoring and evaluating of the language learning process and production. Affective strategies enable learners to control over their personal emotions, attitudes, motivations, and values that relate to language learning, including identifying ones feelings, using a language learning diary, or lowering learning anxiety. Then, social strategies facilitate learning with other people and help learners develop cultural understanding. Examples are asking questions for clarification, cooperating with peers or more proficient learners, or empathizing with others. The relationship of the use of language learning strategies to success in learning a foreign language has been a focus in the area of language learning strategy research. Most research findings indicate that successful learners tend to use appropriate
16

strategies leading to improvement, tend to use more and better strategies than poorer learners do, and are able to combine effective strategies to meet the requirements of the language task Learning strategies are especially important to Taiwans English learners, since most of them lack enough exposure to authentic English at school. It is also impossible for English teachers to follow the learning path of each of their students either inside or outside of classroom. One of the possible ways to turn this situation around is to help students develop effective learning strategies and become selfdirected learners. In fact, both teachers and students can benefit from the use of learning strategies, and more research based on Taiwans learning context is needed. Appendices Key concepts in second language acquisition A. Nature vs. nurture How much of human language learning derives from innate predispositions (genetic pre-programming) and how much of it derives from social and cultural experiences which influence us as we grow up? Skinner: Language could be learned primarily by imitating caretakers speech. Chomsky: Human language is too complex to be learned. We must have some innate predisposition to expect natural languages to be organized in particular ways. B. Competence and performance Competence refers to the abstract and hidden representation of language knowledge held inside our heads, with its potential to create and understand original utterances in a given language (e.g. rules of grammar, vocabulary). Performance is an imperfect reflection of competence, partly because of the processing complications which are involved in speaking or other forms of language production, and which lead to errors and slips (e.g. four language skills). C. Fossilization Learners seem to cease to make any visible progress, no matter how many classes they attend, or how actively they continue to use their second language for communicative purposes. Psycholinguistic explanation: The language-specific learning mechanisms available to the young child simply cease to work for older learners, and no amount of effort and study can recreate them.
17

Sociolinguistic explanation: Older L2 learners do not have the social opportunities, or the motivation, to identify with the native speaker community. D. L1 interference as a learner strategy: Corder (1978) outlines one way in which interference can be recast as a learner strategy He suggests that the learners L1 may facilitate the developmental process of learning a L2. When learners experience difficulty in communicating an idea because they lack the necessary target language resources, they will resort to their L1 to make up the insufficiency. This explains why the L1 is relied on more at the beginning of the learning process than later. A rather similar proposal is made by Krashen (1981), when he suggests that learners can use the L1 to initiate utterances when they do not have sufficient acquired knowledge of the target language for this purpose. Both Corders and Krashens proposals view the L1 as a resource which learners can use for ad hoc translation to overcome their limitations. E. Communication Competence The term communicative competence was coined by Dell Hymes (1967), a sociolinguist who was convinced that Chomskys (1965) notion of competence was too limited. In the 1970s, research on communicative competence distinguished between linguistic and communicative competence (Hymes 1967) to highlight the difference between knowledge about language forms and knowledge that enables a person to communicate functionally and interactively. Cummins (1981) proposed a distinction between cognitive/academic language proficiency (CALP) and basic interpersonal communicative skills (BICS). CALP is that dimension of proficiency in which the learner manipulates or reflects upon the surface features of language outside of the immediate interpersonal context. BICS, on the other hand, is the communicative capacity that all children acquire in order to function in daily interpersonal exchange. Seminal work on defining communicative competence was carried out by Michael Canale and Merrill Swain (1980). In Canale and Swains (1980), and later in Canales (1983) definition, four different components make up the construct of communicative competence. The first two subcategories reflect the use of the linguistic system itself. (1) Grammatical competence is that aspect of communicative competence that encompassed knowledge of lexical items and of rules of morphology, syntax, sentence-grammar semantics, and phonology. It is the competence that we associate with mastering the linguistic code of a language, the linguistic
18

competence of Hymes. (2) Discourse competence: it is the ability we have to connect sentences in stretches of discourse and to form a meaningful whole out of a series of utterances. While grammatical competence focuses on sentence-level grammar, discourse competence is concerned with intersentential relationship. The last two subcategories define the more functional aspects of communication. (3) Sociolinguistic competence is the knowledge of the sociocultural rules of language and of discourse. This type of competence requires an understanding of the social context in which language is used: the roles of the participants, the information they share, and the function of the interaction. Only in a full context of this kind can judgments be made on the appropriateness of a particular utterance (Savignon 1983). (4) Strategic competence: the verbal and nonverbal communication strategies that may be called into action to compensate for breakdowns in communication due to performance variables or due to insufficient competence (Canale and Swain1980). It is the competence underlying our ability to make repairs, to cope with imperfect knowledge, and to sustain communication through paraphrase, circumlocution, repetition, hesitation, avoidance, and guessing, as well as shifts in register and style (Savignon 1983). F. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) CLT is best understood as an approach not a method. Brown (1993) offers the following four interconnected characteristics as a definition of CLT: Classroom goals are focused on all of the components of communicative competence and not restricted to grammatical or linguistic competence. Language techniques are designed to engage learners in the pragmatic, authentic, functional use of language for meaningful purposes. Organizational language forms are not the central focus but rather aspects of language that enable the learner to accomplish those purposes. Fluency and accuracy are seen as complementary principles underlying communicative techniques. At times fluency may have to take on more importance than accuracy in order to keep learners meaningfully engaged in language use. In the communicative classroom, students ultimately have to use the language, productively and receptively, in unrehearsed contexts. Students are given opportunities to focus on their own learning process through an understanding of their own styles of learning and through the development of appropriate strategies for autonomous learning.
19

