Of course, there are multiple perspectives in so called Second Language Acquisition (SLA), which all encompass different hypotheses of how learners acquire a second language. Thus, in this paper two distinct influential linguistic theories of SLA will be introduced and their main statements will be clarified. The first one will be the dominant psychological theory of the 1950s and 1960s, named "Behaviorist Learning Theory", with the focus on habit formation. Some years later, in the 1960s and 1970s, a new mentalist paradigm emerged and in regard to this, Krashen’s monitor model will be outlined. Subsequently, these theories will be discussed in relation to their suitability for the English language classroom and probably supplemented. Following, direct conclusions of how to improve language teaching can be drawn.
Table of Contents
1. Time of the ’global village‘
2. Linguistic theories of second language acquisition
2.1 Goals of SLA researcher
2.2 Behaviorist learning theory
2.3 Innatist learning theory
3. Suitability of SLA theories for the English language classroom
4. Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
The primary objective of this paper is to examine influential linguistic theories of second language acquisition (SLA) and evaluate their practical application and limitations within the context of the English language classroom.
- Analysis of behaviorist learning theory and its focus on habit formation.
- Examination of the innatist perspective and Krashen’s monitor model.
- Critique of input-based versus student-centered teaching approaches.
- Synthesis of explicit and implicit knowledge in modern language instruction.
Excerpt from the Book
2.2 Behaviorist learning theory
As already mentioned above, the behaviorist learning theory was the dominant psychological theory of the 1950s and 1960s (cf. Ellis 1997: 31). At that time, the most popular and significant proponent of language acquisition was B. F. Skinner, an American psychologist, who established an appropriate cognitive model of language learning in 1957 (cf. Saville- Troike 2012: 26). His theory “stressed the notion of habit formation resulting from S-R-R: stimuli from the environment (such as linguistic input), responses to those stimuli, and reinforcement if the responses result in some desired outcome” (Saville- Troike 2012: 26). Thus, habit formation includes adequate behavior to the learner. Habits are formed when learners imitate models of correct language and receive positive reinforcement if they are correct. On the other hand, errors have to be corrected immediately in order to avoid incorrect habits (cf. Tarone & Swierzbin 2009: 14).
In addition to the definition of the behaviorist learning theory as a process of habit formation, behaviorists supposed that a second language learner transfers habits which are appropriate to his first language to the target language (cf. Lightbown & Spada 2006: 34). For a second language learner, this means that he has to exchange and to enlarge his usual habits, which are already formed in his mother tongue. Thus, the process of SLA is attributed to a process in which old habits are being extended or replaced by new habits (cf. Tarone & Swierzbin 2009: 14). According to this, some linguists expected that habits formed in the first language would interfere with the new ones needed for the second language (cf. Lightbown & Spada 2006: 34). To prove this assumption, behaviorism was often linked to the Contrastive Analysis Hypotheses (CAH) to find out structural similarities and differences within the mother tongue and the target language: “According to the CAH, where the first language and the target language are similar, learners should acquire target language structures with ease; where there are differences, learners should have difficulty” (Lightbown & Spada 2006: 34).
Summary of Chapters
1. Time of the ’global village‘: This chapter introduces the growing global necessity for second language skills and outlines the two linguistic theories to be analyzed.
2. Linguistic theories of second language acquisition: This chapter examines the core concepts of SLA research, including behaviorist habit formation and the innatist monitor model.
3. Suitability of SLA theories for the English language classroom: This chapter evaluates the practical implications of these theories and advocates for a shift toward student-centered, communicative language teaching.
4. Conclusion: This chapter synthesizes the findings, highlighting the complexity of SLA and the ongoing challenges of applying theoretical models to classroom practice.
Keywords
Second Language Acquisition, SLA, Behaviorism, Habit Formation, Innatist Theory, Krashen, Monitor Model, Universal Grammar, Comprehensible Input, Affective Filter, Communicative Language Teaching, Student-Centered Learning, Implicit Knowledge, Explicit Knowledge, Language Pedagogy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this academic paper?
The paper explores the theoretical foundations of how humans acquire a second language, specifically focusing on behaviorist and innatist perspectives.
Which central topics are covered in the discussion?
Key topics include habit formation, the monitor model, the role of input, the affective filter, and the practical application of these theories in English language teaching.
What is the main objective or research question?
The work aims to explain how different linguistic theories of SLA contribute to our understanding of language learning and how these theories can be applied to improve English language instruction.
What scientific methods are applied in this study?
The paper employs a comparative literature review, analyzing seminal works and hypotheses by researchers such as Rod Ellis, B. F. Skinner, Stephen Krashen, and Noam Chomsky.
What is addressed in the main part of the text?
The main part contrasts behaviorist theory (habit formation) with Krashen’s monitor model (acquisition vs. learning), followed by a discussion on how these inform classroom teaching.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Essential keywords include Second Language Acquisition (SLA), Behaviorism, Innatist theory, Monitor model, and Communicative Language Teaching.
How does the author view the behaviorist approach to SLA?
The author presents behaviorism as a historical dominant paradigm that focuses on habit formation and stimuli-response, while noting its limitations in explaining complex learner errors.
What are the practical implications for language teachers mentioned in the conclusion?
The conclusion suggests that while theoretical models provide a basis, teachers must recognize the complexity of individual student needs and the necessity of combining explicit knowledge with communicative interaction.
- Quote paper
- B.Ed. Lena Groß (Author), 2013, Second Language Acquisition. Suitability of SLA Theories for the English Language Classroom, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/287305
