FIRST LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

THEORIES

Outline
First

language acquisition Issues in question

The nature of L1 acquisition theories The nature vs. nurture debate Imitation or creativity argument

Major

L1 acquisition theories

L1 Acquisition vs. L2 Acquisition

The acquisition of a first language is a complex topic that requires an interdisciplinary approach; it has been traditionally studied within the field of psycholinguistics, but contributions from other disciplines such as biology, education or the social sciences are necessary to gain a wider perspective. Research on language acquisition/use can be divided into first and second language learning settings.

L1 Acquisition vs. L2 Acquisition

The literature on first language learning is most relevant to child development while second language learning pertains primarily to adult learning, although most general theories of language learning apply to both. While it is not clear whether different psychological processes are involved in first and second language learning, There are differences in the way children and adults learn and this has important implications.

The nature of L1 acquisition theories: competence or performance theory?

Different theories focus on different concerns: Saussure: sociological aspect of language langue vs. parole, langue is the whole system of language that precedes and makes speech possible. A sign is a basic unit of langue. Learning a language, we master the system of grammar, spelling, syntax and punctuation. These are all elements of langue.

The nature of L1 acquisition theories: competence or performance theory?

.

Parole Parole is the concrete use of the language, the actual utterances. It is an external manifestation of langue. It is the usage of the system, but not the system.

The nature of L1 acquisition theories: competence or performance theory?

Chomsky: psychological aspect of language competence vs. performance Competence: the knowledge that we have of the language we speak Performance: the actual use we make of that knowledge.

The nature of L1 acquisition theories: competence or performance theory?

Competence might be modelled as the system of grammatical and semantical rules that identify a language, and in some sense guide the speaker who knows the language,whereas performance is the widely variable and idiosyncratic use an individual may then make of that system. .

The nature of L1 acquisition theories: competence or performance theory?

Psycholinguistic concern of L1 acquisition: Both competence & performance have to be studied, through the study of comprehension & production in child language

The nature vs. nurture debate

Language acquisition theories have basically centered around nurture and nature distinction or on empiricism and nativism. The doctrine of empiricism holds that all knowledge comes from experience, ultimately from our interaction with the environment through our reasoning or senses. Empiricism, in this sense, can be contrasted to nativism, which holds that at least some knowledge is not acquired through interaction with the environment, but is genetically transmitted and innate.

The nature vs. nurture debate

To put it another way, some theoreticians have based their theories on environmental factors while others believed that it is the innate factors that determine the acquisition of language.

It is, however, important to note that neither nurturists (environmentalists) disagree thoroughly with the nativist ideas nor do nativists with the nurturist ideas. Only the weight they lay on the environmental and innate factors is relatively little or more.

Imitation or creativity argument

Platos problem: The imbalance between the external input-linguistic data-- and the output-complex linguistic knowledge-- is called Plato's problem. Chomsky's solution to the Plato's problem is to seek the richness in the processor-infant's mind--rather than in external stimuli.

Imitation or creativity argument

Our knowledge of language is complex and abstract; the experience of language we receive is limited. Imitation does not seem to be a plausible explanation for L1 acquisition.

Our minds could not create such complex knowledge on the basis of such sparse information. It must therefore come from somewhere other than the evidence we encounter; Plato's solution is from memories of prior existence, Chomsky's from innate properties of the mind.

Chomskys theory of UG

Chomsky believes that child's brain is equipped with the principles and parameters of the Universal Grammar (UG) which underlies the grammar of any human language.

With the help of this languagespecific knowledge children can figure out roughly what the shape of his or her mother tongue is like. That is, UG provides a skeletal knowledge upon which the child is supposed to dress the flesh.

