CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A.

BACKGROUND Second Language Acquisition (SLA) refers both to the study of individuals and groups who are learning a language subsequent to learning their first one as young children, and to the process of learning that language. The additional language is called a second language (L2), even though it may actually be the third, fourth, or tenth to be acquired. It is also commonly called a target language (TL), which refers to any language that is the aim or goal of learning. The scope of SLA includes informal L2 learning that takes place in naturalistic contexts, formal L2 learning that takes place in classrooms, and L2 learning that involves a mixture of these settings and circumstances. For example, informal learning happens when a child from Japan is brought to the US and picks up English in the course of playing and attending school with native English-speaking children without any specialized language instruction, or when an adult Guatemalanimmigrant in Canada learns English as a result of interacting with native English speakers or with co-workers who speak English as a second language. Formal learning occurs when a high school student in England takes a class in French, when an undergraduate student in Russia takes a course in Arabic, or when an attorney in Colombia takes a night class in English. A combination of formal and informal learning takes place when a student from the USA takes Chinese language classes in Taipei or Beijing while also using Chinese outside of class for social interaction and daily living experiences, or when an adult immigrant from Ethiopia in Israel learns Hebrew both from attending special classes and from interacting with co-workers and other residents in Hebrew. In trying to understand the process of second language acquisition, we are seeking to answer three basic questions: (1) What exactly does the L2 learner come to know? (2) How does the learner acquire this knowledge? (3) Why are some learners more successful than others? There are no simple answers to these questions in fact, there are probably no answers that all second language researchers would agree on completely. In part this is because SLA is highly complex in nature, and in part because scholars studying SLA come from academic disciplines which differ greatly in theory and research methods. The multidisciplinary approach to studying

SLA phenomena which has developed within the last half-century has yielded important insights, but many tantalizing mysteries remain. New findings are appearing every day, making this an exciting period to be studying the subject. The continuing search for answers is not only shedding light on SLA in its own right, but is illuminating related fields. Furthermore, exploring answers to these questions is of potentially great practical value to anyone who learns or teaches additional languages. SLA has emerged as a field of study primarily from within linguistics and psychology (and their subfields of applied linguistics, psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, and social psychology), as a result of efforts to answer the what, how, and why questions posed above. There are corresponding differences in what is emphasized by researchers who come from each of these fields: Linguists emphasize the characteristics of the differences and similarities in the languages that are being learned, and the linguistic competence (underlying knowledge) and linguistic performance (actual production) of learners at various stages of acquisition. Psychologists and psycholinguists emphasize the mental or cognitive processes involved in acquisition, and the representation of language(s) in the brain. Sociolinguists emphasize variability in learner linguistic performance, and extend the scope of study to communicative competence (underlying knowledge that additionally accounts for language use, or pragmatic competence). Social psychologists emphasize group-related phenomena, such as identity and social motivation, and the interactional and larger social contexts of learning. Applied linguists who specialize in SLA may take any one or more of these perspectives, but they are also often concerned with the implications of theory and research for teaching second languages. Each discipline and subdiscipline uses different methods for gathering and analyzing data in research on SLA, employs different theoretical frameworks, and reaches its interpretation of research findings and conclusions in different ways. It is no surprise, then, that the understandings coming from these different disciplinary perspectives sometimes seem to conflict in ways that resemble the well-known Asian fable of the three blind men describing an elephant: one, feeling the tail, says it is like a rope; another, feeling the side, says it is flat and rubbery; the third, feeling the trunk, describes it as being like a long rubber hose. While each perception is correct

individually, they fail to provide an accurate picture of the total animal because there is no holistic or integrated perspective. Ultimately, a satisfactory account of SLA must integrate these multiple perspectives; this book is a step in that direction. As in the fable of the elephant, three different perspectives are presented here: linguistic, psychological, and social. I make no presumption that any one perspective among these is right or more privileged, but believe that all are needed to provide a fuller understanding of the complex phenomena of SLA.

