First Language Acquisition Theories

Info: 5525 words (22 pages) Essay

Published: 13th Jul 2017 in English Language

Reference this

Share this: Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp

Imagine a blank template, a white sheet of paper, thats how human being starts off. From a crying baby
in a cradle, to babbling, to simple single words, slowly progressing into two-words, then finally a
complete sentence, ever wonder how one acquires the ability to produce the language? Linguists
throughout the ages have tried to find out how does one ACQUIRE a language, is it a deep structure as
claimed by Kimball? Or is it an innate ability, a build-in human capacity propagated by Chomsky?

Get Help With Your Essay

If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!

Find out more

Various theories have arose since language studies came to fore, and the ability to acquire language has
interested various parties since the dawn of man. From the dunes of Egypt, Psammeticus, the Pharaoh
during the 7th century BC, believed language was inborn and that children isolated from birth from any
linguistic influence would develop the language they had been born with. Fast forward to the 15th
century, King James V of Scotland performed a similar experiment; the children were reported to
have spoken good Hebrew. Akbar, a 16th century Mogul emperor of India, desired to learn whether
language was innate or acquired through exposure to the speech of adults. He believed that language
was learned by people listening to each other and therefore a child could not develop language alone.Â
So he ordered a house built for two infants and stationed a mute nurse to care for them. The children
did not acquire speech, which seemed to prove Akbar’s hypothesis that language is acquired and does
not simply emerge spontaneously in the absence of exposure to speech.Â

Henceforth, modern linguists have been trying hard to crack the codes which govern the acquisition and
learning of a language. Theories ranging from Jean Piaget’s Cognitive Theory(1929), Skinner’s Behaviorist
Theory (1957), to Chomsky’s The Innateness Hypothesis, and Lambert’s Critical Period Hypothesis(1967)
for first language acquisition, and finally Krashen’s 5 hypothesis of second language learning have paved
a way for an insight, a way to unravel the way the mind works in acquiring and learning a language -
which happen to be distinct from one another-, and here, we will be looking at the theories that have
been the workhorse of language acquisition and learning.

Definition

First Language Acquisition is touted by linguist as the process of acquiring a language via exposure whilst
young. First language is defined as the primary language -not necessarily mother tongue- which the
speaker first acquires and use on a constant basis. According to Lennenberg (1967) the language that
one picks up during the critical period will generally be the person’s first language. The Canadian census
agrees that the first language that one acquires during childhood is the first language.

A second language, however, can be a related language or a totally different one from the first language.
Language acquisition is a cognitive process cognitive process (reasoning, perception, judgment and
memory) of “acquiring” a language. It is usually done subconsciously, with the mind slowly structuring
the template to mold the language into shape. Language learning however, means a person is trying to
learn the language consciously through practice, training, or experience.

Amongst the most prominent theories of language acquisition that has been put forward by linguists is
the:

Cognitive Development Theory

According to Jean Piaget’s cognitive theory (1970s), language is a subordinate part of cognitive
development. Language is mapped onto an individual’s set of prior cognitive structures. The principles of
language are no different from other cognitive principles. A person becomes capable of abstraction, of
formal thinking which excels concrete experience and direct perception (Freeservers.com, 2012). Firstly,
the child becomes aware of a concept, they acquire the words and patterns to convey the concept.
Simple ideas are expressed earlier than more complex ideas even if they are grammatically more
complicated. Piaget described four distinct stages of childhood cognitive development which include
sensorimotor stage, pre-operational stage, concrete operational stage and formal operational stage and
relates them to a person’s ability to understand and assimilate new information (Springhouse
Corporation, 1990). First language learners are thought to creatively use their skills of cognition in order
to figure out the second language of their own. For adult learners, they have the ability to abstract,
classify and generalize gives them an advantage to systematically solve problems. Adult language
learners rely on their cognitive activities of general information processing because their Language
Acquisition Device gradually becomes unavailable for them (Hadley, 2002).

Piaget claims that the human mind has a template known as the schema: The representation in the
mind of a set of perceptions, ideas and /or actions which go together (Atherton , 2011). The schema
helps individuals understand the various happenings around them, an understanding of oneself (self-
schemata), other people (people schemata), events/situations (event schemata) and roles/occupations
(role schemata).

According to psychologists, cognitive development starts at adaptation, followed by assimilation and

accommodation close after. Assimilation is the process of incorporating new information into pre-
existing schema, more often than not leading to overgeneralization. For example, the child refers to a
whale as a fish, due to the fact the whales and fish, have fins and lives in the ocean. After assimilation,
comes accommodation, whereby the mind is able to differentiate concepts made during the prior phase.
Piaget contends there are four stages of cognitive development which are sensorimotor stage (birth-
2years), pre-operational stage (2-7 years), concrete operational stage (7-11years) and formal
operational stage (11 years and up).