Major L1 acquisition theories

Behavoristic theories: theories argue that association, reinforcement, and imitation are the primary factors in the acquisition of language. Imitation-reinforcement theories

Skinner

Mediation theories

Mowrer & Osgood

Major L1 acquisition theories

Cognitive theories: Cognitive theories suggest that schema, rule structures, and meaning are the distinctive characteristic of language learning. Nativist theories (the innateness hypothesis)

Chomsky Slobin/ Piaget/ Bloom

Cognitive theories

Major L1 acquisition theories

Imitation-reinforcement theories

Behaviorist learning theory (popular in the 1950s and 60s)

Skinners 1957 behavoristic model in Verbal Behavior Verbal behavior, like all other human behaviors, is controlled by its consequences. Effective language is the production of correct responses to external stimuli. If a certain response is repeatedly reinforced, it is conditioned and becomes a habit.

Major L1 acquisition theories

Imitation-reinforcement theories

In L1 acquisition The childs correct responses are repeatedly reinforced and finally a habit is formed. _The childs mind is a blank slate to be written on by experience and shaped by the environment.

Major L1 acquisition theories

Imitation-reinforcement theories
Overview The theory of B.F. Skinner is based upon the idea that learning is a function of change in overt behavior. Changes in behavior are the result of an individual's response to events (stimuli) that occur in the environment. A response produces a consequence such as defining a word, hitting a ball, or solving a math problem. When a particular Stimulus-Response (S-R) pattern is reinforced (rewarded),the individual is conditioned to respond.

Major L1 acquisition theories

Imitation-reinforcement theories

Reinforcement is the key element in Skinner's S-R theory. A reinforcer is anything that strengthens the desired response. It could be verbal praise, a good grade or a feeling of increased accomplishment or satisfaction.

The theory also covers negative reinforcers (punishment) that result in the reduction of undesired responses.

Major L1 acquisition theories

Imitation-reinforcement theories

Application Operant conditioning has been widely applied in clinical settings (i.e. behavior modification) as well as teaching (i.e. classroom management) and instructional development (e.g. programmed instruction), especially relating with FLT (Audiolingual Method) pattern drills .

Major L1 acquisition theories

Imitation-reinforcement theories
By way of example, consider the implications of this theory for the development of programmed instruction (Markle, 1969; Skinner, 1968):

Practice should take the form of question (stimulus)-answer (response) frames which expose the student to the subject in gradual steps; Ensure the learner makes a response for every frame and also receives immediate feedback;

Major L1 acquisition theories

Imitation-reinforcement theories

Arrange the difficulty of the questions so the response is always correct and hence a positive reinforcement; Ensure that good performance in the lesson is paired with secondary reinforcers such as verbal praise, rewards (prizes) and good

Major L1 acquisition theories

Imitation-reinforcement theories

Principles Behavior that is positively reinforced will reoccur; intermittent reinforcement is particularly effective; Information should be presented in small amounts so that responses can be reinforced (`shaping'); Reinforcements will generalize across similar stimuli (`stimulus generalization') producing secondary conditioning.

Major L1 acquisition theories

Imitation-reinforcement theories

Criticisms of behaviorist learning theory overemphasize the external factors ignore the internal factor, i.e. the role of learner himself overemphasize the role of imitation case study

Mediation theories

Mowerer & Osgoods mediation theory: the black box filled with postulated psychological structures and processes to account for the observed behavior of organisms. Two things are associated with a third thing tend to be in association with each other.

Once the association is established, an internal link is built up even when the third thing is not present. Meaning is an internal replica of an external response.

Mediation theories
A word is a conditioned stimulus, while the thing to which the word refers is the unconditioned stimulus. The understanding of a sentence is defined as transfer of word meaning by way of classical conditioning.

Nativist Theories (the innateness hypothesis)

Chomsky, Lenneberg & McNeill Human babies are somehow predisposed to acquire a language. Language is a biologically determined species-specific behavior. There are aspects of linguistic organization that are basic to the human brain and that make it possible for human children to acquire linguistic competence in all its complexity with little or no instruction from their parents.

