<
>
swopdoc logo
Download
a) trade for free
b) buy for 6.24 $
Document category

Term paper
English Language

University, School

Universität Duisburg-Essen - UDE, Essen

Grade, Teacher, Year

2,0 2018

Author / Copyright
Text by Franz D. ©
Format: PDF
Size: 0.13 Mb
Without copy protection
Rating [details]

Rating 4.0 of 5.0 (1)
Live Chat
Chat Room
Networking:
0/0|0[0.0]|2/12







More documents
Introduction to Applied Linguistics What is Applied Linguistics? In search of a definition II ¡ AL – subset of linguistics (in addition to pure linguistics)? ¡ AL – synonymous with language teaching? ¡ AL – consumer, or user, not producer of theories? ¡ Al – mediating discipline between the theoretical developments in the language sciences and the practice of language teaching? ¡ Early view (held by some laymen even today): AL = language teaching methodology ¡ Now: a discipline of its own right and with wide range of interests ¡ Common feature of these divergent areas: the focus is on language problems as experienced in the real world (examples from M. Mc Carthy 2001) ¡ It is not necessarily linked to modern language (L2) learning, e.g. child first language acquisition, language and communication, language deficit, language loss and attrition, language processing, political discourse, the language of advertising and the media, forensic linguistics, machine translation,,, etc. Relationship between theoretical and applied linguistics l Scope and status of AL: persistent and pervasive uncertainty l Superiority? Inferiority? ¡ Early view: presumption of dependency of AL on TL, TL is primary, you have to have it before you can apply it (basis of this view: formal, traditional lines – L as an abstract system, decontextualisa­tio­n), AL: re-contextualis­ati­on (term
UNIT 2 1) What are the advantages of using a ‛communic­ati­on model’ to define language? As language is not only a product but can also be seen as a process, you have the advantage that the communication model can graphically show how this process takes place. 2) Why is ‛speech event’ an important term? ® because it can be defined as a particular instance when people, who share a set of variables, exchange speech, or as a single unit of communication. 3) What is the difference between a sociological and a mental context? a) sociological context: the “external­” context whose properties are: setting, channel, genre… b) mental context: mental mindset of the speaker during communication whose properties are: schemata, knowledge, attitude, values… unlike the sociological context, it is unstable and is constantly changing, “internal context” 4) Below you can see a different version of the communication model. Which categories are of primary interest for the following views of language? sociological functional Cognitive Competence/ Schematic constructs Communicative competence Mental context Purpose Functions Structuring & Forming Utterance Grammatical competence Perceptions Notions cognitive mentalist all approaches 5) Chomsky makes the following statement: Observed use of language may provide evidence as to the nature of this mental reality,

Behaviourism vs.

Innatism

The crushing of behaviourism through innatism

Module C, term paper


Table of contents


1. Introduction 3

2. Second Language Learning Theories 4

2.1 Behaviourism 4

2.2 Innatism 5

2.3 Monitor Model 6

3. Criticism towards Behaviourism 7

3.1 Overgeneralization 7

3.2Transfer 8

4. Innatism in the classroom: The Monitor Model 10

4.1 Criticism on the monitor model 12

5. Conclusion 13

Bibliography 15

Eidesstaatliche Erklärung 16


1. Introduction


Second language acquisition is a diverse field and contributions to that come from many disciplines including linguistics, applied linguistics, psychology and education.

Although there are multiple theories of second language acquisition, no single theory exists to incorporate all the research. (Pica 2005:2) Second language refers to any language learned in addition to one’s native language, so it describes the process of learning a second language (L2) by any human being. (Gass 2013:4) Important theoretical frameworks that have influenced the Second Language Acquisition approaches will be listed in the following.

More specifically, the focus of this term paper is on the confrontation of behaviourism with innatism. Further it will explain how learners can be successful in their classroom goals with the help of innatist ideas and how Second Language Acquisition can be passed on effectively. The first part of this term paper will function as a summary and introduction of the second language acquisition theories mentioned above.

In the beginning the very first known theory called behaviourism will be explained, followed by the newer innatist approach and innatism in general. Also there will be a brief introduction of Krashen’s monitor model. Behaviourism is a theory that is limited in explaining some important language phenomena and shows also many disadvantages when it comes to think about the field of second language acquisition.

