HS Second Language Acquisition Professor Dr' Neal R' Norrick - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – HS Second Language Acquisition Professor Dr' Neal R' Norrick PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 10e4c0-ZDc1Z



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

HS Second Language Acquisition Professor Dr' Neal R' Norrick

Description:

Growing out of work by Fries (1945) and Weinreich (1953) most work on Second ... e.g. putting temporal Adv before locative Adv. They went last week to Berlin. ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:92
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 37
Provided by: Compu441
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: HS Second Language Acquisition Professor Dr' Neal R' Norrick


1
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick
  • IntroductionA Brief History of Research on
    Second Language Acquisition
  • November 29, 2007

2
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
  • 1. Contrastive Analysis
  • Growing out of work by Fries (1945) and Weinreich
    (1953) most work on Second Language Acquisition
    in the 40's and 50's shared the assumptions
    ofContrastive Analysis (Lado 1957)

3
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
  • Contrastive Analysis based on transfer
  • from Native Language (NL) toTarget Language (TL)
  • or First Language (L1) toSecond Language (L2)
  • shared structures facilitate acquisition
  • distinct structures cause problems

4
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
  • positive transfer when L1 and L2 share structures
  • e.g. Det Adj N structure in NPin English and
    German
  • the mean dog     der böse Hund

5
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
  • negative transfer when L1 and L2 have different
    structures
  • e.g. Adv V NP in German vs.Adv NP V in English
  • Morgen fahren wir nach hause 
  • Tomorrow we go home

6
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
  • research in Second Language Acquisition tended
    to
  • revolve around comparison of language pairs
  • language acquisition was seen as developing a
    set of
  • habits to be practiced in accordance with
  • Behaviorist Theory
  • but researchers found errors not predictable by
  • language differences

7
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
  • 2. Approximative Systems and Interlanguage
  • In the 1960's, linguists rejected Behaviorism
    and
  • became interested in mentalistic theories
  • Evidence was mounting for a third system
    between L1
  • and L2
  • Nemser (1971) recognized an approximative
    system
  • for the learner with features of both L1 and
    L2
  • Selinker (1972) introduced the term
    Interlanguage for this
  • individual language system

8
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
  • Interlanguages are highly variable, due to
  • Limited cognitive attention, given so much to
    learn and remember simultaneously
  • Learners lack of knowledge of rules
  • Simultaneous pull from L1 and L2
  • They represent transitional stages of development

9
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
  • L2 tends to fossilize at some stage, due to
  • 1. Negative transfer from L2
  • e.g. putting temporal Adv before locative Adv
  • They went last week to Berlin.
  • 2. Overgeneralization of L2 rules
  • e.g. extending progressive pattern to stative
    verbs
  • I'm knowing him a long time.
  • 3. Simplification of L2 rules
  • e.g. failure to apply "sequence of tenses"
  • I thought it is a joke.

10
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
It's often difficult to tell what causes an
error,since these three factors interact The
concern with rules and errors makes research in
interlanguage spill over into error analysis
research
11
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
3. Error Analysis The concern with interlanguage
and the errors it contains, as well as their
relation to one another gave rise to research in
Error Analysis
12
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
  • Researchers first look for idiosyncracies in
    learner's
  • production
  • when a learner says I want to know the English
  • we must first determine the intention behind it
  • either correct expression of desire involving
    knowledge of English people or incorrect
    expression of desire involving the English
    language

13
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
2. Then they try to describe the structure in
terms of the grammars of both L1 and L2 I
want to know the English involves an overuse of
the definite article from the point of view of
English grammar does it reflect the grammar of
the learner's L1, where abstract nouns take
definite articles?
14
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
3. Finally, they seek to explain the structure as
interference or the learner's "hypothesis-testing"
if the learner uses this sort of
construction systematically, it's part of an
interlanguage but it may be a single careless
mistake or an attempt to test this particular
structure as well
15
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
Error Analysis ends up as a method of describing
data, but not a psycholinguistic theory of
language acquisition. Error Analysis loses sight
of the whole picture of developing competence in
L2 by focussing on errors we could instead
equate knowledge of L2 with fluency and
understandability rather than lack of errors we
could instead focus on what learners do right and
test to see if they do it right intuitively.
16
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
4. Innateness, Input, Natural Orderof
Acquisition in L2 Innateness Debate According
to Chomsky (1986 150) What we "know innately"
are the principles of the various subsystems
phonology, syntax, thematic structure etc of So
the initial state of the child's mind and the
manner of their interaction, and the parameters
associated with these principles.
17
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
What we learn are the values of the parameters
and the elements of the periphery (along with the
lexicon to which similar considerations
apply). That is we "know innately" that
sentences will have noun phrases and verb phrases
in some order, but we have to learn the order.
18
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
  • We need input
  • to learn the whole vocabulary of our language,
  • including the special syntactic properties of
    the
  • vocabulary we learn.
  • to set parameters like word order, use of cases
  • versus prepositions etc.
  • for the periphery, i.e. all the structures and
    rules
  • characteristic for the particular language we
    hear.

