THE CONCEPT OF SECOND

LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
(SLA)
 SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

SLA is the process of learning other languages in addition to the native language.
For instance, a child who speaks Hindi as the mother tongue starts learning English
when he starts going to school. English is learned by the process of second language
acquisition. In fact, a young child can learn a second language faster than an adult
can learn the same language. It covers the development of phonology, lexis,
grammar, and pragmatic knowledge but has been largely continued to
morphosyntax.
 A distinction is often made between competence and performance in the study
of language. According to Chomsky (1965)
 Competence - consists of the mental representation of linguistic rules. Which
constitute the speaker- learners internalized grammar.
 Performance - consists of the comprehension and production of language.
One of the major problems of SLA research has been precisely to what extent
competence can be inferred from performance.
• Language – learner language contains
errors. That is, some of the utterances
produced by learners are not well
formed according to the rules of the
adult grammar. Errors are an important
source of information about SLA,
because they demonstrate conclusively
that learners do not simply measurize
target language rules and then
reproduce them in their own utterance.
 Early theories of SLA, based on the nation of habits
formation through practice and reinforcement, emphasized
the importance of input. Learning a L2 was like any other
kind of learning.

It consisted of building up chains of stimulus response links

which could be controlled and shaped by reinforcement.
In the 1960’s this view of learning was challenged, most
notably by Chomsky. It was pointed out that in many
instances there was no match between the kind of language
to be observed in the input and the language learning
emphasized what he called the learner’s “language
acquisition device "and played down the role of the
linguistic environment. Input merely served as trigger to
activate the device. A major issue in SLA, therefore, is
whether the input shapes and controls learning or is just a
trigger.
 Krashen (1981)argues simply a
matter of comprehensible input,
providing learners with language
that they can understand. The role of
input in the process of SLA remains
one of the most controversial issues
in current research. Learners need to
shift the input they receive and
relate it to their existing knowledge.
how? There are two possible
explanation.
 1.They may use general
cognitive strategies which are
part of their procedural
knowledge and which are used 2. Alternatively. They may posses a
in other forms/process of special linguistic faculty that enables
learning. These strategies are them to operate on the input data in
often referred to as learner’s order to discover the L2 rules in
strategies. maximally efficient ways. This
linguistic faculty is referred to as
Universal Grammar.
Tarone (1980) distinguishes three sets of learner strategies.

Learning strategies – can be conscious and behavioral ( e.g.

memorization or repetition with the purpose of remembering )or
they can be subconscious and psycholinguistic ( e.g.
inferencing or over generalization)

Production strategies – this involves learners attempts to use the

L2 knowledge they have already acquired efficiently, clearly
and with minimum effort.

Communication strategies - consist of learner’s attempts to

communicate meanings for which they lack the requisite
linguistic knowledge.
 One of the most controversial
theoretical perspectives is
Stephen Krashen Concept found in a set of hypothesis
of SLA about second language
learning that were made by
STEPHEN KRASHEN(1977,
1981,1982, 1985) in a host of
articles and books.
 the Acquisition-
Learning hypothesis;
Krashen’s Five
Main
the Monitor hypothesis;
Hypotheses in the Natural Order
SLA hypothesis;
the Input hypothesis;
and the Affective Filter
hypothesis.
 Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis

According to Krashen there are two independent systems of second language performance:
'the acquired system' and 'the learned system'.

The “acquired system” or 'acquisition' is the product of a subconscious process very similar
to the process children undergo when they acquire their first language.

"learned system" or "learning" is the product of formal instruction and it comprises a

conscious process which results in conscious knowledge 'about' the language, for example
knowledge of grammar rules.
 Monitor hypothesis

explains the relationship between acquisition and learning

and defines the influence of the latter on the former.
monitor' acts in a planning, editing and correcting function
when three specific conditions are met: that is, the second
language learner has sufficient time at his/her disposal,
he/she focuses on form or thinks about correctness, and
he/she knows the rule.
 Input hypothesis
• Krashen's attempt to explain how the learner acquires a
second language.
• How second language acquisition takes place.
• the Input hypothesis is only concerned with 'acquisition', not
'learning'. 
• According to this hypothesis, the learner improves and
progresses along the 'natural order' when he/she receives
second language 'input' that is one step beyond his/her
current stage of linguistic competence. 
For example, if a learner is at a stage 'i', then acquisition takes place
when he/she is exposed to 'Comprehensible Input' that belongs to
level 'i + 1'. Since not all of the learners can be at the same level of
linguistic competence at the same time, Krashen suggests
that natural communicative input is the key to designing a syllabus,
ensuring in this way that each learner will receive some 'i + 1' input
that is appropriate for his/her current stage of linguistic
competence.
 Natural Order Hypothesis

Mainly research based

Grammatical structure happens in a
predictable sequence
Used for both L1 and L2 speakers
Differ slightly between L1 and L2 speakers
Although different, the learning still happens
in the same order
Example: Yes/No question
 Affective Filter Hypothesis

embodies Krashen's view that a number of 'affective

variables' play a facilitative, but non-causal, role in second
language acquisition. 

