Second language acquisition.docx

Second language acquisition.docx

《Second language acquisition.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Second language acquisition.docx（38页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

Secondlanguageacquisition

12

Secondlanguageacquisition

LourdesOrtega

Introduction

ThefieldofSecondLanguageAcquisition（SLA）isabranchofappliedlinguisticsthathasahistoryextendingoverhalfacentury.Itinvestigatesthehumancapacitytolearnadditionallanguagesduringlatechildhood,adolescence,oradulthood,oncethefirstlanguage,inthecaseofmonolinguals,orthefirstlanguages,inthecaseofbilingualsandmultilinguals,havebeenacquired.SLAresearchersstrivetoshedlightonfouroverarchingquestions:

1Howdohumanslearnadditionallanguagesaftertheyhavelearnedtheirfirst?

2Inwhatwaysisthelearningofanadditionallanguagedifferentfromthelearningof

languagesforwhichexposureisavailablefrombirth,andinwhatwaysmightitbesimilar?

3Whatfactorscontributetothevariabilityobservedinratesandoutcomesofadditionallanguagelearning?

4Whatdoesittaketoattainadvancedlanguageandliteracycompetenciesinalanguagethatislearnedlaterinlife?

SLAsharesitsinterestinexplaininghumanlanguagedevelopmentwithtwootherfields,bothofwhichstudyfirstlanguageacquisitionfromthewombtorightbeforechildrenenterschool.

TheseareBilingualFirstLanguageAcquisition（BFLA）,whichexamineslanguagedevelopmentamonginfantsandchildrenwhentheygrowupsurroundedbytwoormorelanguagesfrombirth（DeHouwer2009）,andFirstLanguageAcquisition（FLA）,alsoknownasChildLanguageAcquisition,whichinvestigateshowinfantsandchildrenlearntheirfirstlanguagewhentheygrowupsurroundedbyonelanguageonly（Clark2003）.

ThedifferencesinfocusbetweenthesetwofieldsandSLAareimportant.First,inthefieldsofbilingualandmonolingualfirstlanguageacquisition,infantsandtoddlersareinvestigatedatthecriticalpointinlifewhentheyarediscoveringhumanlanguage,asinstantiatedinthespecificlanguage（s）thattheircarershappentospeaktothem.Bycontrast,allparticipantsinSLAstudieswillalreadyberelativelymatureusersofatleastonelanguage,oftenmore.Their

existinglanguagecompetencieswillinfluencetheirlearningofthelanguagethatisbeingadded

totheirrepertoire.Second,atthepointoffirstlanguageacquisition,infantsandtoddlersmust

171

developsociallyandconceptuallyintandemwithdevelopinglinguistically.Ontheotherhand,

adults,adolescents,andevenchildrenasyoungasfourorfive,canbeexpectedtobringtothe

taskalreadyrelativelysophisticatedandincreasinglyfine-tunedsocialandconceptual

structures.Finally,BFLAandFLAresearcherstypicallyassumenaturalisticconditionsof

languagelearning,becauseinfantsandtoddlerslearnlanguagebybeingsurroundedby

meaningfullanguageuseandintheabsenceofinstruction.SLAresearchers,ontheother

hand,investigatelanguagelearninginanypossiblecontext,rangingfromnaturalisticacquisition

withinanon-instructionalcommunity（e.g.aneighbourhood,achurchgroup,theworkplace,

orduringregularschoolingthathappenstooccurinanewlanguage）,toformalinstructionof

variouskinds（e.g.tutorialsorself-access;second,foreign,orheritagelanguageclassrooms;or

classroom-engineeredimmersionsettings）,andoftenacombinationofthetwo.Thisbeingso,

instructionisanimportantareaofstudyinSLA（seeLarsen-Freeman,thisvolume）.

SLAtheoriesinhistoricalperspective

Scholarshavewrittenabouthowpeoplelearnsecondlanguagesandhowtobestteachforeign

languagessinceancienttimes.Wheninthelate1960sSLAemergedasaformalresearch

community,itdidsoshapedbytheselong-standinginterestsinlanguagelearningandteaching.

AdditionalinfluencescamefrommorespecificdevelopmentsinthefieldofFLA,whichat

thetimehadbeentransformedbyaprocessoftheoreticalrenewalinreactionagainstthe

prevailingbehaviouristviewoflanguageacquisitionandhadbeguntoyieldexcitingempirical

findingsabouthowchildrenwhogrowupmonolinguallearntheirmothertongue（e.g.Brown

1973）.

TheawakeningsofSLA:

interlanguage

Theyears1967and1972markthepublicationoftwoseminalpapersbyPitCorderand

LarrySelinkerthatareoftenassociatedwiththeawakeningsofthefieldbecauseofthe

importanceoftheargumentstheyputforth.Atanempiricallevel,theycalledtoquestion

thedominantpracticeofcontrastiveanalysis,whichlookedforacquisitionanswersinthe

exhaustivecomparisonofthelinguisticinventoriesofthelanguagepairsinvolvedinthe

learningtask,thefirstlanguageandthetargetlanguage.Instead,Corder（1967）andSelinker