The first stage or the sensorimotor stage is the stage where a child learns about himself and his
environment through motor and reflex movements. The child’s thoughts are derived from movement
and sensation (Springhouse Corporation, 1990). They learn and progress by doing simple motor
movements such as looking, grasping, crying, listening, touching and sucking. Further down the road,
they will also gain a basic understanding of the relationships of cause and effect. Object permanence
appears around 9 months and further physical development allows the children to begin developing
new intellectual abilities. Piaget contends that some basic language abilities are developed at the end of
this stage.

Pre-operational stage follows after the child reaches at the age of 2. During that stage, a child’s
intelligence is demonstrated through the use of symbols, and his language use matures, advancing to
basic sentences. The child’s memory and imagination are developed to a certain extend but thinking is
done in non-logical and non-reversible manner.

The following stage is the concrete operational stage -where the child reaches the age of 7-11-: Children
then develops seven types of conservation, namely number, length, liquid, mass, weight, area and
volume. The child’s intelligence is further demonstrated through logical and systematic manipulation of
symbols related to concrete objects, and his operational thinking develops exponentially, however, his
thinking at this stage is still concrete.

The final stage in the cognitive development is the formal operational stage, where the child’s
developed intelligence is demonstrated through the logical use of symbols related to abstract concepts.
This is reflected in his/her speech as in choice of words, and capability of metaphorical usage.

Humanistic Approach (Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers)

Abraham Maslow proposed the humanistic approach as a method of language acquisition and learning.
The theory takes into considerations of the feelings, motivation levels and confidence of a person
According to Carl Rogers however, the person’s consciousness of their own identity is about behavior
central to oneself. Rogers believed that people could only fulfill their potential for growth if they had
basically positive self-regard. On the contrary Abraham Maslow’s believed that those who satisfied all
their needs might become self-actualizers (Sammons, n.d.).

Humanistic approach differs it tries to encourage positive emotions that help language acquisition such
as self-esteem, motivation, empathy and risk taking. It also tries to dampen negative emotions such as
low self-confidence, nervousness and mental inhibition (Villatoro, n.d.) and in a sense, it coincides with
Skinner’s Behaviorist Theory.

Behaviorist Theory
B.F. Skinner described learning as a behavior produced by learner’s response to stimuli which can be
reinforced with positive or negative feedback to environmental stimuli. Skinner added that learning can
be observed, explained, and predicted through observing antecedents and consequences. Both positive
reinforcement and negative reinforcement increase the probability that the antecedent behavior will
happen again. In contrast, punishment (both positive and negative) decreases the likelihood that the
antecedent behavior will happen again. Positive indicates the application of a stimulus; Negative
indicates the withholding of a stimulus. Learning is therefore defined as a change in behavior in the
learner. Punishment is sometimes used in eliminating or reducing incorrect actions, followed by
clarifying desired actions. Educational effects of behaviorism are important in developing basic skills and
foundations of understanding in all subject areas and in classroom management.Â

Skinner’s Behaviorist approach contends that children learn language through imitation, repetition and
the reinforcement of the successful linguistics attempts. Mistakes are considered to be the result of
imperfect learning or insufficient opportunities for practice. In such, that a child having a pleasant
learning experience (such as rewards or praise) is positive reinforced. Through that positively reinforcing
stimulus, a child’s learning capacity is triggered. However, unpleasant experiences (such as punishment)
serve as negative reinforcements, and cause learners to avoid undesirable responses to stimuli. As such,
continuous reinforcement increases the rate of learning, be it positive or negative; a child will respond
to different triggers and with experience, remember what is to do and to avoid. Hence, intermittent
reinforcement helps a child to a longer retention of what is learned.

Skinner contends that both positive and negative reinforcement can shape behavior, and this in turn
affects their language acquisition capability, as such, a lack of any reinforcement can also shape
behavior. If people receive no acknowledgement of their behavior, they will likely change that behavior
until they receive some kind of reinforcement.

Behaviorism gave birth to a stimulus-response (S-R) theory which sees language as a set of structures
and acquisition as a matter of habit formation. Ignoring any internal mechanisms, it takes into account
the linguistic environment and the stimuli it produces. Learning is an observable behavior which is
automatically acquired by means of stimulus and response in the form of mechanical repetition. Thus, to
acquire a language is to acquire automatic linguistic habits. According to Johnson (2004:18),
“Behaviorism undermined the role of mental processes and viewed learning as the ability to inductively
discover patterns of rule-governed behavior from the examples provided to the learner by his or her
environment”. Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991:266) consider that S-R models offer “little promises as
explanations of SLA, except for perhaps pronunciation and the rote-memorization of formulae”
(Menezes, V. n.d.).

