Introduction

Research on second language acquisition is an especially complicated endeavor. The working out of a complete grammar of a single language is a task of enormous complexity, one that has yet to be completed for any human language. It is all the more daunting, then, to realize that an understanding of all the factors influencing a language learner's performance demands a fairly well-articulated analysis of at least two languages, the native language and the target language. Furthermore, while linguists attempting to describe the grammatical patterns of a single language must deal with the complicating factors of social and regional variation, anyone investigating the acquisition of a foreign language must grapple not only with these but with a host of additional relevant variables: the age at which the learner was exposed to the foreign language; the type of exposure to the foreign language (through formal instruction or outside the classroom); the learner's knowledge of other foreign languages. And while linguists can fairly safely assume that all adult native speakers of a language have reached a particular stage of mastery of the core grammar of that language, learners of a foreign language may have widely varying levels of competence and motivation.

Yet the potential rewards of such study are considerable. The systematic errors of second language learners can provide a valuable source of external evidence to test linguistic theories. For example, where particular error patterns are associated with particular native language backgrounds, we may assume that these errors provide some reflection of the grammatical system of the first language – the sort of evidence which may not be available from evidence internal to the first language.

Some children grow up in a supportive social environment where more than one language is used and are able to acquire a second language in circumstances similar to those of first language acquisition. However, most of us are not exposed to a second language until much later and, like David Sedaris, our ability to use a second language, even after years of study, rarely matches ability in our first language.

Chapter 13 introduces second language acquisition, the acquisition of non-native grammars, by comparing it to first language acquisition (Chapter 12). The strong interdisciplinary nature of second language acquisition informs this chapter in all areas, including how it links to other branches of linguistics, cognitive psychology, sociolinguistics, education, etc. The chapter introduces readers to key concepts such as interlanguage and transfer from the first language. As in Chapter 12 First language acquisition, this chapter follows the development of the second language sound system, morphology, and syntax. The chapter compares and analyzes different theoretical approaches such as markedness theory, generative approaches (Universal Grammar), the monitor model, sociocultural theory, processability theory, and cognitive models such as the competition model. It examines important factors that may affect the course of second language acquisition such as: the role of age; gender; learning styles such as field dependency or independence; aptitude; motivation; and working memory. It also explores different learning contexts and approaches such as immersion and task-based learning.

Introduction

The term second language acquisition (SLA) refers to the processes through which someone acquires one or more second or foreign languages. SLA researchers look at acquisition in naturalistic contexts (where learners pick up the language informally through interacting in the language) and in classroom settings. Researchers are interested in both product (the language used by learners at different stages in the acquisition process) and process (the mental process and environmental factors that influence the acquisition process). In this chapter I trace the development of SLA from its origins in contrastive analysis. This is followed by a selective review of research, focusing on product-oriented studies of stages that learners pass through as they acquire another language, as well as investigations into the processes underlying acquisition. The practical implications of research are then discussed, followed by a review of current and future trends and directions.

Background

The discipline now known as SLA emerged from comparative studies of similarities and differences between languages. These studies were conducted in the belief that a learner's first language (L1) has an important influence on the acquisition of a second (L2), resulting in the ‘contrastive analysis’ (CA) hypothesis. Proponents of contrastive analysis argued that where L1 and L2 rules are in conflict, errors are likely to occur which are the result of ‘interference’ between L1 and L2. For example, the hypothesis predicted that Spanish L1 learners would tend, when learning English, to place the adjective after the noun as is done in Spanish, rather than before it.

Chapter preview

As we saw in Chapter 6, first language acquisition is a complicated but relatively rapid process through which children become competent and proficient users of their communities’ language(s). However, for those of us who start learning a language after childhood – for example, by enrolling in a foreign language course or moving to a new country – the process of learning a non-native language is far more difficult and much less likely to end in complete mastery/fluency. Adult language learners usually take years to reach a level of proficiency that most children attain easily in their first languages before they are three, and few adults achieve complete native-like mastery of languages they have tried to learn after the end of childhood. What can explain these differences? Why do so many people claim the title of “worst language learner in the world” for themselves? Do adults learn second languages in the same way as children learning their first? If not, what kinds of instruction or learning contexts are most effective for them? These questions are central to the field of second language acquisition (SLA) – broadly defined as the formal study of the learning processes and teaching practices related to the acquisition of non-native languages.

In chapter 3 we pointed out that diglossie speech communities without (individual) bilingualism virtually do not exist. This implies thar in bilingual communities many people have to !earn two languages, particularly those speaking a minority language. In addition to their vernacular they acquire a second language, often the rnajority language or another language of wider communication: a Turkish immigrant worker in Germany leams German, a speaker ofLotuho in Sudan tearus Arabic, a speaker of one ofthe Aboriginallanguages in Australia learns English, etc. Members ofminority groups must attain a certain degree ofbilingualism ifthey wam ro partleipare in mainstream society. Speakers ofa majority language are in a much more comfortable position. If they wish tbey can sray monolingual: Germans generally do net learn Turkish, etc.

In Languages in contact Weinreich (1953) claims thar ‘[rhe] greater the differences between the systems, i.e. the more numerous the mutually exclusive forms and parrerns in eech [language], the grearer is the learning problem and the potential area of interference’ (p. I). Weinreich suggests that the first language influences the acquisition of the second ene. With the term interfermee he refers ra the ‘rearrangement of pattems that results from the introduetion offoreign elements into the more highly srructured domains of language, such as the bulk of the phonemic system, a large part ofthe morphology and syntax, and some areas ofvocabulary’ (p. I).1t is a common-sense notion that secend language learners use elements or structures of their native language in speaking a second tongue: the stereotypie English-speaking Frenchman says ‘I seank’ insteadof'l rhink', beceuse his French phonological system keeps intruding, and the equally stereotypie French-speaking Englishman says: ‘Parlay vuw anglay?'

The influence of one language on the other is extremely important in situations of prolonged and systematic language contact. Here again a quoration from Weinreich is appropriate. ‘In speech, interference is like sand carried by a stream; in language it is the sedimented sand deposited on the bottorn of a lake’ (Weinreieh, 1953: 11). However, the interlanguage of second-Ianguage Ieamers, i.e. their version of the target language, can also be characrerized by ether structural features in addition ra interference, for instanee features due ra simplification oftarget-Ianguage srructures. These features can also become habitualized and established, or - in Weinreich's metaphor - become rhe sedimented sand deposited at the bottorn of a lake.

This chapter zeroes in on the similarities and differences between first and second language acquisition. First, the chapter breaks down the term “second language acquisition” by discussing each of those words. It revisits the components of language (grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and pragmatics) from second language acquisition perspectives. It then introduces different second language acquisition theories such as input processing theory, skill acquisition theory, usage-based theory, sociocultural theory, complex dynamic systems theory, translanguaging, and Monitor Theory. The applicability of those theories to classroom second language teaching is discussed.