MORPHOSYNTAX

What is morphosyntax?
Morphosyntax is another word for grammar.

Grammar can be divided into morphology and syntax. Morphology is the study of words and their rules of
formation. And syntax is the study of sentences and their rules of formation. Essentially, morphology and syntax are
studies of the same thing – formation rules of a language – but at differing “levels”.

By calling it by the transparent term morphosyntax we are highlighting this dualism.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN AGE AND SECOND LANGUAGE PRODUCTIVE ABILITY

Ann Fathman

First published: December 1975

Abstract
This study examines the relationship between certain aspects of the second language acquisition process and age.
An oral production test was developed to assess the ability of nonnative English speaking children to produce
standard English morphology and syntax. The test was administered to approximately 200 children (ages 6–15)
who were learning English as a second language in American public schools. The results of this testing were used to
examine the relationship between age and 1) the rate of acquisition of certain English grammatical structures and
2) the order of acquisition of these grammatical structures.

The results indicated that there was some relationship between age and rate of learning. Among children exposed
to English the same amounts of time, the older children scored higher on the morphology and syntax subtests,
whereas the younger children received higher ratings in phonology. There were, however, no major differences
observed in the order in which children of different ages learned to produce the structures included in the test.
These results suggest that there is a difference in the rate of learning of English morphology, syntax and phonology
based upon differences in age, but that the order of acquisition in second language learning does not change with
age.

LANGUAGE INTERFERENCE/TRANSFER
Language transfer (also known as L1 interference, linguistic interference, and crosslinguistic influence)
refers to speakers or writers applying knowledge from one language to another language.[1] It is the transfer of
linguistic features between languages in the speech repertoire of a bilingual or multilingual individual, whether from
first to second, second to first or many other relationships.[2] It is most commonly discussed in the context of English
language learning and teaching, but it can occur in any situation when someone does not have a native-level
command of a language, as when translating into a second language.

Positive and negative transfer

When the relevant unit or structure of both languages is the same, linguistic interference can result in correct
language production called positive transfer: here, the "correct" meaning is in line with most native speakers' notions
of acceptability.[3] An example is the use of cognates. However, language interference is most often discussed as a
source of errors known as negative transfer, which occurs when speakers and writers transfer items and structures
that are not the same in both languages.

ACCULTURATION
In second-language acquisition, the Acculturation Model is a theory proposed by John Schumann to describe the
acquisition process of a second language (L2) by members of ethnic minorities[1] that typically include immigrants,
migrant workers, or the children of such groups.[2] This acquisition process takes place in natural contexts of majority
language setting. The main suggestion of the theory is that the acquisition of a second language is directly linked to
the acculturation process, and learners’ success is determined by the extent to which they can orient themselves to
the target language culture.[3]
Previous research has highlighted the significant impact of culture on learning a second language (L2). Accordingly,
culture is now believed to be a major learning-affecting factor which, along with linguistic competence, facilitates the
process of L2 learning. Some have proposed that being surrounded by the L2 culture gives one a better chance of
learning an L2. Based on this premise, Schumann in 1978 proposed the acculturation/pidginization model as a context-
sensitive model that emphasizes identification with the L2 community as the primary requirement of L2 acquisition. This
study attempts to take a closer look at different aspects of this theory. The taxonomy of factors which control social
distance is presented along with the different types of acculturation and the stages/steps of acculturation in an L2
environment. The article concludes with a discussion on the advantages and shortcomings of the model.
The Acculturation Model of Second... (PDF Download Available). Available from:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315060938_The_Acculturation_Model_of_Second_Language_Acquisition_In
specting_Weaknesses_and_Strengths [accessed Jun 04 2018].

The role of attention in language learning

May 17, 2017Łukasz Molęda
Scientists have long debated the extent to which attention and conscious effort improve or harm the process
of learning a foreign language. This controversy did not lead to a compromise as each side became
entrenched in their respective positions, and the only thing that was changed by the passing years was
toning down their positions and making some concessions. This article aims to elucidate the complicated
situation on the effective mechanisms of language learning.
Understanding
In 1977. Stephen Krashen put together the observations of previous researchers and created an input
hypothesis. It was based on the assumption that the only things required to learn a language are comprehensible
spoken or written utterances in the target language that do not greatly exceed the student’s understanding. Krashen
believed that it is mostly the absorption of prepared materials similar to the way children learn, and not listening
to teacher’s instructions, that leads to mastery of speaking skills. Moreover, in his opinion knowledge of grammar
rules does not translate into greater fluency of speaking, but serves only as a tool for conscious checking of its
correctness. Until this day, these assumptions continue unchanged.