This view of language learning gave birth to research on contrastive analysis, especially error analysis,
the main focus of which is the interference of one’s first language in the target language. An important
reaction to behaviorism was the interlanguage studies, as the simple comparison between first and
second language neither explained nor described the language produced by SL learners. Interlanguage
studies will be present in other SLA perspectives, as the concern of the area has been mainly with the
acquisition of grammatical morphemes or specific language structures.
Behaviorist Theory for Second Language Learning

Under this theory, it is believed that the second language learning learner tries to imitate what he hears
and practices the second language regularly to develop habits in the language. This theory also believes
that learners try to relate their knowledge of the native language to the second language and this could
lead to positive as well as negative results. However the imitation of one language with the other is not
recommended as this does not help in real life situations. The behaviorists believe that First language
learners (FLL) consists of learners imitating what they hear and develop habits in the first language (FL)
by routine practice. In this view, the learners are thought to relate what they know of their first
language to what they recognize in the second language. “Positive transfer” is a result of similarities
between the first language and the second language, because habits used in the first language easily
transfer to the second language. On the other hand, “negative transfer is caused by differences between
the first language and the second language, because errors result from using habits from the first
language in the second language.

Problems with this view of FLL include the fact that imitation does not help the learner in real-life
situations. Learners are continually required to form sentences they have never previously seen. A finite
number of pre-practiced sentences is not enough to carry on conversation, not even with an instructor.
Another problem with this view is that many of the errors made by FL learners are not based on the first
language. Instead, the problems most often encountered by learners resemble errors made by children
during the period of first language acquisition.

The Innateness Hypothesis

Noam Chomsky believes that children are born with a language acquisition device (LAD) which encodes
the major principles of a language and its grammatical structure into the child’s brain and thus possesses
an inherited ability to learn any human language. He claims that certain linguistic structures which
children use so accurately must be already imprinted on the child’s mind. Children have then only to
learn new vocabulary and apply the syntactic structures from the LAD to form sentences. Chomsky
points out that a child could not possibly learn a language through imitation alone because the language
spoken around them is highly irregular – adult’s speech is often broken up and even sometimes
ungrammatical. Chomsky’s theory applies to all languages as they all contain nouns, verbs, consonants
and vowels and children appear to be ‘hard-wired’ to acquire the grammar.Â

Chomsky defends the innate hypothesis in terms of an elaborated linguistic theory which postulates not
only a general ability in humans to acquire language, but also the ability that comes from a specific
language acquisition device in the brain, equipped already at birth with specific grammatical rules and
principles.

The main arguments in favour of the innateness hypothesis are first, language acquisition would be
difficult or even impossible without an innate grammar: “How do we come to have such rich and
specific knowledge, or such intricate systems of belief and understanding, when the evidence available
to us is so meager?” (Cook, 1985).
Chomsky claims that the mere existence of language universals supports the hypothesis that these are
innate, and most essentially all humans acquire language, and no other animals do.

The LAD is a hypothetical brain mechanism that Chomsky suggested to explain human acquisition of the
syntactic structure of language. This mechanism endows children with the capacity to derive the
syntactic structure and rules of their native language rapidly and accurately from the impoverished input
provided by adult language users. The device is comprised of a finite set of variables which languages
vary, which are set at different levels for different languages on the basis of language exposure. The LAD
reflects Chomsky’s underlying assumption that many aspects of language are universal (common to all
languages and cultures) and constrained by innate core knowledge about language called Universal
Grammar.Â

Universal grammar is defined by Chomsky as “the system of principles, conditions and rules that are
elements or properties of all human languages” (Cook, 1985). The language properties inherent in the
human mind make up ‘Universal Grammar’, which consists, not of particular rules or of a particular
grammar, but of a set of general principles that apply to all grammars and that leave certain parameters
open; Universal Grammar sets the limits within which human languages can vary.

Universal Grammar present in the child’s mind grows into the adult’s knowledge of the language so long
as certain environmental ‘triggers’ are provided; it is not learnt in the same way that, say, riding a
bicycle or playing the guitar are learnt: ‘a central part of what we call “learning” is actually better
understood as the growth of cognitive structures along an internally directed course under the
triggering and potentially shaping effect of the environment’ (Cook, 1985).

Language acquisition is the growth of the mental organ of language triggered by certain language
experiences. Hence the theory of Universal Grammar is frequently referred to as part of biology. Indeed
the theory is not dissimilar from ideas current in biology on other issues, for instance the view that
‘Embryogenesis may then be seen as the progressive, orderly manifestation of the knowledge which is
latent in the egg’ (Cook, 1985).

Find out how UKEssays.com can help you!

Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From
simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched
to your needs.

