Individual Differences in L2 Acquisition

 

    1.       Language aptitude

It has been suggested that people differ in the extent to which they possess a natural ability for learning an L2. This ability, known as language aptitude, is believed to be in part related to general intelligence but also to be in part distinct.

Eaely work by John Carroll led to the identification of a number of components of language aptitude. These are :

a.   Phonemic coding ability, i.e. the ability to identify the sounds of a foreign language so that they can be remembered later.

b.  Grammatical sensitivity, i.e. the ability to recognize the grammatical functions of words in sentences (for example, the subject and object of a sentence).

c.     Inductive language learning ability, i.e. the ability to identify patterns of correspondence and relations between form and meaning (for example, to recognize that in English ‘to’ can denote direction and ‘at’ location).

d.     Rote learning ability, i.e. the ability to form and remember associations between stimuli. This is believed to be important in vocabulary learning.

    2.       Motivation

Whereas language aptitude concerns the cognitive abilities that underlie successful L2 acquisition, motivation involves the attitudes and affective states that influence the degree of effort that learners make to learn an L2. Various kinds of motivation have been identified: instrumental, integrative, resultative, and intrinsic.

a.       Instrumental motivation

Learners may make efforts to learn an L2 for some functional reason-to pass an examination, to get a better job, or to get a place at university. In some learning contexts, an instrumental motivation seems to be the major force determining success in L2 learning.

b.      Integrative motivation

Some learersmaychoose toleara particular L2 because they are interested in the people and culture represented by the target language group. For example, it is this integrative orientation that underlies the motivation that many English speaking Canadians have for learning French.

c.       Resultative motivation

An assumption of the research reffered to above is that motivation is the cause of L2 achievement. However, it is also possible thatmotivation is the result of learning. That is, learners who experiences success in learning may become more, or in some contexts, less motivated to learn.

d.      Intrinsic motivation

In some learning situations, it may not be learners’ general reasons for learning an L2 that are crucial in determining their motivation. Indeed, it is possible that many learners do not hold distinctattitude, positive or negative, towards the target-language group. Such is probably the case with many foreign language learners.

    3.       Learning strategies

Learning strategies are the particular approaches or techniques that learners employ to try to learn an L2. They can be behaviour (for example, repeating new words aloud to help you remember them) or they can be mental (for example, using the linguistic or situational context to infer the meaning of a new word).they are typically problem-oriented. That is, learners employ learning strategies when they are faced with some problem, such as how to remember a new word. Learners are generally aware of the strategies they use and, when, asked, can explain what they did to try to learn something.

Different kinds of learning strategies have been identified. Cognitive strategies are those that are involved in the analysis, synthesis, or transformation of learning materials. Metacognitive strategies are those involved in planning, monitoring, and evaluating learning. Social/affective strategies concern the ways in which learners choose to interact with other speakers.

The study of learning strategies is of potential value to language teachers. If those strategies that are crucial for learning can be identified, it may prove possible to train students to use them. We will examine this idea in the broader context of a discussion of the role of instruction in L2 acquisition.

Linguistic Aspects of Interlanguage

    1.       Typological universals: relative clauses

A good example of how linguistic enquiry can shed light on inter-language development can be found in the study of relative clauses. As we have seen, languages vary in whether they have relative clause structures. Some languages, like English and Arabic, have them, while other languages, like Chinese and Japanese, do not. This linguistic difference influences the ease with which learners are able to learn relative clauses. Learners whose L1 includes relative clauses find them easier to learn than learners whose L1 does not and, consequently, they are less likely to avoid learning them.

    2.       Universal grammar

SLA also owes a considerable debt to another branch of linguistics-that associated closely with Noam Chomsky’s theory of Universal Grammar (UG). Chomsky argues that language is governed by a set of highly abstract principles that provide parameters which are given particular settings in different languages.

Let us  consider an example. A general principle of language is that ii permits co-reference by means of some form of reflexive. Thus, in the English sentence:

The actress blamed herself.

the subject, ‘actress’, is co-referential with the reflexive, ‘herself’ in the sense that both words refer to the same person. However, reflexives also vary cross-linguistically. In the case of English, a reflexive can only co-refer to a subject within the same clause, as in the example above. Thus, English only permits ‘local binding’. ‘Long-distance binding’, where the reflexive co-refers to a subject in another clause, is prohibited.

    3.       Learnability

Chomsky has claimed that children learning their L1 must rely on innate knowledge of language because otherwise the task facing them is an impossible one. His argument is that the input to which children are exposed is insufficient to enable them to discover the rules of the language they aretrying to learn. This insufficient is reffered to as the poverty of the stimulus. For example, a child learning English needs to discover taht sentences like this are ungrammatical :

Sam kicked fiercely his toy car.

because English does not permit an adverb between the verb and the direct object. Can this be learned solely on the basis of input? The argument is that it cannot if the input consists only of positive evidence (i.e. it provides information only about what is grammatical in the language) because learners can never be sure they will not hear a sentence where the adverb is between the verb and direct object. Negative evidence (i.e. input that provides direct evidence of what is ungrammatical in  a language) would make it possible for chilfren to find out that sentences like the one above are ungrammatical.

    4.       The critical period hypothesis

The critical period hypothesis states that there is a period during which language acquisition is easy and complete (i.e. native-speaker ability is achieved) and beyond which it is difficult and typically incomplete.

