ACCULTURATION

The characterization of acculturation that we will develop here is drawn from

several sources, among them:
 Jhon Schumann: Has written extensively on the intriguing similarity
between second language acquisition and the process of pidginization.
Pidginization can be best thought of as the result of language contact where the
“communicants” end up speaking a hybrid language that is functional only for
day_to_day,interaction,, for business”on the Street”
 H. Douglas Brown (1980): Had characterized that phase in learning a
second language when the learner tends to speak an “interlanguage” similar to
a pidgin as the “sociocultural critical period.”
Brown maintains that there is an importat initial phase in one’s encounter with a
new culture when the motivation is is especially strong, when culture shock is
often experienced, when a great deal of language learning must be
accomplished.

 Mark Clarke (1976):Has characterized certain aspects of the acculturation

experience beyond Brown’sociocultural critical period. Beginning at the level
of comunicativa competence. Clarke discusses what he terms the “clash of
consciousness”problem.It is, in some sense, the “second wave”of culture
shock, when the learner is reasonably capable of communicating with natives
on matters requiring sophisticated use of the language but begins to run up
against subtle dimensions of the culture that most second language learners
never truly come to grips with.

 Larry Selinker (1972): Was among the first to pay attention systematically
to”fossilization” in second language learning. The fossilization occurs when
learners incorpórate incorrect forms or gramatical structures into their
relatively fixed, or completed ,versión of the target language.

Our model of acculturation entails four stages:

1. Tourist: Phase, in which the new culture is almost totally inaccesible; the
phase often referred to as entailing some degree of culture schock.
2. Survivor: The stage of functional language and functional understanding
of the culture .One must pass through this stage to be considere dan
educated , component speaker of the language.
 3. Inmigrant: The degree of acculturation we expect of an educated learner
of an educated learner, one who is literate in his on her own language.
4. Citizen: The stage that is almost at the level of the native speaker, in
which one has acculturated to the degree that one is only rarely tripped up by
the subtitles of the language and culture.

I UNDERSTOOD THAT:I understand that acculturation is a process through

a person or a group apeople acquires and assimilates the characteristics
of the foreign culture(customs,the way of speaking,etc)of the country in
which they have.

COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT

The work of British cognitive psychologist Venon Hamilton (1983) has provided
us with a useful theorical framework for clarifyng further the contribution of
general cognitive abilities to the phenomen of acculturation albeit implicitly.
Hamilton’s argument is essentially that knowledge resides in concepts that are,
in turn, abstractions from facts and states.Those facts and states are, according
Hamilton, best represented formally as being in memory in the form of what he
calls “semantic labels” a notion not unlike our everyday understanding of the
meaning of the Word.
We will look briefly at the work of three theorists who have had significant
impact on the field in the área of cognitive considerations in second language
acquisition;
CUMMINS (1981): Was the first to propose the distinction between what he called
basic interpersonal communication skills (BICS) and cognitive academic
language proficiency (CALP).CALP is, in very general terms, that language
valued in the school setting and measured on achievement tests.
Wong Fillmore (1983), in characterizing the important stages in second language
acquisition, came to somewhat similar conclusiones, but with a finer set of
distinctions. Focusing on relatively specific language skills, she noted five
qualitatively differents stages in second language acquisition:
NOVICE SPEAKERS (her stage 1 ours) depend almost exclusively on situacional
clues and first language strategias and vocabulary.
ADVANCE BEGINNERS (her stage 2 and ours) understand most face –to face
conversations and can use rules to produce language but are generally limited to
functional kinds of tasks and interactions.
COMPETENTE SPEAKERS (her stage 3 and ours) know most basic rules of
gramar an conversation, think in the language, and make relatively few serios
mistakes.
PROFICIENT SPEAKERS (her stage 4 and ours) can select language effectively
to meet specific goals, even if they have to bend the rules to do so; they have
developd reliable institutions as to which they have to ben the rules to do so.fight
lebel: which we have not incorporated here, she exemplifies as entailing the
ability to write profesional quality poetry in the second language.

I understood that cognitive development allows the student to learn language

respecting the gramatical rules, developments in daily situations, making
something mistakes for in the future when the individual travel to some country
such as U.S.A or another.do not the same mistakes.