Hello, aaz-ga,
Wow! This was harder than I thought it would be. There was plenty of
information on Second Language Acquisition, and numerous course
outlines and book reviews for First Language Acquisition...but a
simple overview? Not many!
However, I have sorted through the few that I have found and am
presenting what I consider to be most acceptable. I do hope that I
have found at least one writing, or a combination of writings, that
you like! If they are way off base, please let me know.
==
"Acquiring Language: Issues and Questions." Chapter 1. First Language
Acquisiton by Eve Clark. Stanford University.
http://assets.cambridge.org/0521620031/sample/0521620031WS.pdf
I know you said you did not want a book. However, I am only referring
you to the first chapter, which runs approximately 18 pages and gives
a good overview of language acquisition theory without getting into
heavy emphasis on the major players.
====
Lectures by Timothy Mason, Université de Versailles St. Quentin
===============================================================
"Didactics- 1 Introduction: Learning Language"
http://perso.club-internet.fr/tmason/WebPages/LangTeach/Licence/CM/OldLectures/L1_Introduction.htm
This first lecture looks at two ways of accounting for the acquisition
of a first language by the human infant. The first, drawn from the
work of the linguist Noam Chomsky, sees language as a specific skill,
its acquisition governed by an inborn programme, and requiring no
direct intervention from parents or teachers. The second, advanced by
Jerome Bruner and rooted in Lev Vygotsky's theories of development,
sees the behaviour of the infant's entourage as crucial.
"The evidence from neurology and L1 acquisition"
http://perso.club-internet.fr/tmason/WebPages/LangTeach/Licence/CM/OldLectures/L2_neurology.htm
"Language acquisition under extreme conditions"
http://perso.club-internet.fr/tmason/WebPages/LangTeach/Licence/CM/OldLectures/L3_ExtremeCircs.htm
C: Conclusion:
"Over the last three weeks, we have seen that there is a heated debate
amongst linguists as to how a child learns her mother-tongue. On one
side are those like Chomsky, who believe that language is an innate
ability, built into the brain. On the other are those who believe that
speech is a skill like most other human skills, which we learn in much
the same way as we learn other things. For the Chomskians, the
environment has little importance, whereas for those who do not agree
with him, it is of the utmost importance."
"We have looked at several different kinds of evidence. We have looked
at the way in which the brain itself is structured, and we have seen
that there does appear to be a close linkage between different areas
of the brain and some of the skills that are necessary to language. We
have looked at the ways in which children learn language, and we have
seen that they do indeed appear to learn a great deal from very little
evidence, and that they do appear to build upon grammars that they
could not have simply plucked from the language that they hear around
them. We have looked at one or two examples of language learning in
extreme situations, and we have seen that there are indications that
language must be learnt at a certain period in a child's life, and
that a reasonably intelligent adolescent or adult, capable of learning
many things, finds learning a language simply too difficult."
===
"A Discussion of Language Acquisition Theories," by Vedat
Kiymazarslan.
http://www.maxpages.com/thena/ladiscussion
I. INTRODUCTION
"A great many theories regarding language development in human beings
have been proposed in the past and still being proposed in the present
time. Such theories have generally arisen out of major disciplines
such as psychology and linguistics. Psychological and linguistic
thinking have profoundly influenced one another and the outcome of
language acquisition theories alike. This article aims to discuss
language acquisition theories and assess their implications for
applied linguistics and for a possible theory of foreign/second
language teaching."
"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. 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. Before sifting through language acquisition theories
here, therefore, making a distinction between these two types of
perspectives will be beneficial for a better understanding of various
language acquisition theories and their implications for the field of
applied linguistics. In the following paragraphs, the two claims posed
by the proponents of the two separate doctrines will be explained and
the reason why such a distinction has been made in this article will
be clarified."
Environmentalist theories of language acquisition hold that an
organism’s nurture, or experience, are of more significance to
development than its nature or inborn contributions. Yet they do not
completely reject the innate factors. Behaviorist and neo-behaviorist
stimulus-response learning theories (S-R for simplicity) are the best
known examples. Even though such theories have lost their effect
partially because of Chomsky’s intelligent review of Skinner’s Verbal
Behavior (Chomsky, 1959), their effect has not been so little when we
consider the present cognitive approach as an offshoot of
behaviorism."
"The nativist theories, on the other hand, assert that much of the
capacity for language learning in human is ‘innate’. It is part of the
genetic makeup of human species and is nearly independent of any
particular experience which may occur after birth. Thus, the nativists
claim that language acquisition is innately determined and that we are
born with a built-in device which predisposes us to acquire language.
This mechanism predisposes us to a systematic perception of language
around us. Eric Lenneberg (cited in Brown, 1987:19), in his attempt to
explain language development in the child, assumed that language is a
species - specific behavior and it is ‘biologically determined’.