    5.       Access to UG

a.       Complete access

It is argued that learners begin with the parameter settings of their L1 but subsequently learn to switch to the L2 parameter settings.

b.      No access

The argument here is that UG is not available to adult L2 learners.

c.       Partial access

Another theoretical possibility is that learners have access to parts of UG but not others.

d.      Dual access

According to this positionn, adult L2 learners make use of both UG and general learning strategies.

    6.       Markedness

This uncertainty regarding the contributin of linguistic theory to the study of L2 acquisition is also evident in another area of the linguistic enquiry. This term refers to the general idea that some structures are more ‘natural’ or ‘basic’ than other structures. In typological lingusitics, unmarked structures are those that are common in the wrold’s languages. Number of hypothesis relating to markedness have been examined in SLA : One is that learners acuire less marked structures before more marked ones. We need to be sure that it is markedness and not some other factor that determines the order of acquisition. Learners are more likely to acquire a frequent but marked structure before an infrequent but marked structure than vice versa. Learners are much more likely to transfer unmarked structures from their L1 than they are marked structure.

    7.       Cognitive versus linguistic explanations

The typological study of languages affords interesting predictios about what learners will acquire first and what they will transfer from their L1. Finely-tuned hypothesis about what structures will cause learning diffculty and raises important questions about whether L2 and L1 acquisiotion are the same or different. It comes down to whether L2 acquisition is to be explained in terms of a distinct and innate language fculty or in terms of general cognitive abilities. UG does not claim to accountfor the whole of a language or even the whole of the grammar of a language. The existence of different components of language that are learned in the differnet ways, some through UG and others with the assistance of general cognitive abilities.

Psycholinguistic Aspects of Interlanguage

Psycholinguistics is the study of the mental structures and processes involved in the acquisition and use of language. The study of psycholinguistic aspects of L2 acquisition has been prominent in SLA and has given rise to many acquisition models. Here we will focus on a small number of major issues – L1 transfer, the role of consciousness, processing operations, and communication strategies.

    1.       L1 transfer

L1 transfer refers to the influence that the learner’s L1 exerts over the acquisition of an L2. This influence is apparent in a number of ways. First, the learner’s L1 is one of the sources of error in learner language. This influenceis referred to as negative transfer. However, in some cases,the learner’s L1 can facilitate L2 acquisition. For example, French learners of English are much likely to make errors of this kind :

The man whom I spoke to him is a milionaire.

than are Arabic learners becauseFrench does not permit resumptive pronouns (like ‘him’) in relative clauses whereas Arabic does. This type of effect is known as positive transfer. L1 transfer can also result in avoidance. These learners make fewer errors in relative clauses than Arabic learners of English but only because they rarely use them. Finally, L1 transfer may be reflected in the overuse of some forms.

It is clear, then, that transfer is governed by learners’ perceptions about what is transferable and by their stage of development. It follows that interlanguage development cannot constitute a restructuring continuum. That is, the starting point is not the learners’ L1, and learners do not proceed by replacing L1 rules with L2 rules. Rather they construct their own interim rules. However, they may well try to make use of their L1 knowledge along the way, but only when they believe it will help them in the learning task or when they have become sufficiently proficient in the L2 for transfer to be possible.

    2.       The role of consciousness in L2 acquisition

Richard Schmidt has pointed out that the term ‘consciousness’ is often used very loosely in SLA and argues that there is a need to standardize the concepts that underlie its use. For example, he distinguishes etwee consciousness as ‘attention’. ‘Intentionality’ refers to whether a learner makes a conscious and deliberate decision to learn some L2 knowledge. It contrasts with ‘incidental learning’, which takes place when learners pick up L2 knowledge through exposure. Schmidt argues that no matter whether learning is intentional or incidental, it involves conscious attention to features in the input.

    3.       Processing operations

a.       Operating principles

Operating principles provide a simple and attractive way of accounting for the properties of interlanguage. However, they have been criticized on a number of grounds. It is not clear how many principles are needed and the ones that have been advanced are not mutually exclusive. More important, perhaps, is the absence of any overarching theory to explain where the principles themselves come from.

b.      Processing constraints

The multidimensional model is a powerful theory of L2 acquisition in that it proposes mechanism to account for why learners follow a definite acquisitional route. However, the model has also been subject to considerable criticism. It has been ponted out that it is based on research into a fairly limited set of grammatical features. It is also not clear how variational features can be identified and, in fact, few examples have been provided, the most frequently mentioned being copula be. More seriously, the model provides no account of how or why the ‘blocks’ to developmental progress are removed. The metaphor of ‘blocks’ is interesting but remains rather undeveloped.

    4.       Communication strategies

Communication strategies constitute one of the processes responsible for learner errors. We might expect, therefore, that the choice of communication strategies will reflect the learner’s stage of development. For  example, learners might be expected to switch from L1-based strategies to L2-based strategies as their knowledge of the L2 develops. It would also be interesting to discover whether the use of communication strategies has any effect on L2 acquisition.

    5.       Two types of computational model

The ‘black box’ houses some kind of apparatus that extract information from the input, works on it, stores it, and subsequently uses it in output. Two different types of apparatus have been proposed. First type involves the idea of serial processing where the information is processed in a series of sequential steps and results in the representation of what has been learned as some kind of strategy or rule. The second type involves the idea of parallel distributed processing. This credits the learner with the ability to perform a number of mental task as the same time.