Language awareness by Ronald Carter

Language awareness refers to the development in learners of an enhanced consciousness of and sensitivity to the forms
and functions of language. The approach has been developed in contexts of both second and foreign language learning,
and in mother-tongue language education, where the term ‘knowledge about language’ has sometimes been preferred.
The concept of language awareness is not new. van Essen (1997) points to a long tradition in several European countries;
see also the journal Language Awareness 1990, 1/1.¡ The approach was, however, associated in the 1980s with a
reaction to those more prescriptive approaches to language learning which were generally typified by atomistic analysis
of language, and reinforced by narrowly formalistic methodologies, such as grammar translation, drills, and pattern
practice. However, the language awareness movement also developed a parallel impetus in reaction to the relative
neglect of attention to forms of language within some versions of communicative language teaching methodologies.
More recently, the approach has evolved alongside advances in language description which deal with larger stretches of
discourse, including literary discourse, and which go beyond the single sentence or the individual speaking turn as the
basic unit. In general, language awareness is characterized by a more holistic and text-based approach to language, of
which a natural extension is work in critical language awareness, or CLA. [CLA is also referred to by the term ‘critical
linguistics’.] CLA presents the view that language use is not neutral, but is always part of a wider social struggle
underlining the importance for learners of exploring the ways in which language can both conceal and reveal the social
and ideological nature of all texts. (Fairclough 1992). One example would be drawing attention to the ways in which the
passive voice or noun phrases can be used to conceal agency (although see Widdowson 2000 for some reservations
about such claims). Language awareness has also been strongly advocated as an essential component in teacher
education (see James and Garrett 1992; Wright and Bolitho 1993).

Fossilization refers to the process in which incorrect language becomes a habit and cannot
easily be corrected.
Example
Many advanced level learners who have Spanish as an L1 do not distinguish between ‘he' and ‘she'.
This could be a fossilized error.

In the classroom
Errors in general take time to correct but a fossilized error may never be corrected unless the learner
sees a reason to do so, e.g. if it is seriously hindering communication. Teachers can help learners
notice their fossilized errors by for example recording them speaking, or by asking them to keep a
record of written errors as part of a language portfolio.

What Is Fossilization?
We're not talking trilobites and Tyrannosauruses here: Language fossilization refers to the process in the learning of a
secondary language in which the student has more and more difficulty furthering his fluency in the language, until eventually, the
student can learn no more. The language, for all intents and purposes, has been set in stone in the mind of the learner at this last point.
Some potential for learning small superficial aspects of the language might still exist, such as vocabulary, but conceptual understanding
of the material will not develop any further. Fossilization, thus, is a sort of stagnation in secondary language acquisition that cannot be
overcome.

ZPD/SCAFFOLDING/SLA
Central to learning from this perspective is the zone of proximal development, which focuses on the gap
between what the learner can currently do and the next stage in learning – the level of potential
development – and how learning occurs through negotiation between the learner and a more advanced
language user during which a process of scaffolding occurs. To take part in these processes the learner
must develop interactional competence, the ability to manage exchanges despite limited language
development. Personality, motivation, cognitive style may all play a role in influencing the learners
willingness to take risks, his or her openness to social interaction and attitudes towards the target
language and users of the target language.
Language learning is facilitated by interactions like the ones above in which the interaction proceeds as a
kind of joint problem-solving between teacher and student. During the process the teacher assists the
learner in using more complex language through a type of assisted performance, and this is central to
how many aspects of language use can be learned. The kind of discourse or talk that that occurs in
language classrooms also reflects both the pedagogical strategies the teacher employs (e.g. in trying to
facilitate negotiation of meaning, interaction and feedback, or to provide scaffolding for activities) as well
as the kind of learning community that develops in the classroom.