Another important point as regards the innatist account is that
nativists do not deny the importance of environmental stimuli, but
they say language acquisition cannot be accounted for on the basis of
environmental factors only. There must be some innate guide to achieve
this end. In Table 1 below, a classification around the nurture/nature
distinction has been made."
See following sections (the later sections get into applications for
foreign language teaching and will probably not be applicable for your
purpose)
Language Acquisition Theories:
Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development
Skinner’s Verbal Behavior
Piaget’s View of Language Acquisition
Cognitive Theory: The Language Acquisition View
The Discourse Theory
The Speech Act Theory
The Universal Grammar Theory
The Monitor Model
Conclusion
Bibliography
Appendix
=====
"Language Acquisition." by Steven Pinker.Massachusetts Institute of
Technology
(Chapter to appear in L. R. Gleitman, M. Liberman, and D. N. Osherson
(Eds.),
An Invitation to Cognitive Science, 2nd Ed. Volume 1: Language.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.)
NONFINAL VERSION: PLEASE DO NOTE QUOTE.
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Papers/Py104/pinker.langacq.html
This is a bit of a different approach to the subject. I could not
excerpt it here since there are instructions not to quote the
material.
==
Additional Reading
===================
"Could Chomsky be Wrong?" by Timothy Mason. Université de Paris 8
http://perso.club-internet.fr/tmason/WebPages/LangTeach/CounterChomsky.htm
============
I anxiously await your reply, with a bit of trepidation, I must
admit! If these references are not to your liking, just let me know.
umiat-ga
Google Search Strategy
Theory for the Acquisition of First Language
how do children learn language?
+overview AND "first language acquisition"
overview of child language theory |
Request for Answer Clarification by
aaz-ga
on
21 Jun 2003 06:37 PDT
Not stellar write ups but you win by getting back quick. Especially
because such overview involved reading (or browsing) a lot. Here is
the feedback:
Timothy Mason is good, so is Eve Clark's book (1st chapter). I wish
somebody could teach Steve Pinker the virtues of brevity. (His
Language Instinct is about 500 pages). Vedat Kiymazarslan's discussion
is groping in the dustbin of linguistic history. Not relevant for me.
I read it before actually.
You say that you came across plenty of L2 stuff. Can I request 2 links
regarding L2 Overview the same way as you gave L1's? (Exclude The
Natural Approach by Krashen). The request is outside the scope of
original question. I am asking because you said you did find plenty of
stuff. If it involves too much of your additional time, please state
so. If you would rather not provide the link, I will sure understand.
|
Clarification of Answer by
umiat-ga
on
21 Jun 2003 11:51 PDT
Hi again, aaz!
Of course I am willing to provide you with some further sources for
Second Language Acquisition! After sorting through what is available,
I have listed four papers in order of best to "not so great!" I hope
they provide a source of information that is useful to you.
======
"Second Language Acquisition Theories: Overview and Evaluation," by
Christina Gitsaki.
http://www.joho.nucba.ac.jp/JCISarticles/gitsaki4298.pdf
"This paper presents some of the most influential theories of second
language acquisition. Ther first part of the paper outlines some
general distinctions and categorizations concerning the differenct
theories as well as critieria for the evaluation of the various
theories. A critical overview follows the description of each theory
and its contribution to second language acquisition research."
======
"Overview of Second Language Acquisition Theory." Strategies and
Resources for Mainstream Teachers of English Language Learners. NW
Regional Education Laboratory. (updated 6/9/2001)
http://www.nwrel.org/request/2003may/overview.html
This article might be shorter than you would like, but it does give a
concise overview of the major theories. Krashen's name is in there,
but other theorists are mentioned as well.
======
If you liked Timothy Mason's approach, you can consider these two
lectures. The only problem is that they do not really offer a
comprehensive ovrview, but rather an analysis of one or two theorists.
"Didactics - 4 : Second language acquisition. Some experiments and a
theory."
http://perso.club-internet.fr/tmason/WebPages/LangTeach/Licence/CM/OldLectures/L4_Experiments.htm
"Didactics - 5 : Critique of Krashen I. The Acquisition/Learning
Hypothesis."
http://perso.club-internet.fr/tmason/WebPages/LangTeach/Licence/CM/OldLectures/L5_Acquisition_Learning.htm
(This section introduced the hypthesis of Anderson and other cognitive
scientists)
Conclusion:
"We have seen two models of SLA. One of these, which its author claims
is based upon Chomsky's account of FLA, and central to which is the
idea that language learning is a special skill, posits that SLA is
similar to, if not exactly the same as FLA, and that the learner does
not have to direct any conscious effort towards the language itself.