View our services

So, to acquire language, the child needs not only Universal Grammar but also evidence about a
particular language; he needs to hear sentences of English to know how to fix the parameter for the
order of Verb, Subject, and Object. The evidence he encounters can be positive or negative (Cook,
1985).Â

By using the same language principles, a French child constructs a grammar of French, an English child a
grammar of English. The two grammars represent different choices within the guidelines set by
Universal Grammar, different applications of the same linguistic principles in response to different
environments; ‘Experience is necessary to fix the parameters of core grammar’ (Cook, V, 1985). But the
children also have to learn aspects of language that are peripheral, that do not conform to Universal
Grammar. The child’s mind ‘prefers’ to adopt rules based on the handy set of principles with which it is
equipped; they are in a sense the easy way out, and need only triggering experience to be learnt. By
listening to the language around him, he can decide how to fix the parameter of sentence order as SVO
or SOV, for instance. His mind ‘prefers’ not to adopt peripheral solutions, as they fall outside his pre-
programmed instructions; they are more demanding. This may be interpreted through the concept of
markedness: the child prefers to learn ‘unmarked’ knowledge that conforms to Universal Grammar,
rather than ‘marked’ knowledge that is less compatible with it.Â

Chomsky’s work has been highly controversial, rekindling the age-old debate over whether language
exists in the mind before experience. Despite its few limitations, The Innateness Hypothesis is rich
enough to provide a substantial idea of how a child acquires his/her first language.

The Critical Period Hypothesis

According to Eric Lenneberg’s Cirtical Period Hypothesis in 1967, the hypothesis theorized that the
acquisition of language is an innate process that determined biologically. The notion of critical period
was connected only in the first language acquisition (freeservers.com, 2012). Lenneberg assumed that
the structural reorganizations within the brain were developed only from roughly the age of two to
puberty which was around thirteen or fourteen. Language skills which were neither learned nor being
taught during this age would remain permanently undeveloped (Schouten, 2011). Lenneberg’s
hypothesis claimed that the absence of language was very limited in the first language acquisition during
the early childhood exposure (citizendium.org, 2009). He believed that the brain would lose the
plasticity after two sides of the brain has developed specialized functions.

The Critical Period Hypothesis is Lenneberg’s response to the long-standing debate in language
acquisition over the extent to which the acquire language is biologically linked to age
(citizendium.org, 2009) Lenneberg proposed that the ability of brain to acquire a language is stopped at
puberty with the onset of brain lateralization. He refers that brain lateralization, which is a process
which the both sides of brain develop specialized function, in which after the process, the brain would
lose its plasticity as the function of the brain is set.

Lenneberg stated that if the child did not learn the language before the puberty, the language could
never be learned in a full and functional way. He proves his theory by referring to cases of feral children,
such as Genie. Discovered in the age of thirteen and a half in 1970 in an isolated and neglected living
condition, Genie did not had any form of communication, and she was neither able to speak nor write.
After being saved from her ordeal, she began to learn language slowly, but she never regained full
language capabilities.

According to Lenneberg, first language learners should receive exposure on their first language prior to
puberty for the best acquisition results. He contends that the critical period for learning a first language
would same apply to acquiring a second language Studies have shown that before the brain is fully
developed a second language can be learned more easily. However, while many people have been able
to master the syntax and vocabulary of a second language after puberty, not many achieve native-
speaker fluency, compared to first language learners, or bilinguals who start off at a young age. A
notable trait for FLL is that their phonological is the most obvious evidence for the critical period
hypothesis, as their learning a second language would be impacted by their first language accent.

Lenneberg’s works is still highly regarded as one of the most well regarded psycholinguistic argument of
language acquisition.

Krashen’s Theory of Second Language Acquisition

Stephen Krashen’s theory of second language acquisition has been of much debate in the
psycholinguistic circles. His theories are well regarded, and provide a different insight into how the mind
works in learning a second language.

The first of the five of Krashen’s theories is the Natural Order Hypothesis. Based on a powerful analysis
of research results, Krashen’s natural order hypothesis suggests that the acquisition of language,
especially the rules of language, follows a predictable natural order. For any given language, some
grammatical structures tend to be acquired earlier than others. This idea reflects Noam Chomsky’s
revolutionary notion that have a built-in Language Acquisition Device (LAD), which within the first year
of the children lives begins to enable them to understand and acquire language.

Because of the nature of the LAD, children tend to learn different structures at different levels as young
children. Researchers have found that the same pattern occurs for older learners – not a surprise to
seasoned language teachers! This is the “predictable natural order” of this hypothesis.

Secondly, is the Acquisition or Learning Hypothesis. The distinction between acquisition and learning is
the most fundamental of all the hypotheses in Krashen’s theory, since it suggests that language comes
to children in two rather different ways. Acquisition is one. Language can be acquired by using it for real
communication while learning, which he describes as “knowing about” language, is quite a different
thing.

Acquisition is the product of a subconscious process very similar to the process children undergo when
they acquire their first language. It requires meaningful interaction in the target language-natural
communication, in which speakers concentrate not on the form of their utterances, but in the
communicative act. Learning, on the other hand, provides conscious knowledge about the target
language. It is therefore less important than acquisition for basic communication, but it still plays an
important role in language learning. In short, learning is likely to occur in the “study” segment of an
English lesson, while acquisition takes place during language activation.

