Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Criticism between Stephen Krashen and Merrill Swaine about the Input Hyp
othesis
Group members
Fihi
Ana
Grace
Patsy
Introduction –Stephen Krashen
Stephen Krashen is a linguist and educator who proposed the Monitor
Model, a theory of second language acquisition, in Principles and practice in second language acquisition as published i
n 1982. According to the
Monitor Model, five hypotheses account for the acquisition of a second language:
Acquisition-learning hypothesis
Monitor hypothesis
Input hypothesis
As part of his Monitor Model, Krashen (1981,1982, 1985) formulated the Input
Hypothesis, which claims that language input (listening and reading comprehension)
constitutes the main communicative process through which we acquire a second language. Krashen believes that fluency in speaking or
writing in a second language will naturally come about after learners have built up sufficient competence through comprehending input.
such input is the one which is only slightly above the current level of the learner's competence, which he represented wi
th the simple formula I + 1, where I = input. This input is made comprehensible because of the help provided by the co
ntext. Thus, if the learner receives understandable input, language structures will be naturally acquired, according to Kra
shen.
Krashen argues that learners are not to be forced to produce language, as this would bring about a co
nsiderable amount of anxiety, which would cause them to develop a high affective filter that would pr
event them from acquiring the target language smoothly.
Definition of the Input
Hypothesis
The fourth hypothesis, the input hypothesis, which applies only
to language acquisition and not to language learning, posits the
process that allows second language learners to move through
the predictable sequence of the acquisition of grammatical
input is input that contains a structure that is “a little beyond” the current
hypothesis.
THE ISSUES IN KRASHEN
THEORIES
However, as Krashen cautions, like the time, focus, and knowledge required by
the Monitor, comprehensible input is necessary but not sufficient for second
language acquisition
Like for the acquisition-learning hypothesis, the first critique of the input
through language production (written or spoken) that SLA may be more likely to
occur.
it is during language production stages that learners realise what they know and
what they don't. This may happen when a learner is trying to convey a message
but his or her linguistic knowledge of the second language is insufficient to do so.
It is then that the learner realises that s/he ignores some useful language structur
es and/or words needed to express a desired message. This issue is what Swain
refers to as the "gap" between what one can say and what one would like to be a
ble to say. And it would be on realizing this gap, that learners are motivated towar
ds modifying their output in order to learn something new about the target langua
ge.
Besides, this hypothesis asserts that language production
aids learners in four different ways (Swain, 1993).
• The first derives from the fact that language production provides opportunities
for meaningful practice, allowing the development of automatic linguistic
behaviours.
• The second is related to that which forces the learner to switch from semantic
mental processes to syntactic ones. As Krashen (1982) suggested: "In many c
ases, we do not utilize syntax in understanding, we often get the message
information".
The third way in which language production helps learners in acquiring a L2 is
through testing hypotheses, since output provides students with the opportunity to
test their own hypotheses, and withdraw their own conclusions. This third aspect
is closely related to the fourth one, which deals with the responses of other speak
ers of the language, especially native ones, which can give learners information o
n how comprehensible or well-formed their utterances are.
To sum up, where Krashen sees input hugely responsible for language acquisition
, Swain considers output; where the latter claims language production to be of utt
er importance, the former regards it as not necessary, as something that should n
ot be forced, since it will appear naturally after a certain amount of comprehensibl
e input.
THE END
THANK YOU