Language lessons should, in fact, be about something else - something
that the student wants to study, in which he is interested. This
approach underlies the growing movement in educational establishments
to have courses in one or other subject area given in a foreign
language. As we have seen, in Canada, this means young anglophones
learning French through doing maths. In Scandinavian universities, all
science teaching is done in English - and here at St. Quentin, third
year sociology students have an option to study the sociology of
juvenile delinquency in English."
"The other model also assumes that SLA is similar to FLA - but does
not agree that language learning is in any way different from other
kinds of learning. Moreover, it suggests that work on the formal
aspects of language is necessary, and that the learner needs to be
given the rules of the language. Students need to be encouraged to
build up their own rules, and to pack them into networks, where they
will become available for work by procedural routines. This may leave
the impression that speaking a language is effortless - but the
conscious effort is mainly made during the first phase of learning."
"In Anderson's model, and in particular in the work of those who have
followed it up, the learner is expected to do the work for him or
herself, and thus it is that the learner needs to be encouraged to
develop specific learning strategies. We shall return to this question
later on in the course."
======
"Theories."
http://members.tripod.com/~chris1066/theories.html
A VERY basic and short overview with descriptions of the The
Behaviorist View, the Cognitive View, the Critical Period Hypothesis
and (you favorite) the Natural Order Hypothesis. There is no mentions
of theorist's names so it is quite elementary.
====
Again, I hope these are helpful!
umiat-ga
Search Strategy
+overview of theories AND second language acquisition
+different +theories +"Second language acquisition
Theory of Second Language Acquisition
+overview +Theory of Second Language Acquisition
|
Request for Answer Clarification by
aaz-ga
on
21 Jun 2003 22:36 PDT
Christani Gitsaki is good but on Interlanguage she is too sketchy.
This link did not work:
http://www.nwrel.org/request/2003may/overview.html
Since you rank it the second best in your list, I am keen to access
it. Any solution? If you can access it, can you cut and paste in the
reply (minus Bibliography etc to reduce the size). Regards
|
Clarification of Answer by
umiat-ga
on
22 Jun 2003 07:47 PDT
Hi, aaz,
I don't know why the link didn't work for you since I clicked right
on it in the answer and it came right up. As I said, the following
article is much shorter than you would like. I am also giving you the
cached link, so it might work for you.
"Overview of Second Language Acquisition Theory."
http://216.239.51.100/search?q=cache:PMY6Qg77mFAJ:www.nwrel.org/request/2003may/overview.html+%22overview+of+second+language+acquisition+theory%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
An understanding of second language acquisition can improve the
ability of mainstream teachers to serve the culturally and
linguistically diverse students in their classrooms (Fillmore & Snow,
2002; Hamayan, 1990). While significant professional development is
necessary to gain a full understanding of second language acquisition
theory, some key concepts can be quickly understood and applied in the
classroom.
Current theories of second language acquisition are based on years of
research in a wide variety of fields, including linguistics,
psychology, sociology, anthropology, and neurolinguistics (Freeman &
Freeman, 2001).
One concept endorsed by most current theorists is that of a continuum
of learning—that is, predictable and sequential stages of language
development, in which the learner progresses from no knowledge of the
new language to a level of competency closely resembling that of a
native speaker. These theories have resulted in the identification of
several distinct stages of second language development. These stages
are most often identified as:
Stage I: The Silent/Receptive or Preproduction Stage: This stage can
last from 10 hours to six months. Students often have up to 500
"receptive" words (words they can understand, but may not be
comfortable using) and can understand new words that are made
comprehensible to them. This stage often involves a "silent period"
during which students may not speak, but can respond using a variety
of strategies including pointing to an object, picture, or person;
performing an act, such as standing up or closing a door; gesturing or
nodding; or responding with a simple "yes" or "no." Teachers should
not force students to speak until they are ready to do so.
Stage II: The Early Production Stage: The early production stage can
last an additional six months after the initial stage. Students have
usually developed close to 1,000 receptive/active words (that is,
words they are able to understand and use). During this stage students
can usually speak in one- or two-word phrases, and can demonstrate
comprehension of new material by giving short answers to simple
yes/no, either/or, or who/what/where questions.
Stage III: The Speech Emergence Stage: This stage can last up to
another year. Students have usually developed approximately 3,000
words and can use short phrases and simple sentences to communicate.
Students begin to use dialogue and can ask simple questions, such as
"Can I go to the restroom?" and are also able to answer simple
questions. Students may produce longer sentences, but often with
grammatical errors that can interfere with their communication.
Stage IV: The Intermediate Language Proficiency Stage: Intermediate
proficiency may take up to another year after speech emergence.
Students have typically developed close to 6,000 words and are
beginning to make complex statements, state opinions, ask for
clarification, share their thoughts, and speak at greater length.