CHAPTER II DISCUSSION 1. ISSUE IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUSITION For the second-language learner, the acquisition of meaning is arguably the most important task. Meaning it is the heart of a language, not the exotic sounds or elegant sentence structure. There are several types of meanings: lexical, grammatical, semantic, and pragmatic. All the different meaning contributing to the acquisition to the meaning of generally having the integral second language possession. Lexical meaning meaning that is stored in our mental lexicon; Grammatical meaning comes into consideration when calculating the meaning of a sentence; usually encoded in inflectional morphology (ex. - ed for past simple, -s for third person possessive) Semantic meaning word meaning; Pragmatic meaning meaning that depends on context, requires knowledge of the world to decipher; for example, when someone asks on the phone, Is Mike there? he doesnt want to know if Mike is physically there; he wants to know if he can talk to Mike. From the field of linguistics, the most influential theory by far has been Chomsky's theory of Universal Grammar (UG). The UG model of principles, basic properties which all languages share, and parameters, properties which can vary between languages, has been the basis for much second-language research. From a UG perspective, learning the grammar of a second language is simply a matter of setting the correct parameters. Take the pro-drop parameter, which dictates whether or not sentences must have a subject in order to be grammatically correct. This parameter can have two values: positive, in which case sentences do not necessarily need a subject, and negative, in which case subjects must be present. In German the sentence "Er spricht" (he speaks) is grammatical, but the sentence "Spricht" (speaks) is ungrammatical. In Italian, however, the sentence "Parla" (speaks) is perfectly normal and grammatically correct.[2] A German speaker learning Italian would only need to deduce that subjects are optional from the language he hears, and then set his pro-drop parameter for Italian accordingly. Once he has set all the parameters in the language correctly, then from a UG perspective he can be said to have learned Italian, i.e. he will always produce perfectly correct

Italian sentences. Universal Grammar also provides a succinct explanation for much of the phenomenon of language transfer. Spanish learners of English who make the mistake "Is raining" instead of "It is raining" have not yet set their pro-drop parameters correctly and are still using the same setting as in Spanish. The main shortcoming of Universal Grammar in describing second-language acquisition is that it does not deal at all with the psychological processes involved with learning a language. UG scholarship is only concerned with whether parameters are set or not, not with how they are set. Stephen Krashen introduced the acquisition-learning hypothesis, which makes a distinction between conscious language learning and subconscious language acquisition. Krashen argues that only subconscious acquisition can lead to fluency. `A distinction closely related to that made by Krashen (1982) between acquisition and learning is one between implicit and explicit linguistic knowledge. Learners gain implicit knowledge by processing target-language input without consciously giving attention to acquiring the forms and structures of the language. On the other hand, learners get explicit knowledge of a language when they process language input with the conscious intention of discovering the. A distinction between the implicit learning involved in acquiring a first language (L1) and the mix of implicit and explicit learning that takes place in L2 acquisition has been one analytic route for understanding the virtually universal success of L1 acquisition versus the more limited success of L2 acquisition among adult learners (Hulstijn, 2005). Ellis has found empirical confirmation for the distinct constructs of implicit and explicit language knowledge. Other concepts have also been influential in the speculation about the processes of building internal systems of second-language information. Some thinkers hold that language processing handles distinct types of knowledge. For instance, one component of the Monitor Model, propounded by Krashen, posits a distinction between acquisition and learning. According to Krashen, L2 acquisition is a subconscious process of incidentally picking up a language, as children do when becoming proficient in their first languages. Language learning, on the other hand, is studying, consciously and intentionally, the features of a language, as is common in traditional classrooms. Krashen sees these two processes as fundamentally different, with little or no interface between them. In common with connectionism, Krashen sees input as

essential to language acquisition. Further, Bialystok and Smith make another distinction in explaining how learners build and use L2 and interlanguage knowledge structures. They argue that the concept of interlanguage should include a distinction between two specific kinds of language processing ability. On one hand is learners knowledge of L2 grammatical structure and ability to analyze the target language objectively using that knowledge, which they term representation, and, on the other hand is the ability to use their L2 linguistic knowledge, under time constraints, to accurately comprehend input and produce output in the L2, which they call control. They point out that often non-native speakers of a language have higher levels of representation than their native-speaking counterparts have, yet have a lower level of control. Finally, Bialystok has framed the acquisition of language in terms of the interaction between what she calls analysis and control. Analysis is what learners do when they attempt to understand the rules of the target language. Through this process, they acquire these rules and can use them to gain greater control over their own production. Monitoring is another important concept in some theoretical models of learner use of L2 knowledge. According to Krashen, the Monitor is a component of an L2 learners language processing device that uses knowledge gained from language learning to observe and regulate the learners own L2 production, checking for accuracy and adjusting language production when necessary. Long's interaction hypothesis proposes that language acquisition is strongly facilitated by the use of the target language in interaction. Similarly to Krashen's Input Hypothesis, the Interaction Hypothesis claims that comprehensible input is important for language learning. In addition, it claims that the effectiveness of comprehensible input is greatly increased when learners have to negotiate for meaning. Interactions often result in learners receiving negative evidence. That is, if learners say something that their interlocutors do not understand, after negotiation the interlocutors may model the correct language form. In doing this, learners can receive feedback on their production and on grammar that they have not yet mastered. The process of interaction may also result in learners receiving more input from their interlocutors than they would otherwise. Furthermore, if learners stop to clarify things that they do not understand, they may have more time to process the input they receive. This can lead to better understanding and possibly the acquisition of new language forms. Finally, interactions may