Nativist Theories (the innateness hypothesis)

The existence of LAD enables the child to use language creatively. [Language acquisition device (LAD) a mechanism with access to the grammatical rules of all human languages (Universal grammar - UG)]

Chomskys theory

Good points: explains why language is learned relatively quickly explains how language is learnt despite poverty of the stimulus, no negative evidence etc

Bad points: very little evidence for adultlike grammatical knowledge in young children (Braine, 1976) young children make errors Chomsky would not predict (e.g. omit obligatory constituents such as determiners, possessives) cannot explain why children make grammatical errors (e.g. doggie go walkies) even after extensive language exposure

Behaviorist learning theory (A) vs. The nativist approach (B)

A holds the view that LL is similar to the learning of other things; B holds the view that LL is different from the learning of other things; Were born with a kind of faculty which is unique to LL. A attaches great importance to the role of language input; B holds that input is needed, but only to trigger the operation of the LAD

Cognitive theories

Slobins theory

The conceptual development of all human children is the same with regard to the order of attainment of conceptual categories and a number of cognitive prerequisites lie behind the emergence of communicative speech.

When acquiring a new concept, the child attempts to express it with the language it knows, and it creates new language to accommodate the new concept when its known language is proved to be insufficient.

Cognitive theories

Piagets theory

4 stages of intellectual development in the child. Intelligence actually develops well before language. A childs language develops as his cognitive ability matures.

Blooms theory

She improves on McNeills work by suggesting that an explanation of language development depends upon an explanation of the cognitive underpinnings of language. The development of perception and cognition are keys to the understanding of the process of child language acquisition.

Cognitive theories
Good points: explained acquisition of grammar without having to resort to innate knowledge Bad points: does not fit the evidence. Children seem to learn grammar without going through semantic routes (i.e. dont start off with agent and patient, Maratsos, 1979). Cognitive accounts cannot explain how some grammatical relations (e.g. the passive) were learnt

Functional Theory

The socio-cultural view of language development and learning has gained substantial support over the past decade (Barratt Plough &Rohl 2000; Campbell & Green 2000).

The view maintains that language development is socially and culturally defined (Halliday 1990; Vygotsky 1962). Language is a social practice, which is learned as part of the wider sociocultural activities in which we are engaged, as we become members of family and community groups (Breen et al. 1994).

Functional Theory

It maintains that: Learning and cognitive development are socially and culturally based (Halliday 1990; Vygotsky 1962). Language develops over time, as we interact within particular social and cultural settings (Halliday 1990; Vygotsky 1962). Language experiences of children will vary in accordance with values, beliefs and behaviours of the cultural group into which they are being socialised (Vygotsky 1962).

Functional Theory

Meanings within language are determined by social and cultural context (Gee 1991; Halliday 1990).
Semiotics (signs and symbols of language) and semiotic systems are based on shared language conventions, which are often specific to a particular socio-cultural group or discourse community (Love et al. 2002).

Functional Theory

Love et al. (2002) describe a discourse community as a group of people who share common knowledge and understanding of language concepts, content, symbols, vocabulary and subject matter. In learning to make meaning through language, we move from being outsiders to insiders within a particular discourse community (Gee 1991; Love et al. 2002).

Functional Theory

Primary Discourse Communities Early language development is shaped by the social and cultural mechanisms of the discourse community into which we are born the primary discourse community (Gee 1991).

From the moment of birth, children are actively involved in communicating signals to and from parents, siblings and other members of their primary network (Halliday 1990).

Functional Theory

Through face-to-face interaction with intimates, children become familiar with a range of literacy practices, which are valued within their family and community groups (Brice-Heath 1986; Gee 1991; Halliday 1990; Vygotsky 1962).

Functional Theory

Language experiences of groups of learners will vary according to types of literacy experiences, valued within the primary network (BriceHeath 1986; Gee 1991; Love et al. 2002; Vygotsky 1962).

Functional Theory
The school is a Secondary Discourse community an institution beyond the family in which individuals are required to communicate with nonintimates, including teachers and peers (Gee 1991).

Schools are institutions, which uphold particular social practices. Literacy practices of dominant social and cultural groups are often highly valued and reinforced within the school, while those of minority groups are commonly undervalued or unrecognised (Barratt-Plough & Rohl 2000; Eades 1993; Gee 1991).