Stage V: The Advanced Language Proficiency Stage: Gaining advanced
proficiency in a second language can typically take from five to seven
years. By this stage students have developed some specialized
content-area vocabulary and can participate fully in grade-level
classroom activities if given occasional extra support. Students can
speak English using grammar and vocabulary comparable to that of
same-age native speakers.
Understanding that students are going through a predictable and
sequential series of developmental stages helps teachers predict and
accept a student’s current stage, while modifying their instruction to
encourage progression to the next stage. (For examples of
instructional strategies explicitly tied to language acquisition
stages, see this table.)
A concept endorsed by most language acquisition theorists is Stephen
Krashen’s "comprehensible input" hypothesis, which suggests that
learners acquire language by "intaking" and understanding language
that is a "little beyond" their current level of competence (Krashen,
1981, p. 103). For instance, a preschool child already understands the
phrase "Get your crayon." By slightly altering the phrase to "Get my
crayons," the teacher can provide an appropriate linguistic and
cognitive challenge— offering new information that builds off prior
knowledge and is therefore comprehensible (Sowers, 2000). Providing
consistent, comprehensible input requires a constant familiarity with
the ability level of students in order to provide a level of "input"
that is just beyond their current level.
Research by Merrill Swain and others has extended this concept to
include "comprehensible output." According to several studies,
providing learners with opportunities to use the language and skills
they have acquired, at a level in which they are competent, is almost
as important as giving students the appropriate level of input (Pica
et al., 1989, 1996; Swain & Lapkin, 1995).
Krashen’s Affective Filter Hypothesis is another concept that has
found wide acceptance with both researchers and ELL instructors
(Krashen, 1981; Krashen & Terrell, 1983). This theory suggests that an
individual’s emotions can directly interfere or assist in the learning
of a new language. According to Krashen, learning a new language is
different from learning other subjects because it requires public
practice. Speaking out in a new language can result in anxiety,
embarrassment, or anger. These negative emotions can create a kind of
filter that blocks the learner’s ability to process new or difficult
words. Classrooms that are fully engaging, nonthreatening, and
affirming of a child’s native language and cultural heritage can have
a direct effect on the student’s ability to learn by increasing
motivation and encouraging risk taking.
Another theory that has directly influenced classroom instruction is
Jim Cummins’s distinction between two types of language: basic
interpersonal communications skills (BICS) and cognitive academic
language proficiency (CALP). Research has shown that the average
student can develop conversational fluency within two to five years,
but that developing fluency in more technical, academic language can
take from four to seven years depending on many variables such as
language proficiency level, age and time of arrival at school, level
of academic proficiency in the native language, and the degree of
support for achieving academic proficiency (Cummins, 1981, 1996;
Hakuta, Butler, & Witt, 2000; Thomas & Collier, 1997).
Later, Cummins expanded this concept to include two distinct types of
communication, depending on the context in which it occurs:
Context-embedded communication provides several communicative supports
to the listener or reader, such as objects, gestures, or vocal
inflections, which help make the information comprehensible. Examples
are a one-to-one social conversation with physical gestures, or
storytelling activities that include visual props.
Context-reduced communication provides fewer communicative clues to
support understanding. Examples are a phone conversation, which
provides no visual clues, or a note left on a refrigerator.
Similarly, Cummins distinguished between the different cognitive
demands that communication can place on the learner:
Cognitively undemanding communication requires a minimal amount of
abstract or critical thinking. Examples are a conversation on the
playground, or simple yes/no questions in the classroom.
Cognitively demanding communication, which requires a learner to
analyze and synthesize information quickly and contains abstract or
specialized concepts. Examples are academic content lessons, such as a
social studies lecture, a math lesson, or a multiple-choice test.
Understanding these theories can help teachers develop appropriate
instructional strategies and assessments that guide students along a
continuum of language development, from cognitively undemanding,
context-embedded curricula, to cognitively demanding, context-reduced
curricula (Robson, 1995).
A basic knowledge of language acquisition theories is extremely useful
for mainstream classroom teachers and directly influences their
ability to provide appropriate content-area instruction to ELL
students. It is especially important in those schools or districts
where limited resources result in little or no instructional support
in a student’s native language. In these "sink-or-swim" situations, a
committed mainstream teacher with a clear understanding of language
acquisition can make all the difference.
===
In my searches, I tried to find "overviews" as you requested. There
were many articles that focused on specific aspects of Language
theory, but I did not feel these provided the general overview you
requested.
It is hard to know what articles are acceptable, especially since you
have a liking for some linguists and not for others, which is
understandable when you are involved in a particular field of study.
I hope you can use some of what I have given you! I tried my best to
find the most general articles. Now.....had you wanted a
book.........:)
Regards!
umiat
|
