Theories in Second Language Acquisition - Coursework Example

Recently, there have been so many definitions for SLA in the field of linguistics. From my point of view, second language learning can be defined as an analysis of the methods which learners and teachers use to help the former attain linguistic skills essential in communicating in another language beyond the mother tongue. Linguistic skills in this case embrace oral, written skills, and other rules that govern the language such as syntax and phonemes. It must also be noted that acquisition of a second language may take place automatically (subconscious), for example, through interaction with speakers of that language, or the learner actively pursues the desired linguistics skills (conscious). The second language in this case refers to any additional language other than the mother tongue. Hence, it might be the third or the tenth provided it is secondary to the mother tongue. This personal definition of SLA is either consistent or inconsistent with existing literature on various grounds. The definition that explains my SLA definition the least– Behaviorism: Behaviorism is one of the many approaches to SLA. This approach treats language as a set of structures and acquisition of L2 linguistic skills as a developing habit imitated. This approach ignores internal mechanisms that come in to play in language acquisition (Mitchell & Myles 2004) such as the one suggested by the provided personal definition of SLA. In the personal view of SLA, the learner of language plays an active role and participates fully in the learning process which disagrees with the behaviorism approach. Johnson (2004, 18) makes a note of the passive role of the learner and says that “behaviorism undermined the role of mental processes and viewed learning as the ability to inductively discover patterns of rule-governed behavior from the examples provided to the leaner by his or her environment.” In this case, the issues of rules that govern a particular language are unnecessary as the leaner will adapt to them through examples. Language is dynamic and does not constitute solid and rigid structures that are transferable from one person to the other just the way they are. Behaviorists therefore do not recognize the native language used by learners of L2 as they interlace their L2 with their native language in the initial stages (Johnson 2004; Mitchell & Myles 2004). In fact behaviorism is unable to explain this feature and terms it as interference. Proponents if this approach has contended that language rules and culture all play a role in the transfers of language as a habit from the natives to the learners. This ideology has been used in explaining the learning of foreign language. The main argument is that if the language structures between L1 and L2 are almost similar, then the easier it is for the learner of L2 and vice versa. This perception of language as a set of structures, which are culture influenced, does not recognize contribution of cognitive abilities in learning L2 but rather attributes the ease or difficulty of learning L2 to the distance between the learner’s native language and L2. Mitchell and Myles (2004, 200) observe any theory that uses a “social-cultural perspective” in acquiring language, such as the socio-cultural theory, is best applied in explaining acquisition of L1 and not L2. The definition that explains my SLA definition the best- Cognitive approach: This approach recognizes a central role of the brain and the involvement of cognitive processes in L2 learning. The approach stipulates that learning L2 is a complex skill that follows the general mechanisms of learning. The approach is concerned with ‘how’ knowledge, in this case linguistic skills in L2 are gained as opposed to ‘what’ is learnt (Mitchell & Myles 2004; Condon 2008; Robinson 2008) though Hulstijn (2002) suggest that the scope of SLA should also cover emotion and motivation as they are critical cognitive elements. This approach concurs with the personal definition where L2 learning is achieved through the active involvement of the learner in various ways which both engage his or her cognitive abilities. This theory however, is not to be confused with the Universal Grammar (UG) which also opposes the behavioral approach. The UG theory was developed by Noam Chomsky in 1980 in opposing the view held by behaviorist. In this view, Chomsky argues that language cannot be learned as a habit but rather that every child possessed an innate knowledge of the principles of the universal grammar that allowed them to learn the language of their environment and not really imitate it as a habit as both adults and children encounter ‘logical problems’ in acquiring L1 or L2 (Mitchell and Myles 2004, 68). Language is not a static object as a learner’s competence in it lies in his knowledge of applying it in concrete situations which is a function of cognitive abilities. Taylor (1995, cited in Escribano 2004, 89) writes that “language, being at once both the creation of human cognition and an instrument in its service, is thus more likely than not to reflect, in its structure and functioning, more general cognitive abilities.” This explains the difference in learning capabilities amongst L2 learners where cognitive abilities vary from one individual to another. Escribano (2004) continues to say that one’s linguistic abilities are an observable manifestation of hidden cognitive constructions of the brain. Given that cognition mechanisms are genetically transmitted, then it is obvious to say that linguistic skills are not determined fully by imitation or the environment as suggested by behaviorists. The systematic development of human cognitive abilities from childhood to adulthood is visible in acquisition of linguistic skills among L2 learners. Condon (2008) notes that the research has shown that the use of phrasal verbs among L2 learners follows a systematic order under different motivations as opposed to arbitrary progression. This again shows agreement with the personal definition of SLA which recognizes the role of motivation. Motivation happens to be a cognitive ability that is heavily influenced by the environment. In this case, the motivation to learn to use phrasal verbs, for instance, may emanate from the desire to be as fluent as the native speakers of the language and not particularly imitate them according to the stipulations of behaviorism (Condon 2008). The desire to acquire advanced linguistic skills with time resembles with the development of cognitive abilities in human development. Behaviorism and cognitive theories are just two of the many others suggested by experts. The cognitive approach has, however, gained prominence over the others owing to its support from psychologists and linguists alike. SLA, through the behaviorist theory, implies that SLA is a research on how individuals imitate one another in passing on linguistic skills. On the other hand, SLA, using the cognitive approach, is the study of how humans utilize their cognitive abilities as a function to the environment in acquiring L2 knowledge. Thus, the cognitive approach fits best with my definition of SLA. References Condon, N. (2008). ‘How cognitive motivation influences the learning of phrasal verbs. In Freyberg, M. (ed). Second language learning theories – the behaviouristic approach as the initial theory towards modern researches. London: GRIN Verlag, 133-158 Escribano, P. (2004) Exploring cognition processes in second language acquisition: the case of cognates and false-friends in EST. IBÉRICA 7(1), 87-106. Accessed online 7/03/11 from, Hulstijn, J. (2002). “Towards a unified account of the representation, processing and acquisition of second language knowledge” Second Language Research, 18(3), 193-223 Johnson, M. (2004). A philosophy of second language acquisition. London: Yale University Press Mitchell, R. & Myles, F. (2004). Second language learning theories, 2nd ed. New York: Arnold Robinson, P. (2008). Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition. London: Taylor & Francis Read More