19
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
  • But if input supplies all this information,
    shouldn't it supply enough information to learn
    the basic principles?
  • Debate on principles and parameters
  • even within the Chomskyan scheme
  • complete in the newborn child (like the heart)
  • develop over time (like the teeth)

20
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
Even if we "know innately" the principles of
language, are they separate from or integrated
with other abilities? The Innateness Debate from
child language research carries over to research
in second language acquisition Does the Language
Acquisition Device (LAD) work for L2 as for L1?
If the LAD is at work, there should be a Natural
Order of Acquisition in L2 as in L1
21
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
Dulay Burt (1973) posit Natural order of
acquisition in L2 parallel to what Brown (1973)
found for L1 at least learners with the same L1
background go through the same stages in
acquiring L2 1. plural -s on nouns the books 2.
progressive -ing on verbs they driving 3. forms
of main verb be this is London, she was there 4.
forms of auxiliary be she's driving 5. articles
a and the a cat, the dog 6. irregular past
tenses went, ate, came 7. 3rd person sing pres
-s she waits 8. possessive -s Sally's truck
22
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
Dulay Burt (1974) found even greater regularity
of order if features were ordered into
groups Group 1 progressive -ing, plural -s,
copula be Group 2 auxiliary be, articles Group
3 irregular past Group 4 regular past, 3rd pers
-s, possessive -s
23
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
Dulay Burt use cross-sectional testing, i.e.
what percent of which forms show up for a group
of learners, while Brown used longitudinal
testing, i.e. at what stage do kids control (90
correct) certain forms If no firm order of
acquisition can be shown, then no assumption
acquisition of L2 and L1 are alike
24
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
Even if LAD makes input unimportant in L1
acquisition, the status of input in L2 a remains
a problem What kind of Input should learners
receive? Does correcting errors help?
25
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
5. Krashen's Input Hypothesis and the Monitor
Model Language Acquisition vs. Language
Learning subconscious acquisition like
children's L1 acquisition not affected by
correction, not based on formally learned rules
26
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
but conscious learning in L2 context changes
things Input is filtered and output is
monitored Conscious learning results in "knowing
about" learning rules only acts as Monitor
27
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
Natural order of acquisition in L2 just as in
L1 not based on linguistic complexity but
Monitor disturbs the natural order Affective
filter based on types of motivation -
integrative lowers filter - instrumental can
raise filter - empathy for L2 group lowers
filter
28
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
  • Monitor
  • has its source in Piaget's Formal Operations
    Stage
  • consciously formulates and edits output
  • disturbs the natural order of acquisition

29
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
  • Monitor Use Conditions
  • time
  • focus on form (not involved in message)
  • must know the rule
  • the monitor is not limited to conscious rules,
  • but conscious learning is limited to the
    monitor
  • Krashen uses Monitor to describe individual
    differences
  • overusers, underusers, optimal users

30
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
Organizer innate language acquisition faculty
(like Chomsky's LAD) gradually organizes input
(without conscious attention) reflected
in errors transitional constructions natural
order of acquisition
31
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
Input input understood in context is the primary
factor in L2 acquisition Caretaker speech is
ideal intake 1. here now immediate
environment 2. syntactically simple 3.
communication for action in context
32
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
Input Hypothesis We acquire i 1, the 'next'
rule along the natural order, by understanding
messages containing i 1.A necessary but not
sufficient condition for acquisition i current
level in phonology, morphology, syntax, lexis
33
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
1. delaying speaking L2 helps 2. comprehension
precedes production in L2 acquisition 3.
comprehension in interaction provides best
intake 4. best input contains structures one step
beyond current knowledge, i.e. i 1
34
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
References Brown, Robert. 1973. A first language
The early stages. London George Allen. Chomsky,
Noam. 1986. Barriers. Linguistic Inquiry
Monograph Thirteen. Cambridge, MA and London
MIT Press. Dulay, H. and M. Burt. 1974. Errors
and strategies in child second language
acquisition. TESOL Quarterly 8. 129-136. ----.
1973. Should we teach children syntax? Language
Learning 23. 245-258. Fries, Charles C. 1945.
Teaching and learning English as a foreign
language. Ann Arbor University of Michigan
Press. Krashen, Stephen. 1985. The input
hypothesis Issues and implications. London
Longman.
35
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
References Lado, Robert. 1957. Linguistics Across
Cultures. Ann Arbor University of Michigan
Press. Nemser, W. T. 1971. Approximative systems
of foreign language learning. IRAL 9. 115-123.
Selinker, Larry. 1972. Interlanguage. IRAL 10
(3). 209-31. Weinreich, Uriel. 1953 (1963).
Languages in contact Findings and problems. The
Hague Mouton.
36
HS Second Language AcquisitionProfessor Dr. Neal
R. Norrick_______________________________________
______________
  • Thank you for your attention!
About PowerShow.com