Systemic functional linguistics

Systemic functional linguistics (SFL) is an approach to linguistics that considers language as a social
semiotic system.
It was devised by Michael Halliday, who took its notion of system from J. R. Firth, his teacher. Firth proposed that
systems refer to possibilities subordinated to structure; Halliday "liberated" choice from structure and made it the
central organising dimension of SFL. In more technical terms, while many approaches to linguistic description place
structure and the syntagmatic axis foremost, SFL adopts the paradigmatic axis as its point of
departure. Systemic foregrounds Saussure's "paradigmatic axis" in understanding how language works.[1] For
Halliday, a central theoretical principle is then that any act of communication involves choices. Language is above
all a system; SFL maps the choices available in any language variety using its representation tool of a "system
network".
Functional signifies the proposition that language evolved under pressure of the functions that the language system
must serve. Functions are taken to have left their mark on the structure and organisation of language at all levels,
which is achieved via metafunctions. Metafunction is uniquely defined in SFL as the "organisation of the functional
framework around systems", i.e., choices. This is a significant difference from other "functional" approaches, such
as Dik's functional grammar (FG, or as now often termed, functional discourse grammar) and lexical functional
grammar. To avoid confusion, the full designation—systemic functional linguistics—is typically used, rather
than functional grammar or functional linguistics.
For Halliday, all languages involve three simultaneously generated metafunctions: one construes experience of our
outer and inner worlds; another enacts social relations (interpersonal relations); and a third weaves together these
two functions to create text (the wording).
Sequential bilingualism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
See also: Multilingualism
Sequential bilingualism occurs when a person becomes bilingual by first learning one language and then another.
The process is contrasted with simultaneous bilingualism, in which both languages are learned at the same time.
There is variation in the period in which learning must take place for bilingualism to be considered simultaneous.
Generally, the term sequential bilingualismapplies only if the child is approximately three years old before being
introduced to the second language (L2).

Modes to acquire L2[edit]

Circumstantial Bilingualism vs Elective Bilingualism[edit]
Elective bilingualism is whereby L2 is acquired through language classes, and have been immersed by choice in a
social context for a prolonged period of time where the L2 language is spoken as the L1.
Circumstantial bilinguals, on the other hand, are forced to relocate to a new country and must learn the new
language for survival. The child learners will enter a “functional” stage of learning the language after about two years
of being in a new country. This means that they will basically be fluent and able to function in all aspects of life with
needed written and oral language skills. Interestingly, when the child has reached this stage, they will begin to avoid
using their native language. However, this native language will still be present in the way they both speak and write.
Adult learners will most likely not enter the functional stage until they have been in the new country for 10 years.
They will also remain native language preferent.[10]

Krashen and Terrell’s “Natural Approach”

Introduction

The influence of Stephen Krashen on language education research and practice is

undeniable. First introduced over 20 years ago, his theories are still debated today. In 1983, he
published The Natural Approach with Tracy Terrell, which combined a comprehensive second
language acquisition theory with a curriculum for language classrooms. The influence of Natural
Approach can be seen especially in current EFL textbooks and teachers resource books such as The
Lexical Approach (Lewis, 1993). Krashen’s theories on second language acquisition have also had
a huge impact on education in the state of California, starting in 1981 with his contribution
to Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework by the California State
Department of Education (Krashen 1981). Today his influence can be seen most prominently in the
debate about bilingual education and perhaps less explicitly in language education policy: The
BCLAD/CLAD teacher assessment tests define the pedagogical factors affecting first and second
language development in exactly the same terms used in Krashen’s Monitor Model (California
Commission on Teacher Credentialing, 1998).

Natural approach
The natural approach is a method of language teaching developed by Stephen Krashen and Tracy Terrell in the
late 1970s and early 1980s. It aims to foster naturalistic language acquisition in a classroom setting, and to this end
it emphasises communication, and places decreased importance on conscious grammarstudy and explicit correction
of student errors. Efforts are also made to make the learning environment as stress-free as possible. In the natural
approach, language output is not forced, but allowed to emerge spontaneously after students have attended to large
amounts of comprehensible language input.