serve as a way of focusing learners' attention on a difference between their knowledge of the target language and the reality of what they are hearing; it may also focus their attention on a part of the target language of which they are not yet aware. In the 1980s, Canadian SLA researcher Merrill Swain advanced the output hypothesis, that meaningful output is as necessary to language learning as meaningful input. However, most studies have shown little if any correlation between learning and quantity of output. Today, most scholars contend that small amounts of meaningful output are important to language learning, but primarily because the experience of producing language leads to more effective processing of input. The factors that influence the acquisition of a second language

Some students learn a new language more quickly and easily than others. This simple fact is known by all who have themselves learned a second language or taught those who are using their second language in school. Clearly, some language learners are successful by virtue of their sheer determination, hard work and persistence. However there are other crucial factors influencing success that are largely beyond the control of the learner. These factors can be broadly categorized as internal and external. It is their complex interplay that determines the speed and facility with which the new language is learned. Internal factors Internal factors are those that the individual language learner brings with him or her to the particular learning situation.

Age: Second language acquisition is influenced by the age of the learner. Children, who already have solid literacy skills in their own language, seem to be in the best position to acquire a new language efficiently. Motivated, older learners can be very successful too, but usually struggle to achieve native-speaker-equivalent pronunciation and intonation.

Personality: Introverted or anxious learners usually make slower progress, particularly in the development of oral skills. They are less likely to take advantage of opportunities to speak, or to seek out such opportunities. More outgoing students will not worry about the

inevitability of making mistakes. They will take risks, and thus will give themselves much more practice.

Motivation: Intrinsic motivation has been found to correlate strongly with educational achievement. Clearly, students who enjoy language learning and take pride in their progress will do better than those who don't.

Extrinsic motivation is also a significant factor. ESL students, for example, who need to learn English in order to take a place at an American university or to communicate with a new English boy/girlfriend are likely to make greater efforts and thus greater progress.

Experiences: Learners who have acquired general knowledge and experience are in a stronger position to develop a new language than those who haven't. The student, for example, who has already lived in 3 different countries and been exposed to various languages and cultures has a stronger base for learning a further language than the student who hasn't had such experiences.

Cognition: In general, it seems that students with greater cognitive abilities will make the faster progress. Some linguists believe that there is a specific, innate language learning ability that is stronger in some students than in others.

Native language: Students who are learning a second language which is from the same language family as their first language have, in general, a much easier task than those who aren't. So, for example, a Dutch child will learn English more quickly than a Japanese child.

External factors External factors are those that characterize the particular language learning situation.

Curriculum: For ESL students in particular it is important that the totality of their educational experience is appropriate for their needs. Language learning is less likely to place if students are fully submersed into the mainstream program without any extra assistance or, conversely, not allowed to be part of the mainstream until they have reached a certain level of language proficiency.

Instruction: Clearly, some language teachers are better than others at providing appropriate and effective learning experiences for the students in their classrooms. These

students will make faster progress. The same applies to mainstream teachers in second language situations. The science teacher, for example, who is aware that she too is responsible for the students' English language development, and makes certain accommodations, will contribute to their linguistic development.

Culture and status: There is some evidence that students in situations where their own culture has a lower status than that of the culture in which they are learning the language make slower progress.

Motivation: Students who are given continuing, appropriate encouragment to learn by their teachers and parents will generally fare better than those who aren't. For example, students from families that place little importance on language learning are likely to progress less quickly.

Access to native speakers: The opportunity to interact with native speakers both within and outside of the classroom is a significant advantage. Native speakers are linguistic models and can provide appropriate feedback. Clearly, second-language learners who have no extensive access to native speakers are likely to make slower progress, particularly in the oral/aural aspects of language acquisition.