Thirdly, is the Monitor Hypothesis. The fundamental distinction between acquisition and learning leads
directly to the next hypothesis. The monitor hypothesis relegates language learning (that is, a student’s
responses to what the teacher teaches) to a secondary place in the scheme of language learning.Â
The monitor hypothesis is the idea that conscious learning – that is, the outcome of grammar instruction
and other activities that were the traditional stock in trade of the language teacher – serve only as a
monitor or an editor for the language student. Real acquisition takes place as “meaningful interaction in
the target language – natural communication – in which speakers is concerned not with the form of
their utterances but with the messages they are conveying and understanding.”Â

Following that is the Input Hypothesis. The input hypothesis suggests that people acquire language in
only one way: by understanding messages, or by receiving ‘comprehensible input’. According to the
input hypothesis, learner’s progress by receiving second language input that is one step beyond their
current stage of linguistic competence. Acquisition for learners with language knowledge “i” can only
take place if they are exposed to comprehensible input at a slightly higher level, which Krashen
describes as level “i + 1”.Â

And last but not least, the Affective Filter Hypothesis. Finally, the Affective Filter Hypothesis proposes
that a mental block caused by affective or emotional factors can prevent input from reaching the
student’s language acquisition device. The affective filter hypothesis says that affective variables like
self-confidence and anxiety play a role in language acquisition. When the filter is up, that is, when
negative emotional factors are in play, language acquisition suffers while when the filter is down,
language acquisition benefits.

Similarities between First Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning

There have been many arguments about language acquisition, some claims that acquisition and learning
is the same process, whilst some beg to differ. Here are some similarities between first language
acquisition and second language learning that have been argued before.

Physical process wise, the learners of both first language and second language hear the spoken language
and begin to understand how it sounds, the mind works to grasp the basic sounds, which in turn,
facilitates learning. The learners pick up words and phrases in the language and begin to build up a
vocabulary, this is then followed up by grasping the grammatical structure and learning how to form
simple and complex sentences in the language. Subsequently the learners are eventually able to
understand new words by context and they are able to express complex ideas and thoughts in the
language, and finally, learn to pick up writing and reading skills in the language (Panse, 2010).

Universal grammar may influence learning either independently or through the first language in
second language learning. For both first language acquisition and second language learning there
are predictable stages, and particular structures, are acquired in a set order. Individuals may move
more slowly or quickly through these stages, but they cannot skip ahead.

Making errors is a part of learning. Learners need to make and test hypotheses about language to
build an internal representation of the language. In the initial stages of learning, learners may use
chunks of language without breaking them down or processing them as independent units. In later
stages, they may make new errors as they begin to process the parts of each chunk according to the
rules of their language system. For example, a learner may start out using the correct form of an
irregular verb as part of a language chunk, but later overgeneralize and place a regular affix on that
same verb.

Differences between First Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning

Many studies addressed the distinction between first language acquisition and second language
learning. The first distinction is the natural process in which first language learners acquire their
knowledge naturally and the conscious process in which second language learners learn their second
language.

First language acquisition is a natural process which is genetically triggered at the most crucial stage of
the child’s cognitive development in which children subconsciously process and develop the linguistic
knowledge of the setting they live in and are unaware of grammatical rules.

In contrast, second language learning takes place where the target language is the language spoken in
the language spoken in the language community that differs from the first language. Second language is
not genetically triggered in any way unless the child grows up bilingually in which case, it is not
considered second language learning at all.

First language acquisition is mostly passive. Children usually listen to the people around them, their
speech melody, their sounds, their words, and their sentence structures. Before the child can even read
or write a single word in his first language, he is already using an impressive vocabulary and many
important grammar structures. Some people never learn how to read or write but can still speak their
first language fluently. Most babies learn rules while listening to the people around them. They are able
to distinguish sentence structures at the early age of seven months as experiments have shown. They
also pick up new words from their surrounding people. At the age of six, most children have acquired
their native language(s) without any effort.

Second language learning, on the other hand, is an active process. Second language learners need to
learn vocabulary and grammar in order to achieve their goals. Most people will need an instructor,
either a teacher at school or the instructions of a course book or audio course. For those learners to
achieve fluency or near fluency in a second language, it requires years of studying and likely a long stay
in another country. Many people will never reach anywhere near fluency with any second language.
Most experts see the ages between three to four years as the critical age when first language
acquisition ends and second language learning begins.

Another area of difference between first language acquisition and second language learning is input –
specifically the quality and quantity of input. Language learning process depends on the input frequency
and regularity. The quantity of exposure to a target language a child gets is immense compared to the
amount an adult receives. A child hears the language all day every day, whereas an adult learner may
only hear the target language in the classroom – which could be as little as three hours a week. Even if
one looks at an adult in a total submersion situation the quan
First Language Acquisition Theories
Info: 5525 words (22 pages) Essay
Published: 13th Jul 2017 in English Language

Reference this

Share this: Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp

Imagine a blank template, a white sheet of paper, thats how human being starts off.
From a crying baby in a cradle, to babbling, to simple single words, slowly progressing
into two-words, then finally a complete sentence, ever wonder how one acquires the
ability to produce the language? Linguists throughout the ages have tried to find out
how does one ACQUIRE a language, is it a deep structure as claimed by Kimball? Or is it
an innate ability, a build-in human capacity propagated by Chomsky?