（1972）arguedresearchersmustturnforevidencetotheactuallanguageproducedbylearners

astheytrytocommunicateinthetargetsecondlanguage（L2）.Thismeantexaminingthe

‘errors’learnersproducenotassomethingtobepre-emptedorremediedbutasobjectsof

studythatholdgreatvalueforunderstandingL2acquisition.Atthetheoreticallevel,the

behaviouristviewoflanguageacquisitionasmerehabitformationwasrejectedandreplaced

byanovelconceptualizationofacquisitionascreativeconstruction.Forthefirsttime,learners

wereviewedasactiveandrationalagentswhoengagedinthediscoveryofunderlyingL2

rules.Theyformedhypothesesaboutthelanguage,testedthem,andemployedanumberof

cognitiveandsocialstrategiestoregulatetheirlearning.Thesedevelopmentsmadeinterlanguage

investigationsduringthe1970sand1980sincreasinglymorefocusedoncognitive

andpsycholinguisticaspectsofacquisition.Nevertheless,afewSLAresearchersalsoworking

withintheinterlanguagetraditionturnedtheirattentiontoexploringthepotentialof

quantitativesociolinguistictheoriesofvariationforthestudyofL2development（e.g.Tarone

1988）.

Oncethefoundationsofinterlanguageasanovelanddistinctobjectofinquirywerelaid

out,therewasajustificationfortheneedforafieldthatwouldinvestigateadditionallanguage

LourdesOrtega

172

developmentinitsownright.Afterthesebeginnings,severalbroadphasescanbedistinguished

inthehistoryofSLA.Thenarrativedepictionoforderlyhistoricaltrendsthatfollows

belowisonlyaconvenientshorthandthatundoubtedlyobscuresmorecomplicated

developments.

Fromfirsttheoriestothecognitiveandlinguisticemphasesofthe1990s

Bytheearly1980s,thefirstattemptataformaltheoryofL2acquisitionwasmusteredinthe

UnitedStatesbyStephenKrashen（1985）.KnownastheMonitorModel,thistheorybecame

（andhasremained）popularwithlanguageteachers.Inanutshell,Krashenproposedthat:

（a）thecoreingredientofadditionallanguagelearningismeaningful,comprehensibleinput;

（b）theprocessesofadditionallanguageacquisitionareimplicitandsubconsciousandany

explicitandconsciousprocessesthatmaybesummonedintheclassroomcanonlyhelpcareful

monitoredperformancebutwillhavelittleeffectsontruelanguageknowledgeoronspontaneous

performance;and（c）themainobstaclestoadditionallanguagelearningforadultsstem

fromaffectiveinhibitions.Despiteitspopularity,alreadyinthemid-1980stheMonitorModel

wasevaluatedasbeingtoometaphoricaltolenditselftoproperempiricalinvestigation.The

strongestcritiqueswerelevelledbySLAscholarswhowerewellversedinskillsacquisition

theoryfromthefieldofpsychology（e.g.McLaughlin1987）,andalsobyscholarswhohad

begunapplyingUniversalGrammartheoryfromthefieldoflinguisticstothedisciplinary

SLAproject（e.g.Gregg1984）.Inbothcases,thecriticismsalsoservedtocarveintellectual

spacesforthesenewerkindsofSLAtheories.

Thus,asthe1980scametoaclose,theSLAresearchcommunityhadalreadydeveloped

severaltheoreticallydistinctproposalsforexplainingL2acquisition.Oneview（Krashen1985）

wasthatL2acquisitionoccurswithindimensionsdefinedlargelybyinputandaffectand

operatingmostlyattheunconsciouslevel.Anotherposition（McLaughlin1987）heldthat

learninganadditionallanguageisacomplex,cognitiveprocesssimilartoanyotherhuman

learning（cooking,playingchess,ridingabike,thinkingmathematically,knowinghistory）;as

such,itinvolvesgreatamountsofexperienceaidedbyattentionandmemoryanditmust

includethedevelopmentofsufficientdeclarativeknowledgeaboutthelanguageandsufficient

deliberatepracticetoeventuallysupportfullyautomaticuseoflanguage.Athirdview（White

1989）wasthatthementalgrammarofsecondlanguagelearnersmustbeexplainedbythe

relativecontributionsoftwoforcesthatguidetacitlanguageknowledgeformationandthat

areindependentfromothercognitiveoperations,andevenrelativelyindependentfromsurrounding

ambientexperience,namelyabstractknowledgeofUniversalGrammar（whichthe

humanspeciesisendowedwithatbirth）andmorespecificknowledgeofagivenfirstlanguage

（whichisimprintedinthemindoflanguageusersduringthecriticalyearsoflearningafirst

languageorlanguages）.

Particularlyduringthe1990s,thesevariedSLAresearcheffortswerestrengthenedtothe

pointofcoheringintowhatlookedlikeoneoftwodominantapproaches.Acognitiveinteractionist

prism（Larsen-FreemanandLong1991）wasstronglyinfluencedbySwisspsychologist

JeanPiagetandeasilyaccommodatedwithinittheinterlanguageresearchtradition

aswellastheskillsacquisitiontheory.ItcalledfortheexaminationofL2acquisitionasthe

sumcontributionsoflearner-internalfactors,suchasattentionandmemory,andlearnerexternal

factors,suchastheinteractionsofferedtolearnersinthetargetlanguageandthe

qualityofanyformalinstructiontheymightseek.Bycontrast,aformallinguisticSLAprism

（Ha