So a critical view on this theory will be taken. In order to show some negative aspects, overgeneralization and transfer errors will be presented in chapter three and it will be shown how innatism explains these problems. The following chapter will then deal with the innatist theory in the classroom. Whereas the first part of the chapter will deal with Krashen’s monitor model and how its’ different hypotheses can be implemented by a teacher in a learning situation, the second part of this chapter will focus on the criticism of the monitor model.

Additionally the interplay of Krashen’s monitor model and Swain’s output hypothesis will be taken into account, in order to show a possible solution to counteract the problems critics had mentioned. Finally the term paper ends with a critical evaluation to the ideas and problems stated .....[read full text]


Download Behaviourism vs. Innatism - The crushing of behaviourism through innatism
Click on download to get complete and readable text
• This is a free of charge document sharing network
Upload a document and get this one for free
• No registration necessary, gratis
This page(s) are not visible in the preview.
Please click on download.
Download Behaviourism vs. Innatism - The crushing of behaviourism through innatism
Click on download to get complete and readable text
• This is a free of charge document sharing network
Upload a document and get this one for free
• No registration necessary, gratis

The learning of a habit thus can occur through imitation. (Lightbown ,Spada 2006: 10).

The behaviouristic approach brought an initial change towards the understanding of language learning and teaching in second language acquisition.

Teachers started to use behaviouristic strategies and methods in the educational setting based on this theory (Saville-Troike 2009:13). Robert Lado and Nelson Brooks were the first proponents of this perspective who developed the audio-lingual teaching method. The audio-lingual method was a style of teaching which was built on static drills in which the students have little or no control on their own output.

The method’s insistence on repetition and memorization of standard phrases ignored the role of context and knowledge in language learning. (Lightbown,Spada 2006:34) Regarding the audio-lingual method it is remarkable that behaviourism is often connected to a hypothesis which explains the errors made in the target language. The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis creates the connection between behaviourism and the audio-lingual teaching methodology. Habits formed in the first language interfere with the habits of the target language.

The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis is used to predict possible language difficulties of acquiring a second language and is a systematic comparison of the first and second language. The transfer is called positive transfer, when similarities are present in L1 and L2. Therefore, the target language can be learned quickly with ease.

But whenever linguistic differences between L1 and L2 occur one can talk about negative transfer and the learning process can be challenging. (Decke-Cornill, Küster 2014:23).


2.2 Innatism


The innatist view was a direct challenge to the established behaviourist theory of the time since it proposed a completely different view of language acquisition.

The linguists Chomsky and Lenneberg serve here as a framework for the innatist perspective. Chomsky points out that children know more about language than they are expected to know only from imitation because of their ability to form new sentence structures by themselves. According to him even children with very limited cognitive ability develop quite complex language systems if they are brought up in environments in which people interact with them.

It is often highlighted that the children’s novel utterances cannot only be the repetitions of sentences they have heard in their environment. This would lead to the logical problem in Skinner's behaviourist theory, since imitation and practice alone are unable to explain the new sentence structures children develop by themselves. In respect to the complexity of human language the linguist Chomsky has argued that it would not be possible to acquire it entirely only through imitation. (Lightbown, Spada 2006:15) He suggests that there must be an innate predisposition for language and expectations about the langua.....

Download Behaviourism vs. Innatism - The crushing of behaviourism through innatism
Click on download to get complete and readable text
• This is a free of charge document sharing network
Upload a document and get this one for free
• No registration necessary, gratis
This page(s) are not visible in the preview.
Please click on download.
Download Behaviourism vs. Innatism - The crushing of behaviourism through innatism
Click on download to get complete and readable text
• This is a free of charge document sharing network
Upload a document and get this one for free
• No registration necessary, gratis

After this time it gets difficult to acquire a language. (Collins 2008: 86).

2.3 Monitor Model


Another ambitious and influential theory in the field of second language acquisition is called the monitor model developed by Stephen Krashen in the 1970’s and early 1980’s.

The monitor model is the first theory that is specifically developed in the field of second language acquisition but it also has been strongly influenced by Chomsky’s perception of language acquisition. (Lightbown, Spada 2006: 36) Krashen’s model of language acquisition consists of five main hypotheses which are listed as follows; the acquisition-learning-, the monitor-, the natural order-, the input-, and the affective filter hypothesis.