Get Help With Your Essay

If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is
here to help!

Find out more

Various theories have arose since language studies came to fore, and the ability to
acquire language has interested various parties since the dawn of man. From the dunes
of Egypt, Psammeticus, the Pharaoh during the 7th century BC, believed language
was inborn and that children isolated from birth from any linguistic influence would
develop the language they had been born with. Fast forward to the 15th century, King
James VÂ of Scotland performed a similar experiment; the children were reported to
have spoken good Hebrew. Akbar, a 16th century Mogul emperor of India, desired to
learn whether language was innate or acquired through exposure to the speech of
adults. He believed that language was learned by people listening to each other and
therefore a child could not develop language alone. So he ordered a house built for
two infants and stationed a mute nurse to care for them. The children did not acquire
speech, which seemed to prove Akbar’s hypothesis that language is acquired and does
not simply emerge spontaneously in the absence of exposure to speech.Â

Henceforth, modern linguists have been trying hard to crack the codes which govern the
acquisition and learning of a language. Theories ranging from Jean Piaget’s Cognitive
Theory(1929), Skinner’s Behaviorist Theory (1957), to Chomsky’s The Innateness
Hypothesis, and Lambert’s Critical Period Hypothesis(1967) for first language
acquisition, and finally Krashen’s 5 hypothesis of second language learning have paved a
way for an insight, a way to unravel the way the mind works in acquiring and learning a
language -which happen to be distinct from one another-, and here, we will be looking
at the theories that have been the workhorse of language acquisition and learning.

Definition
First Language Acquisition is touted by linguist as the process of acquiring a language
via exposure whilst young. First language is defined as the primary language -not
necessarily mother tongue- which the speaker first acquires and use on a constant basis.
According to Lennenberg (1967) the language that one picks up during the critical
period will generally be the person’s first language. The Canadian census agrees that the
first language that one acquires during childhood is the first language.

A second language, however, can be a related language or a totally different one from
the first language. Language acquisition is a cognitive process cognitive process
(reasoning, perception, judgment and memory) of “acquiring” a language. It is usually
done subconsciously, with the mind slowly structuring the template to mold the
language into shape. Language learning however, means a person is trying to learn the
language consciously through practice, training, or experience.

Amongst the most prominent theories of language acquisition that has been put
forward by linguists is the:

Cognitive Development Theory

According to Jean Piaget’s cognitive theory (1970s), language is a subordinate part of
cognitive development. Language is mapped onto an individual’s set of prior cognitive
structures. The principles of language are no different from other cognitive principles. A
person becomes capable of abstraction, of formal thinking which excels concrete
experience and direct perception (Freeservers.com, 2012). Firstly, the child becomes
aware of a concept, they acquire the words and patterns to convey the concept. Simple
ideas are expressed earlier than more complex ideas even if they are grammatically
more complicated. Piaget described four distinct stages of childhood cognitive
development which include sensorimotor stage, pre-operational stage, concrete
operational stage and formal operational stage and relates them to a person’s ability to
understand and assimilate new information (Springhouse Corporation, 1990). First
language learners are thought to creatively use their skills of cognition in order to figure
out the second language of their own. For adult learners, they have the ability to
abstract, classify and generalize gives them an advantage to systematically solve
problems. Adult language learners rely on their cognitive activities of general
information processing because their Language Acquisition Device gradually becomes
unavailable for them (Hadley, 2002).

Piaget claims that the human mind has a template known as the schema: The
representation in the mind of a set of perceptions, ideas and /or actions which go
together (Atherton , 2011). The schema helps individuals understand the various
happenings around them, an understanding of oneself (self-schemata), other people
(people schemata), events/situations (event schemata) and roles/occupations (role
schemata).

According to psychologists, cognitive development starts at adaptation, followed by

assimilation and accommodation close after. Assimilation is the process of incorporating
new information into pre-existing schema, more often than not leading to
overgeneralization. For example, the child refers to a whale as a fish, due to the fact the
whales and fish, have fins and lives in the ocean. After assimilation, comes
accommodation, whereby the mind is able to differentiate concepts made during the
prior phase.

Piaget contends there are four stages of cognitive development which are sensorimotor
stage (birth-2years), pre-operational stage (2-7 years), concrete operational stage (7-
11years) and formal operational stage (11 years and up).