Although Terrell originally created the natural approach without relying on a particular theoretical model, his
subsequent collaboration with Krashen has meant that the method is often seen as an application to language
teaching of Krashen's monitor model.[4] Krashen outlined five hypotheses in his model:

1. The acquisition-learning hypothesis. This states that there is a strict separation between
conscious learning of language and subconscious acquisition of language, and that only acquisition can
lead to fluent language use.[4]
 2. The monitor hypothesis. This states that language knowledge that is consciously learned can only be used
to monitor output, not to generate new language. Monitoring output requires learners to be focused on the
rule and to have time to apply it.[4]
3. The input hypothesis. This states that language is acquired by exposure to comprehensible input at a level a
little higher than that the learner can already understand. Krashen names this kind of input "i+1".[4]
4. The natural order hypothesis. This states that learners acquire the grammatical features of a language in a
fixed order, and that this is not affected by instruction.[4]
5. The affective filter hypothesis. This states that learners must be relaxed and open to learning in order for
language to be acquired. Learners who are nervous or distressed may not learn features in the input that
more relaxed learners would pick up with little effort.[4]

What Is the Language Acquisition Device?

Anybody who has had or known a child knows that children take to learning language at a remarkable rate. In fact,
it seemed a little too remarkable for one linguistics researcher.
Noam Chomsky, a pioneering linguist and a professor at MIT, put forth an idea called the language acquisition
device or LAD, for short. The LAD is a hypothetical tool hardwired into the brain that helps children rapidly learn
and understand language. Chomsky used it to explain just how amazingly children are able to acquire language
abilities as well as accounting for the innate understanding of grammar and syntax all children possess.
Keep in mind that the LAD is a theoretical concept. There isn't a section of the brain with 'language acquisition
device' printed on it and a big switch to turn on and learn a new language. Rather, the LAD is used to explain what
are most likely hundreds or thousands of underlying processes that humans have in their brains that have evolved
to make us particularly exceptional at learning and understanding language.
Chomsky developed the LAD in the 1950s, and since then, has moved on to a greater theory called universal
grammar (or UG) to account for the rapid language development in humans. While universal grammar is a bit
beyond the scope of this article, just remember for now that LAD later evolved into this theory.

The Nativist Perspective

Linguists have long debated how and why we're able to learn a language. In some ways, this is sort of a chicken
and egg kind of scenario: are we born with the ability to communicate with language, or do we learn it after we're
born?
Guided by these burning questions about why children are so adept at learning a language, Noam Chomsky
developed what is called the nativist perspective. According to Chomsky's theory, infants have an innate ability
to learn language. From a very early age, we're able to understand the basics of language. For instance, Chomsky
argued, children are able to understand the appropriate order of words from a young age. Instead of saying ''Juice I
want,'' children know to say ''I want juice!'' Chomsky noted that this is similar across languages. Children are able to
do this even before they have developed much of a vocabulary. This is an important point for Chomsky because it
underscores his theory that children are able to understand the structure and rules even before they know many
words.

Historical Theories and Models of Language Acquisition[edit]

Behaviourist Theory[edit]
B.F Skinner 1950

In 1957 a piece of literature appeared that would come to affect how we view language, human behaviour and
language learning. B.F Skinner's Verbal Behaviour (1957) applied a functional analysis approach to analyze
language behaviour in terms of their natural occurrence in response to environmental circumstances and the effects
they have on human interactions.[3] Skinner's behaviour learning approach relies on the components of classical,
which involves unconditioned and conditioned stimuli, and operant conditioning but particularly the elements of
operational conditioning. Operational conditioning refers to a method of learning that occurs through rewards and
punishments for behaviour. Behaviour operates on the environment to bring about favorable consequences or avoid
adverse ones. These same ideas of operant conditioning can also be applied to language acquisition because
Skinner believed that language could be treated like any other kind of cognitive behaviour. According to the
behaviourist theory, language learning is a process of habit formation that involves a period of trial and error where
the child tries and fails to use correct language until it succeeds. Infants also have human role models in their
environment that provide the stimuli and rewards required for operant conditioning. For example, if a child starts
babblings, which resembles appropriate words, then his or her babbling will be rewarded by a parent or loved one
by positive reinforcement such as a smile or clap. Since the babblings were rewarded, this reward reinforces further
articulations of the same sort into groupings of syllables and words in a similar situation (Demirezen,
1988).[4] Children also utter words because they cause adults to give them the things they want and they will only be
given what they want once the adult has trained or shaped the child through reinforcement and rewards speech
close to that of adult speech. Before long children will take on the imitation or modeling component of Skinner's
theory of language acquisition in which children learn to speak by copying the utterances heard around them and by
having their responses strengthened by the repetitions, corrections and other reactions that adults provide.
However, before a child can begin to speak, they first start by listening to the sounds in their environment for the first
years of their life. Gradually, the child learns to associate certain sounds with certain situations such as the sound of
endearment a mother produces when feeding her child. These sounds then become pleasurable for the child on
their own without being accompanied by food and eventually the child will attempt to imitate these sounds to invite
the attention of his mother or another adult. If these sounds resemble that of adult language the mother will respond
with reward and the operant conditioning process begins.

