M3 Tarea 1 Luis

LUIS FIGUEROA
Instructions:
b) In a Word File and with your own words, try to summarize the content in
Krashen's five hypothesis.
According to Zobl, “acquisition operates incidentally to processing for

comprehension and results in implicit, intuitive knowledge; ‘learning’ relies on
memorization and problem-solving and leads to explicit, conscious knowledge
about the L2.” In other words, if a person wants to be able to effectively
communicate in another language without having to stop to remember the right
word or structure, he or she needs to go through a process in which he or she not
only has understood and memorized a good number of words and structures, but
has also internalized them and is now able to unconsciously retrieve them when
needed.
The first instance, understanding and memorizing, would be an example

of learning, as understood by Krashen (1994, 2004), whereas the second one,
internalizing and being able to unconsciously retrieve words and structures, would
be an example of acquisition.
Carefully read the following text taken from Krashen (2013: 1-5) which summarizes
what has been perhaps the most influential theory on second language acquisition
since the 1980s.
Topic 1. Language Acquisition - Theory
DEUTSCH FRENCH ENGLISH
The following five hypotheses summarize current theory on language acquisition.

(For technical discussion and supporting evidence, see Krashen 1994, 2004.)
The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis
We have two very different ways of developing ability in another language: We can
acquire language, and we can learn language.
Language acquisition occurs subconsciously. While it is happening, we are not
aware that it is happening. We think we are having a conversation, reading a book,
watching a movie. Of course, we are, but at the same time, we might be acquiring
language.
The research strongly supports the view that both children and adults can
subconsciously acquire language. Also, both oral and written language can be
acquired.
Error correction is supposed to help learning. When we make a mistake and are
corrected, we are supposed to change our conscious version of the rule. If a
learner says, “I comes to school every day”, and a teacher responds with, “No, it’s
Topic 1.1 The Natural Order Hypothesis
We acquire (not learn) the parts of a language in a predictable order. Some

grammatical items, for example, are acquired early while others are acquired later.
The order is not exact: Not every acquirer proceeds in exactly the same order. But
the variation among acquirers is not extreme.
In English as a second language, for example, the –ing marker, the progressive
(“John is playing the violin.”), is among the first grammatical markers (function
words) to be acquired, while the third person singular –s is acquired later. In fact,
some adults who speak English as a second language very well have not acquired
this marker.
Topic 1.2 The Monitor Hypothesis

A few language experts can Monitor to some extent while conversing, but these
are very advanced acquirers who only need to Monitor an occasional rule here and
there,
and who have a special interest in the structure of language.
Research indicates that we use grammar - that we Monitor - only when all of these
three conditions are fully met (Krashen, 1982, 2003). For most people, this
happens only when they take a grammar test.
Consciously learned language is only available to us as Monitor, or editor.
The ability to produce language fluently and easily comes from what we have
acquired. The grammar rules that we learned in school have only one function:
They act as Monitor, or editor.
It is extremely difficult to use the Monitor. In order to use the Monitor successfully,
three very stringent conditions must be met:
The Monitor user must know the rule. This is a very difficult condition to meet.
Linguists tell us that they have not yet described all the rules of any language.
Authors of grammar texts know fewer rules than the linguists. Language teachers
do not teach all the rules in the texts. Even the best students
don’t learn all the rules that are taught, even the best students don’t remember all
the rules they have learned, and even the best students can’t always use the rules
they do remember. Some are simply too complicated.
Topic 1.3 The Comprehension Hypothesis
The Comprehension Hypothesis is the centerpiece of language acquisition theory.

It attempts to answer the most important question in the fields of language
acquisition and language education: How do we acquire language?
The answer is simple: We acquire language when we understand what people tell
us or when we understand what we read. And there is no other way it can happen.
While people differ in many important ways, they do not differ in the way they
acquire language.
To be a little more precise, we acquire language when we understand messages

that contain aspects of language (vocabulary, grammar) we have not yet acquired,
but are “ready” to acquire. To be even more precise, let us assume a simplified
version of the Natural Order Hypothesis, that we acquire the rules of a language in
a linear order: 1, 2, 3… The question “How do we acquire language?” can be
restated this way: “How do we move along the natural order?
The Comprehension Hypothesis claims that we move from i to i + 1 by

understanding input containing + 1. We are able to do this with the help of
language we have already acquired, our knowledge of the world, and context. For
beginners, pictures are a great help in making input comprehensible, as are the
body movements that are the core of Asher’s Total Physical Response method.
Speaking can help language acquisition indirectly, however. First, it is part of

conversation, and conversation is an excellent way to obtain comprehensible input.
What is important in conversation, however, is what other people say to you, not
what you say to them. Second, actually using a language, actually speaking it, I
suspect, can make you feel more like the user of the second language, like a
member of the “club”.
Given enough comprehensible input, i + 1 is present.
The structures they are ready to acquire will be present in the input. We don’t have
to make sure they are there, we don’t have to deliberately focus on certain points
of grammar. If this corollary is correct, it means the end of grammatically-based
language teaching. It means the end of classes in which students focus on one rule
at a time, “master it”, and then go on to the next. It means the end of boring
lessons and texts, stories whose real objective is to provide practice with the
relative clause. It means all that is necessary for language acquisition is input that
is interesting and comprehensible.
We should not introduce grammatical rules even along the “natural order”: The
syllabus should not be based on any grammatical order. Rather, students will
acquire the language in a natural order as a result of getting comprehensible input.
Topic 1.4 The Affective Filter Hypothesis.
The Affective Filter Hypothesis claims that affective variables do not impact
language acquisition directly but prevent input from reaching what Chomsky has
called the “language acquisition device”, the part of the brain responsible for
language acquisition.
If the acquirer is anxious, has low self-esteem, does not consider himself or herself
to be a potential member of the group that speaks the language (see Smith 1988
for discussion of this last factor), he or she may understand the input, but it will not
reach the language acquisition device. A block -the affective filter- will keep it out.
As mentioned earlier, Krashen’s theory on second language acquisition has had an

enormous influence on the ELT field. However, more recently, the terms ‘learning’
and ‘acquisition’ have begun to be used interchangeably by some authors.
Ultimately, the question for us, teachers, is how do we help our students acquire
the language, in Krashen’s terms? Although there are no simple answers to that
question, there are a number of things we can do, namely:
• Create a pleasant atmosphere in which students do not feel threatened or

anxious; try to boost their self-esteem as language learners.
• Present new material at a level of English which is slightly above the learners’
proficiency level. This should also be the case when you give instructions or
generally address your group of students.

M3 Tarea 1 Luis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

M3 Tarea 1 Luis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

M3 Tarea 1 Luis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LUIS FIGUEROA

According to Zobl, “acquisition operates incidentally to processing for

The first instance, understanding and memorizing, would be an example

DEUTSCH FRENCH ENGLISH

The following five hypotheses summarize current theory on language acquisition.

The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis

We acquire (not learn) the parts of a language in a predictable order. Some

Topic 1.2 The Monitor Hypothesis

Topic 1.3 The Comprehension Hypothesis

The Comprehension Hypothesis is the centerpiece of language acquisition theory.

To be a little more precise, we acquire language when we understand messages

The Comprehension Hypothesis claims that we move from i to i + 1 by

Speaking can help language acquisition indirectly, however. First, it is part of

Topic 1.4 The Affective Filter Hypothesis.

As mentioned earlier, Krashen’s theory on second language acquisition has had an

• Create a pleasant atmosphere in which students do not feel threatened or

You might also like