The first stage or the sensorimotor stage is the stage where a child learns about
himself and his environment through motor and reflex movements. The child’s thoughts
are derived from movement and sensation (Springhouse Corporation, 1990). They learn
and progress by doing simple motor movements such as looking, grasping, crying,
listening, touching and sucking. Further down the road, they will also gain a basic
understanding of the relationships of cause and effect. Object permanence appears
around 9 months and further physical development allows the children to begin
developing new intellectual abilities. Piaget contends that some basic language abilities
are developed at the end of this stage.

Pre-operational stage follows after the child reaches at the age of 2. During that stage,
a child’s intelligence is demonstrated through the use of symbols, and his language use
matures, advancing to basic sentences. The child’s memory and imagination are
developed to a certain extend but thinking is done in non-logical and non-reversible
manner.

The following stage is the concrete operational stage -where the child reaches the age
of 7-11-: Children then develops seven types of conservation, namely number, length,
liquid, mass, weight, area and volume. The child’s intelligence is further demonstrated
through logical and systematic manipulation of symbols related to concrete objects, and
his operational thinking develops exponentially, however, his thinking at this stage is still
concrete.

The final stage in the cognitive development is the formal operational stage, where
the child’s developed intelligence is demonstrated through the logical use of symbols
related to abstract concepts. This is reflected in his/her speech as in choice of words,
and capability of metaphorical usage.

Humanistic Approach (Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers)

Abraham Maslow proposed the humanistic approach as a method of language
acquisition and learning. The theory takes into considerations of the feelings, motivation
levels and confidence of a person According to Carl Rogers however, the person’s
consciousness of their own identity is about behavior central to oneself. Rogers believed
that people could only fulfill their potential for growth if they had basically positive self-
regard. On the contrary Abraham Maslow’s believed that those who satisfied all their
needs might become self-actualizers (Sammons, n.d.).

Humanistic approach differs it tries to encourage positive emotions that help language
acquisition such as self-esteem, motivation, empathy and risk taking. It also tries to
dampen negative emotions such as low self-confidence, nervousness and mental
inhibition (Villatoro, n.d.) and in a sense, it coincides with Skinner’s Behaviorist Theory.

Behaviorist Theory
B.F. Skinner described learning as a behavior produced by learner’s response to stimuli
which can be reinforced with positive or negative feedback to environmental stimuli.
Skinner added that learning can be observed, explained, and predicted through
observing antecedents and consequences. Both positive reinforcement and negative
reinforcement increase the probability that the antecedent behavior will happen again.
In contrast, punishment (both positive and negative) decreases the likelihood that the
antecedent behavior will happen again. Positive indicates the application of a stimulus;
Negative indicates the withholding of a stimulus. Learning is therefore defined as a
change in behavior in the learner. Punishment is sometimes used in eliminating or
reducing incorrect actions, followed by clarifying desired actions. Educational effects of
behaviorism are important in developing basic skills and foundations of understanding
in all subject areas and in classroom management.Â
Skinner’s Behaviorist approach contends that children learn language through imitation,
repetition and the reinforcement of the successful linguistics attempts. Mistakes are
considered to be the result of imperfect learning or insufficient opportunities for
practice. In such, that a child having a pleasant learning experience (such as rewards or
praise) is positive reinforced. Through that positively reinforcing stimulus, a child’s
learning capacity is triggered. However, unpleasant experiences (such as punishment)
serve as negative reinforcements, and cause learners to avoid undesirable responses to
stimuli. As such, continuous reinforcement increases the rate of learning, be it positive
or negative; a child will respond to different triggers and with experience, remember
what is to do and to avoid. Hence, intermittent reinforcement helps a child to a longer
retention of what is learned.

Skinner contends that both positive and negative reinforcement can shape behavior,
and this in turn affects their language acquisition capability, as such, a lack of any
reinforcement can also shape behavior. If people receive no acknowledgement of their
behavior, they will likely change that behavior until they receive some kind of
reinforcement.

Behaviorism gave birth to a stimulus-response (S-R) theory which sees language as a set
of structures and acquisition as a matter of habit formation. Ignoring any internal
mechanisms, it takes into account the linguistic environment and the stimuli it produces.
Learning is an observable behavior which is automatically acquired by means of stimulus
and response in the form of mechanical repetition. Thus, to acquire a language is to
acquire automatic linguistic habits. According to Johnson (2004:18), “Behaviorism
undermined the role of mental processes and viewed learning as the ability to
inductively discover patterns of rule-governed behavior from the examples provided to
the learner by his or her environment”. Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991:266) consider
that S-R models offer “little promises as explanations of SLA, except for perhaps
pronunciation and the rote-memorization of formulae” (Menezes, V. n.d.).

This view of language learning gave birth to research on contrastive analysis, especially
error analysis, the main focus of which is the interference of one’s first language in the
target language. An important reaction to behaviorism was the interlanguage studies, as
the simple comparison between first and second language neither explained nor
described the language produced by SL learners. Interlanguage studies will be present
in other SLA perspectives, as the concern of the area has been mainly with the
acquisition of grammatical morphemes or specific language structures.