He presented this theory in the early 1970’s, while there was growing criticism towards methods based on behaviourism (Lightbown, Spada 2006: 36).


3. Criticism towards Behaviourism


It can be stated that behaviourism is an approach used mostly in language lessons.

It proposes that language learning is also a habit formation similar to other habits, which are acquired automatically. The most serious fault of this theory seems to be the fact that it cannot account for how children and adults are able to produce and understand new sentences. It is evident that there are an infinite number of possible sentences in any language, and speakers are able to understand and produce completely new utterances.

Another risky element is perhaps the idea that all learning processes, whether verbal or non-verbal, take place by means of the same underlying process that is via forming habits. These claims are strictly criticized by Chomsky as the theory overlooks the speaker’s internal factors in this process. It should be taken into consideration that behaviourism offers ways of understanding how children learn some of the regular and routine aspects of language at the earliest stages and these might be learned through the process of stimulus-response-reinforcement, but this does not seem to account for more grammatical structures of language. Some points against behaviorism are: transfer errors, overgeneralization, no creative langu.....

Download Behaviourism vs. Innatism - The crushing of behaviourism through innatism
Click on download to get complete and readable text
• This is a free of charge document sharing network
Upload a document and get this one for free
• No registration necessary, gratis
This page(s) are not visible in the preview.
Please click on download.
Download Behaviourism vs. Innatism - The crushing of behaviourism through innatism
Click on download to get complete and readable text
• This is a free of charge document sharing network
Upload a document and get this one for free
• No registration necessary, gratis

And this is the striking thing for Chomsky. On the basis of the complexity and abstractness of linguistic rules, children are not able to learn the structural properties of a language just from given samples of the language they are subjected to. Children are in the capability of using their language creatively and unconsciously, although the input children receive is limited. “Children do not learn and reproduce a large set of sentences, but they routinely create new sentences that they have never heard before.” (Mitchell, Myles &Marsden 2013:30). Those errors and mistakes proof Chomsky’s point of view “[…] that children have an innate faculty which supports them in their learning of language. “ (Mitchell, Myles &Marsden 2013: 30). So all in all it can be said that it is impossible for learners to acquire a complete language through imitation of their environment.




3.2Transfer

As discussed in the previous chapters behaviourists hypothesized that language acquisition proceeds through habit formation.

Consequently, the second language learner has to replace his habits formed in the first language by a set of habits which are necessary for the second language the learner wants to acquire (Collins 2008: 95). Therefore, it was thought it will be easier for learners, if the habits of the first language match or closely resemble the second language habits. Just like overgeneralization, transfer is representing aspects of the same learning strategy, thus they are not different processes.

But in the case of Transfer, the learner unconsciously assumes that the L2 is like the L1. (Littlewood 1984: 25). Second language learners make individual mistakes, depending on which mother tongue they speak.

These mistakes result from the negative transfer. Transfer errors occur more often with beginners than with intermediate students. The beginner has less knowledge about rules of the second language, therefore, he starts making own hypotheses about rules with the use of his first language knowledge.

Learners use what they already know about a certain language to make sense of new experiences in order to do so, “[ .] the learner uses his previous mother-tongue experience as a means of organising the second language data. “ .....

Download Behaviourism vs. Innatism - The crushing of behaviourism through innatism
Click on download to get complete and readable text
• This is a free of charge document sharing network
Upload a document and get this one for free
• No registration necessary, gratis
This page(s) are not visible in the preview.
Please click on download.
Download Behaviourism vs. Innatism - The crushing of behaviourism through innatism
Click on download to get complete and readable text
• This is a free of charge document sharing network
Upload a document and get this one for free
• No registration necessary, gratis

Teachers then began to apply communicative language teaching including more content based methods into the second language classrooms. These have also implemented Krashen’s monitor model. In the following every hypothesis will be outlined in detail.

With the acquisition-learning hypothesis Krashen stated, that there is a distinction between learning a language and acquiring a language. Learning a language is what students do at school or university.