2. DEVELOPMENTAL SEQUENCES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION a) Developmental Sequences in In L1 acquisition, children go Learner LanguageThe Silent Period through a lengthy period of listening topeople talk to them before they This silent period is necessary for the young produce their first words. In L2 learners to discover whatlanguage is and what it does. acquisition, the silent period is not necessary, since the Yet, learneralready knows about language, having already acquired one. Saville-Troike (1988), many L2 learners, opt for a silent period. reports that six out of nine children learning L2English that she Not all learners go through a silent studied opted for a silent period. Many learners, particularly period, as Saville-Troikes study shows. classroom learners, are obliged to speak fromthe beginning. b) Developmental Sequences in Gibbons Learner LanguageThe Silent Period (1985), reviewed the evidence in favour of a silent period in His own survey of 47 bothchildren

and adults and found it inconclusive. children learning English as an L2 in Sydney primaryschools revealed considerable individual variation, with a mean length ofjust two weeks There is some disagreement regarding the contribution that in silence. Krashen (1982), argued that the silentperiod makes to language learning. it provides an opportunity for the learner tobuild up competence via listening while Itoh and Hatch (1978), refer to thesilent period as a rejection stage in which the learner tries to avoidlearning English. c) Developmental Sequences in The Learner LanguageThe Silent Period silent period provides learners with opportunities to preparethemselves for social use of the L2 by means of PRIVATE SPEECH which theyengage in Saville-Troike, defines silent speech as speech while they are silent. that is produced at a verylow volume which is inaudible to anyone In general, in L2 acquisition, present and does not expect anyresponse. early language is characterized by a silentperiod although not all learners go through this period. d) Developmental Sequences in Formulaic sequences consist of Learner

LanguageFormulaic Sequences expressions which are learnt asunanalysable wholes and employed on Two types of It differs from creative speech. particular occasions. Formulaic sequences according to Hakuta (19760, Krashenand Scarcella (1978)ROUTINES and PATTERNS refer respectively to wholeutterances learnt as memorized chunks. e) Developmental Sequences in Learner In comparison with LanguageStructural and Semantic Simplification formulaic speech, learners early creative utterances aretypically truncated, consisting of just one or two words, with bothgrammatical Hanania and Gradman (1977) gave the functors and content words missing. following examples produced bytheir adult subject Fatmah:library (= He is in the library)clean floor (= give me something for cleaning Ellis (1984) found further evidence of simplified speech in the floors.) speech ofthree children learning English in a classroom setting.Me no blue (= I dont have a blue crayon)Eating at school (= she eats meat at These utterances indicate that both structural and semantic school) simplificationare taking place in learner language.

f) Developmental Sequences in Learner LanguageThe Acquisition of Much of the early research Grammatical Morphemes : Order and Sequence focussed on the order of acquisition whilesubsequent research has increasingly paid attention to sequence of stagesevident in the Morphemes are the acquisition of a single feature as well as order. smallest meaningful units of a language.Eg: developmental = develop Early studies of the acquisition of grammatical morphemes such mental The morpheme order as plural s and articles produced mixed results. Dulay and Burt acquisition is not the same in L1 and L2 acquisition. (1974), studied the acquisition of 10 grammaticalmorphemes by children learning English as a second language . g) Developmental Sequences in Learner LanguageThe Acquisition of Grammatical Morphemes : Using the Bilingual Syntax Measure they counted. Order and Sequence morpheme use inobligatory contexts, that is, a context where the item They compared the was obligatory incorrect native speaker speech. acquisition order they obtained with the acquisitionorder for the same morphemes obtained in both longitudinal studies andcrosssectional of L1 Articles, copula.They found that the orders were different. English. and auxiliary be were acquired earlier by L2 learnerswhile irregular The process by which individual morphemes past tense was acquired later. For example: are acquired displays bothsimilarities and differences. both L1 and L2 learners omit pronouns and they bothovergeneralize In general , the morpheme acquisition order studies individual pronouns. appear to show strongevidence of a natural sequence, but there is also evidence that points todifferences. h) Developmental Sequences The morpheme in Learner LanguageThe Acquisition of Tense and Aspect studies belong to an early period in SLA (the 1970s and 1980s),however, tense and aspect, both of which involve the acquisition of morphologicalfeatures, have been studied intensively in SLA in more Studies of the acquisition of tense and aspect lend strong recent years. support to the existenceof developmental patterns in L2 Learners of different L2s manifest similar patterns of acquisition. Klein (1995), identified the development when acquiringtense and aspect. following order of acquisition of English tense-aspectmorphological forms in a longitudinal study of an Italian learner:Third person s and present tense copulaIrregular past tense forms and verbingPresent perfect formsRegular past tense formsFuture with shall or willPast