Innateness Theory[edit]
Noam Chomsky's innateness theory (or nativist theory) proposes that children have an inborn or innate faculty for
language acquisition that is biologically determined. According to Goodluck (1991), nativists view language as a
fundamental part of the human genome, as a trait that makes humans human, and its acquisition is a natural part of
maturation.[5] It seems that the human species has evolved a brain whose neural circuits contain linguistic
information at birth and this natural predisposition to learn language is triggered by hearing speech. The child's brain
is then able to interpret what she or he hears according to the underlying principles or structures it already contains
(Linden, 2007).[6] Chomsky has determined that being biologically prepared to acquire language regardless of setting
is due to the child's language acquisition device (LAD), which is used as a mechanism for working out the rules of
language. Chomsky believed that all human languages share common principles, such as all languages have verbs
and nouns, and it was the child's task to establish how the specific language she or he hears expresses these
underlying principles. For example, the LAD already contains the concept of verb tense and so by listening to word
forms such as "worked" or "played". The child will then form a hypothesis that the past tense of verbs are formed by
adding the sound /d/,/t/ or /id/ to the base form. Yang (2006) also believes that children also initially possess, then
subsequently develop, an innate understanding or hypothesis about grammar regardless of where they are
raised.[7] According to Chomsky, infants acquire grammar because it is a universal property of language, an inborn
development, and has coined these fundamental grammatical ideas that all humans have as universal
grammar (UG). Children under the age of three usually don't speak in full sentences and instead say things like
"want cookie" but yet you would still not hear them say things like "want my" or "I cookie" because statements like
this would break the syntactic structure of the phrase, a component of universal grammar. Another argument of the
nativist or innate theory is that there is a critical period for language acquisition, which is a time frame during which
environmental exposure is needed to stimulate an innate trait. Linguist Eric Lenneberg in 1964 postulated that the
critical period of language acquisition ends around the age of 12 years. He believed that if no language was learned
before then, it could never be learned in a normal and functional sense. It was termed the critical period hypothesis
and since then there has been a few case examples of individuals being subject to such circumstances such as the
girl known as Genie who was imposed to an abusive environment, which didn't allow her to develop language skills.

Cognitive Theory[edit]
Jean Piaget was a Swiss psychologist that was famous for his four stages of cognitive development for children,
which included the development of language. However, children do not think like adults and so before they can
begin to develop language they must first actively construct their own understanding of the world through their
interactions with their environment. A child has to understand a concept before he or she can acquire the particular
language which expresses that concept. For example, a child first becomes aware of a concept such as relative size
and only afterward do they acquire the words and patterns to convey that concept. Essentially it is impossible for a
young child to voice concepts that are unknown to them and therefore once a child learns about their environment
then they can map language onto their prior experience. An infant's experience of a cat is that it meows, is furry and
eats from a bowl in the kitchen; hence they develop the concept of cat first and then learns to map the word "kitty"
onto that concept. Language is only one of the many human mental or cognitive activities and many cognitivists
believe that language emerges within the context of other general cognitive abilities like memory, attention and
problem solving because it is a part of their broader intellectual development. However, according to Goodluck
(1991), once language does emerge it is usually within certain stages and children go through these stages in a
fixed order that is universal in all children.[8] There is a consistent order of mastery of the most common function
morphemes in a language and simple ideas are expressed earlier than more complex ones even if they are more
grammatically complicated. Piaget's cognitive theory states that, children's language reflects the development of
their logical thinking and reasoning skills in stages, with each period having a specific name and age
reference.[9] There are four stages of Piaget's cognitive development theory, each involving a different aspect of
language acquisition:

1. Sensory-Motor Period- (birth to 2 years) Children are born with "action schemas" to "assimilate"
information about the world such as sucking or grasping. During the sensory-motor period, children's
language is "egocentric" and they talk either for themselves or for the pleasure of associating anyone who
happens to be there with the activity of the moment
2. Pre-Operational Period- (2 years to 7) Children's language makes rapid progress and the development of
their "mental schema" lets them quickly "accommodate" new words and situations. Children's language
becomes "symbolic" allowing them to talk beyond the "here and now" and to talk about things such as the
past, future and feelings.
3. Egocentrism- Involves "animism" which refers to young children's tendency to consider everything,
including inanimate objects, as being alive. Language is considered egocentric because they see things
purely from their own perspective.
4. Operational Period- (7 to 11 years) and (11 years to adulthood) Piaget divides this period into two parts:
the period of concrete operations and the period of formal operations. Language at this stage reveals the
movement of their thinking from immature to mature and from illogical to logical. They are also able to "de-
center" or view things from a perspective other than their own. It is at this point that children's language
becomes "socialized" and includes things such as questions, answers, commands and criticisms.
Social Interactionist Theory

Vygotsky's social interaction theory incorporates nurture arguments in that children can be influenced by their
environment as well as the language input children receive from their care-givers. Although the theories of Skinner,
Chomsky and Piaget are all very different and very important in their own contexts, they don't necessarily take into
account the fact that children don't encounter language in isolation. The child is a little linguist analyzing language
from randomly encountered adult utterances. The interaction theory proposes that language exists for the purpose
of communication and can only be learned in the context of interaction with adults and older children. It stresses the
importance of the environment and culture in which the language is being learned during early childhood
development because this social interaction is what first provides the child with the means of making sense of their
own behaviour and how they think about the surrounding world. According to Williamson (2008), children can
eventually use their own internal speech to direct their own behaviour in much the same way that their parents'
speech once directed their behaviour.[10] Speech to infants is marked by a slower rate, exaggerated intonation, high
frequency, repetition, simple syntax and concrete vocabulary. This tailored articulation used by care-givers to young
children to maximize phonemic contrasts and pronunciation of correct forms is known as child-directed
speech (CDS). Vygotsky also developed the concepts of private speech which is when children must speak to
themselves in a self guiding and directing way- initially out loud and later internally and the zone of proximal
development which refers to the tasks a child is unable to complete alone but is able to complete with the
assistance of an adult. The attention and time that a mother spends talking about topics that the child is already
focused on highly correlates with early vocabulary size. In the early stages of a child`s life this is usually done
through motherese or ``baby talk`` which may allow children to ``bootstrap`` their progress in language acquisition
(Williamson, 2008).[10] The mother and father also provide ritualized scenarios, such as having a bath or getting
dressed, in which the phases of interaction are rapidly recognized and predicted by the infant. The utterances of the
mother and father during the activities are ritualized and predictable so that the child is gradually moved to an active
position where they take over the movements of the care-taker and eventually the ritualized language as well.
Basically the care-giver is providing comprehensible contexts in which the child can acquire language (Mason,
2002).[11] Another influential researcher of the interaction theory is Jerome Bruner who elaborated and revised the
details of the theory over a number of years and also introduced the term Language Acquisition Support
System (LASS), which refers to the child`s immediate adult entourage but in the fuller sense points to the child`s
culture as a whole in which they are born. Adults adapt their behaviour towards children to construct a protected
world in which the child is gradually inclined to take part in a growing number of scenarios and scripts and in this
way the child is lead gradually further and further into language. However, one must remember that although our
social context provides support for language acquisition, it does not directly provide the knowledge that is necessary
to acquire language and this perhaps where a child`s innate abilities come into play.