They learn about specific rules or grammatical structures and they are able to talk about them and also explain it to others. Acquiring a language happens subconsciously, which means that human beings are not aware of acquiring a language but just use it to communicate.

We can also say that they are just picking-up language. They don´t even know about all the rules and structures, but have a feel for errors and sentences. (Gass, Behney & Plonsky 2013: 129).

In order to distinguish these two systems, the teacher has to be aware of them while planning language lessons. It is important to keep in mind that learning rules does not lead to acquisition.
The natural-order hypothesis says that the acquisition of grammatical structures happen in a predictable order, some structures are learned earlier and other later.

So teachers have to relate to that and be aware of it. “The language features that are easiest to state (and thus to learn) are not necessarily the first to be acquired.” (Lightbown,Spada 2006: 37).

In fifth or sixth grade students learn the rule „he she it, das S muss mit“. It is actually a very easy rule and as it rhymes, also easy to remember. But a lot of children and even adult learners have sometimes problems with it and make mistakes. (Lightbown,Spada 2006:37). It does not really make sense when learners are on a low level or beginner level but are expected to know this rule from their textbooks.

Because of Krashen we know, that it is impossible for these young learners to actually conceptualise. As a teacher I can tell them about the rule, but I cannot expect them to know about it. The monitor hypothesis implies that language learning has only one function, and is as.....

Download Behaviourism vs. Innatism - The crushing of behaviourism through innatism
Click on download to get complete and readable text
• This is a free of charge document sharing network
Upload a document and get this one for free
• No registration necessary, gratis
This page(s) are not visible in the preview.
Please click on download.
Download Behaviourism vs. Innatism - The crushing of behaviourism through innatism
Click on download to get complete and readable text
• This is a free of charge document sharing network
Upload a document and get this one for free
• No registration necessary, gratis

The fact that learners are suspended to large quantities of comprehensible input does not necessarily mean that learners acquire a language successfully like the affective filter hypothesis explains: “The affective filter is a metaphorical barrier that prevents learners from acquiring language even when appropriate input is available.” (Lightbown, Spada 2006:37).

This hypothesis states how affective factors can play a huge role when it comes to second language acquisition. Factors such as motivation, emotion, attitudes, self-confidence or anxiety can be influential during the process of acquisition. Somebody who has a positive and good self-image and feels confident has an advantage for L2, as he or she is maybe more interested in a topic or received positive feedback from a teacher.

Somebody who has low motivation and is less interested will learn maybe slower and will not pay attention to what is taught and therefore built a wall that prevents comprehensible input. Affective filter prevents input from being used for language acquisition. (Gass, Behney & Plonsky 2013:133) Even if a teacher cannot necessarily influence internal feelings and emotions, he should try to influence external conditions in which students are stated in.

The teacher should create a safe, supportive environment for students and give his best to make the classroom a place, where students feel comfortable in. Next, he should use varieties of teaching methods to cater all types of learners, as well.


4.1 Criticism on the monitor model


In a language learning class or lesson, the main focus should not only be on form and grammar.

The main aim and function of language is communication. So the monitor model by Krashen can obviously be a great approach to imply communicative language teaching into a second language classroom that of course focuses on meaning rather than form. Yet this theory was criticized in terms of second language research. Many linguists and psychologists especially criticized the lack of emphasis on language production. Undoubtedly, language production is an important part of language learning, “[…] in that using language aids us in understanding what our own limitations are in terms of our knowledge of the L2.” (Gass, Behney & Plonsky 2013:134).

But there is a potential solution to improve Krashen’s monitor model. To counteract critics one can combine the monitor theory with Merrill Swain’s Output Hypothesis. Swain suggested that it is not enough for learners to have comprehensible input for the L2 learning. She argued that they needed to produce comprehensible output as well in order to make the L2 a.....

This page(s) are not visible in the preview.
Please click on download.
Download Behaviourism vs. Innatism - The crushing of behaviourism through innatism
Click on download to get complete and readable text
• This is a free of charge document sharing network
Upload a document and get this one for free
• No registration necessary, gratis

Legal info - Data privacy - Contact - Terms-Authors - Terms-Customers -
Swap+your+documents



Parse error: syntax error, unexpected '{' in /var/www/bodo/dokumente-online.com/caching_ende.inc on line 23