The role of the teacher is that of facilitator and guide, not an all-knowing bestower of knowledge. CLT suggests that grammatical structure might better be subsumed under various functional categories. In CLT we pay considerably less attention to the overt presentation and discussion of grammatical rules than we traditionally did. CLT often makes it difficult for a nonnative speaking teacher who is not very proficient in the second language to teach effectively. Dialogues, drills, rehearsed exercises, and discussions of grammatical rues are much simpler for the average nonnative speaking teacher to contend with. G. Interlanguage The term interlanguage was coined by Selinker (1969, 1972) to refer to the interim grammars constructed by second-language learners on their way to the target language. The term won favor over similar constructs, such as approximative system (Nemser 1971) and transitional competence (Corder 1967). Since the early 1970s interlanguage has come to characterize a major approach to second-language research and theory. The interlanguage is thought to be distinct from both the learners first language and form the target language. It evolves over time as learners employ various internal strategies to make sense of the input and to control their own output. Selinker (1972) argued that the interlanguage, which he saw to be a separate linguistic system resulting form the learners attempted production of the target language norm, was the product of five central cognitive processes involved in second-language learning: 1. Language transfer from the first language. 2. Transfer of the training process used to teach the second language. 3. Strategies of second-language learning. 4. Strategies of second-language communication. 5. Overgeneralization of the target language linguistic material. The development of the interlanguage was seen by Selinker as different from the process of first-language development because of the likelihood of fossilization in the second language. Fossilization is the state of affairs that exists when the learner ceases to elaborate the interlanguage in some respect, no matter how long there is exposure, new data, or new teaching. Interlanguage and learning strategy: Selinker et al. (1975) argued that an analysis of the childrens speech revealed a definite systematicity in the interlanguage. For Selinker interlanguage referred to an interim grammar that is a single system composed of rules that have been developed via different cognitive strategies for
20

example, transfer, overgeneralization, simplification, and the correct understanding of the target language. Interlanguage as rule-governed behavior: In contrast to Selinkers cognitive emphasis, Adjemian (1976) argues that the systematicity of the interlanguage should be analyzed linguistically as rule-govern behavior. Like any language system, interlanguage grammars are seen to obey universal linguistic constraints and evidence internal consistency. Whereas Selinkers use of interlanguage stressed the structurally intermediate nature of the learners system between the first and the target language, Adjemian focused on the dynamic character of interlanguage systems, their permeability. Interlanguage systems are thought to be by their nature incomplete and in a state of flux. Interlanguage as a set of styles: Tarone (1979) maintained that the interlanguage could be seen as analyzable into a set of styles that are dependent on the context of use. Tarone proposed a capability continuum, which includes a set of styles ranging from a stable subordinate style virtually free of first-language influence to a characteristically superordinate style where the speaker pays a great deal of attention to form and where the influence of the first language is more likely to be felt. The more careful superordinate style shows the intervention of a consciously learned rule system. (Capability continuum assumes that the learners competence is made up of a continuum of styles, ranging from the careful to the vernacular. The style used in a particular situation is determined by the degree of attention paid to language form, which in turn is a reflection of social factors and personal style.) More specifically, Tarone (1983) proposed that variability in the interlanguage can be accounted for by a system of variable and categorical rules based on particular contexts of use. Like Adjemian, Tarone assumed that the interlanguage is a natural language, obeying the constraints of the same language universals and subject to analysis by means of standard linguistic techniques. She went beyond Adjemian in claiming that language production show systematic variability, similar to that demonstrated to exist in the speech of native speakers. Thus she added to Adjemians linguistic perspective a sociolinguistic point of view. For Tarone, interlanguage is not a single system, but a set of styles that can be used in different social contexts. To summarize, the views of interlanguage that guides early research saw secondlanguage learners as possessing a set of rules of intermediate grammars. Slinkier and Adjemian stressed the influence of the first-language on the emerging interlanguage. The authors differed, however, in that Selinker hypothesized that interlanguages are the product of different psychological mechanisms than native languages and hence are not natural language. Adjemian and Tarone viewed interlanguages as operating on the
21

same principles as natural languages, but Tarone differed form Adjemian in that she stressed the notion of variability in use and the pragmatic constraints that determine how language is used in context. The role of the first language: Transfer as process: The end result was the same, but the processes differed because of differences in first language. Speakers of some languages take longer to learn certain forms than do speakers of other languages because their own first languages have similar forms. Transfer is predicted to occur when the perceived similarity between the two languages is great and when the structures involved are unmarked. A number of studies (Gass 1979; Jordens 1977; Rutherford 1982) support these predictions. More marked structures are those that the person thinks of as irregular, infrequent, and semantically opaque. More regular (unmarked) forms are viewed by learners as transferable to the target language, assuming that the two languages are thought to be similar. The first language does affect the course of interlanguage development, but this influence is not always predictable. Evaluation: Interlanguage theory concerned with describing a limited range of second-language phenomena. These include the question of systematicity and variability in the performance of language learners, the question of how the emerging system develops and the role of transfer from the first language in this process. Interlanguage theory has had a relatively minor impact on pedagogy.

22