These variables include: motivation, self-confidence and

anxiety. 

learners with high motivation, self-confidence, a good self-

image, and a low level of anxiety are better equipped for
success in second language acquisition. 
 Low motivation, low self-esteem, and debilitating
anxiety can combine to 'raise' the affective filter and
form a 'mental block' that prevents comprehensible
input from being used for acquisition. 

In other words, when the filter is 'up' it impedes

language acquisition. On the other hand, positive
affect is necessary, but not sufficient on its own, for
acquisition to take place.
 Theory of Second Language Acquisition

a theory of course does not stand by its exhaustiveness.

Equally if not more importantly, is whether the premises upon
which a theory rests are valid ( consistent with the known
facts) and internally consistent (non contradictory)
 There are 5
components of SLA The
Situational that need primary linguistic
Factors considerations. input

Learner Learner Linguistic

difference processes output
Situational Factors influence input (input in a classroom
setting is likely to differ from that in a natural setting) and
also the use of learner process (communication strategies).
Learner difference on such variables as motivation and
personality help to determine the quality and quantity of the
input and also affect the operation of learner strategies (use
of mentalingual strategies). Input comprises of (1) the
inherent properties of the target language system and (2)
formality and interactionally adjusted features found in
foreigner and teacher talk. Input constitute data upon which
the learner strategies work, but also the input is itself in part
determines by the learner’s use of communication
strategies. Thus, the relationship between input and the
learner process in an interactive one.
A consideration of the basic issue which a theory of SLA will
need to consider will be presented as a series of hypotheses.
The hypotheses are organized in sections corresponding to the
component of SLA identified.
 General

Hypothesis #1

SLA follows a natural sequence of development, but there will be

minor variations in the order of development and more major
variations in the rate of development and in the level of
proficiency achieved.

The sequence refers to the general stages of development which

characterize SLA, and the order of the development of specific
grammatical feature.
Hypothesis #2

At any one stage of development, the learner’s interlanguage

comprises a system of variable rules.

Whereas Hypothesis (1) refers to vertical variability, this hypothesis

acknowledges horizontal variability. The two are closely related, in
that horizontal variability is the mirror of vertical variability.
 Hypothesis #3

Situational factors are indirect determinants of the rate of SLA and also of the
level of proficiency achieved, but they do not influence the sequence of
development and they affect the order of development only in minor and
temporary ways.

It follows from this hypothesis that classroom and naturalistic SLA will follow the
same developmental route. It also follows that differences in specific settings will
not influence the developmental route. Situational factors do not affect the rout of
development evident to the vernacular style.
Hypothesis #4

Situational factors are the primary causes of variability of

language-learner language.

Situational factors (who is addressing whom, when, about what, and

where) govern the learner’s variable use of his interlanguage in the
same way as they govern the native speaker’s use of his mother tongue.
 Input

Hypothesis #5

Input that is interactionally (but not necessarily

formally) adjusted as a result of negotiation of
meaning in a two-way discourse between the
learner and another speaker functions as a
determinant (but not the sole determinant) of the
sequence of development, the order of
development, and the rate of development.
 Learner Differences

Hypothesis #6

Affective learner differences (those

relating to motivation and
personality) determine the rate of
SLA and the level of proficiency
achieved, but not the sequence or
order of development.
Hypothesis #7

The learner’s first language influences

the order of development (although
not in major ways), but it does not
affect the sequence of the
development.
While the behaviorist’s accounts the roles
of the first language have not proved
durable, more cognitive explanations of
transfer shows that the first language is
still an important factor in SLA. It is
doubtful, however, if the sequence of
development if affected by the first
language. It is more likely that the
appearance of specific grammatical
features in the order of development of
difference learners can be traced to their
first language, perhaps, as a result of the
degree of markedness of the same features
in the first language.
 Learner
Processes

Hypothesis #8

development occurs as a product Interlanguage of the learner’s

use of procedural knowledge to construct discourse.
 Linguistic Output

Hypothesis #9

Language learner language consists of (a) formulated speech and (b) utterance
constructed creativity.
Language learner language is variable, dynamic but also systematic.

It is unlikely that all SLA researches would agree with all nine of these hypotheses,
and they might as well want to rephrase some in rather different ways, or attribute a
different emphasis to them. However, they reflect the basic issues which have
directed SLA inquiry and which will need to be considered in any composite picture
of SLA.
Thank you!