Bardovi-Halig (2000) reported a similar order in her perfect forms longitudinal study of 16learners of L2 English from 4 different language back grounds.past > past progressive > present perfect > past perfect. i) Developmental Sequences in Learner LanguageThe Acquisition of Tense and AspectProposed natural order for L2 acquisition j) Developmental Sequences in Learner LanguageThe Acquisition of A number of studies which examined the Syntactic Structures - Negatives acquisition of negatives in Englishand German provide evidence of a The acquisition of negation shows clear clear sequence of development. transitional structures whichinvolves a series of forms which learners use en route to mastering thetarget language form.EXAMPLES OF ENGLISH: no swim (at the beginning of the utterance) external negation I no can swim (the negative article comes inside the utterance) internalnegation I cant swim (negative is attached to modal These forms are indicative of the developmental stages that verbs) learners passthrough on the way to TL competence.Examples of negatives : no, not, dont, doesnt, didnt wont, cant . k) Developmental Sequences in Learner LanguageThe Acquisition of Syntactic Structures Studies on the acquisition of relative clauses also. Relative Clauses There is evidence that provide evidence of anorder of acquisition. learners solve it piecemeal by learning to modifynoun phrases before the verb, and then noun phrases that follow the verb. Examples :A beautiful girl who lives next door.I got a friend who speaks fluent Also, learners acquire the functions that relative pronouns English. can perform in a fairly well-defined order. l) Developmental Sequences in Learner Language The Acquisition of Syntactic Structures The ZISA project and research based on Penmans Processibility Theory have provided impressive evidence to show that learners acquire a range of features in a predictable order. Stage L2 Process Morphology/Syntax6 Main and subordinate Embedded questions: clauses I wonder why he sold the car.5 Subject-verb agreement 3rd person-s: This man owns a dog4 Inversion Yes/no inversion: Has he seen you?3 Noun phrase agreement Plural: He own many dogs Adverb: He sleeps always.2 Plural/possessive pronoun Canonical order (Subject- verb-object: He buy car.1 Invariant forms Single constituent.

m) Developmental Sequences in Learner Language The Two broad approaches to the study of Acquisition of Vocabulary developmental patterns in the acquisition of vocabulary can be identified:1) Longitudinal studies of L2 learners productive vocabulary2) Experimental studies of learners acquisition of individual L2 acquisition, like the

acquisition of grammar, is a slow and words gradual Learners gradually extend their lexicons while process. Simultaneously accumulating knowledge of lexical forms and meanings. There is. However, there is little evidence of any order or sequence. some evidence that early acquisition is characterized by nouns and But there does not seem to adjectives, with verbs only appearing later. be any clear hierarchy in learners acquisition of the properties of It is important to note that vocabulary constitutes individual words. an open system that is not subject to rules in the same way as The acquisition of vocabulary is seen as grammar or phonology. involving item rather than system learning and for this reason is inherently variation. n) Developmental Sequences in Similarities are also Learner Language The Acquisition of Phonology evident in the acquisition of phonology, despite the fact that L2 Abrahamson learners are known to transfer features from their L1. (2003), claimed that closed syllable structure is essentially the same When faced with articulating a closed syllable for L1 and L2 learners. such as sad learners are likely to either omit the final consonant (i.e. Say sa), add a vowel (i.e. Saysadi), or devoice the /d/ (i.e. Thus, learners acquisition of closed syllable structure Say sat) shows a staged progression from consonant deletion to epenthesis to feature substitution to target form.

CHAPTER III CONCLUSION Based on this review of literature, SLA theory, research, and practice, an interactionist model may be applied to Moore and Kearsleys three-component distance education interaction model (1996). If these factors are considered, distance second language courses appear to hold promise for providing students with comprehensible input and output while they interact and negotiate meaning. However, this review also reveals that a need exists for more extensive research about distance second language course design. With careful planning, instructors can design courses that encourage comprehensible input, output, interaction, and negotiation of meaning, characteristics identified by interactionist theorists as crucial for SLA. While distance second language courses may lack valuable face to face interaction, they do provide viable alternatives to learners that are geographically isolated or need flexible learning environments. Second language acquisition is learning of a nonnative language (i.e., second language) sometime after learning a native language (i.e., first language) has begun. A central characteristic defining second language acquisition is that it occurs in the context in which that language is spoken. For example, native Spanish speakers learning English in the United States or native German speakers learning Japanese in Japan are considered second language learners. However, learning a second language may or may not take place in the context of classroom instruction.