Behaviorist Theory for Second Language Learning

Under this theory, it is believed that the second language learning learner tries to
imitate what he hears and practices the second language regularly to develop habits in
the language. This theory also believes that learners try to relate their knowledge of the
native language to the second language and this could lead to positive as well as
negative results. However the imitation of one language with the other is not
recommended as this does not help in real life situations. The behaviorists believe that
First language learners (FLL) consists of learners imitating what they hear and develop
habits in the first language (FL) by routine practice. In this view, the learners are thought
to relate what they know of their first language to what they recognize in the second
language. “Positive transfer” is a result of similarities between the first language and the
second language, because habits used in the first language easily transfer to the second
language. On the other hand, “negative transfer is caused by differences between the
first language and the second language, because errors result from using habits from
the first language in the second language.

Problems with this view of FLL include the fact that imitation does not help the learner in
real-life situations. Learners are continually required to form sentences they have never
previously seen. A finite number of pre-practiced sentences is not enough to carry on
conversation, not even with an instructor. Another problem with this view is that many
of the errors made by FL learners are not based on the first language. Instead, the
problems most often encountered by learners resemble errors made by children during
the period of first language acquisition.

The Innateness Hypothesis

Noam Chomsky believes that children are born with a language acquisition device (LAD)
which encodes the major principles of a language and its grammatical structure into the
child’s brain and thus possesses an inherited ability to learn any human language. He
claims that certain linguistic structures which children use so accurately must be already
imprinted on the child’s mind. Children have then only to learn new vocabulary and
apply the syntactic structures from the LAD to form sentences. Chomsky points out
that a child could not possibly learn a language through imitation alone because the
language spoken around them is highly irregular – adult’s speech is often broken up
and even sometimes ungrammatical. Chomsky’s theory applies to all languages as they
all contain nouns, verbs, consonants and vowels and children appear to be ‘hard-wired’
to acquire the grammar.Â

Chomsky defends the innate hypothesis in terms of an elaborated linguistic theory

which postulates not only a general ability in humans to acquire language, but also the
ability that comes from a specific language acquisition device in the brain, equipped
already at birth with specific grammatical rules and principles.

The main arguments in favour of the innateness hypothesis are first, language
acquisition would be difficult or even impossible without an innate grammar: “How do
we come to have such rich and specific knowledge, or such intricate systems of belief
and understanding, when the evidence available to us is so meager?” (Cook, 1985).

Chomsky claims that the mere existence of language universals supports the hypothesis
that these are innate, and most essentially all humans acquire language, and no other
animals do.

The LAD is a hypothetical brain mechanism that Chomsky suggested to explain human
acquisition of the syntactic structure of language. This mechanism endows children with
the capacity to derive the syntactic structure and rules of their native language rapidly
and accurately from the impoverished input provided by adult language users. The
device is comprised of a finite set of variables which languages vary, which are set at
different levels for different languages on the basis of language exposure. The LAD
reflects Chomsky’s underlying assumption that many aspects of language are universal
(common to all languages and cultures) and constrained by innate core knowledge
about language called Universal Grammar.Â

Universal grammar is defined by Chomsky as “the system of principles, conditions and

rules that are elements or properties of all human languages” (Cook, 1985). The
language properties inherent in the human mind make up ‘Universal Grammar’, which
consists, not of particular rules or of a particular grammar, but of a set of general
principles that apply to all grammars and that leave certain parameters open; Universal
Grammar sets the limits within which human languages can vary.

Universal Grammar present in the child’s mind grows into the adult’s knowledge of the
language so long as certain environmental ‘triggers’ are provided; it is not learnt in the
same way that, say, riding a bicycle or playing the guitar are learnt: ‘a central part of
what we call “learning” is actually better understood as the growth of cognitive
structures along an internally directed course under the triggering and potentially
shaping effect of the environment’ (Cook, 1985).

Language acquisition is the growth of the mental organ of language triggered by certain
language experiences. Hence the theory of Universal Grammar is frequently referred to
as part of biology. Indeed the theory is not dissimilar from ideas current in biology on
other issues, for instance the view that ‘Embryogenesis may then be seen as the
progressive, orderly manifestation of the knowledge which is latent in the egg’ (Cook,
1985).

Find out how UKEssays.com can help you!

Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may
have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have
a service perfectly matched to your needs.

View our services

So, to acquire language, the child needs not only Universal Grammar but also evidence
about a particular language; he needs to hear sentences of English to know how to fix
the parameter for the order of Verb, Subject, and Object. The evidence he encounters
can be positive or negative (Cook, 1985).Â

By using the same language principles, a French child constructs a grammar of French,
an English child a grammar of English. The two grammars represent different choices
within the guidelines set by Universal Grammar, different applications of the same
linguistic principles in response to different environments; ‘Experience is necessary to fix
the parameters of core grammar’ (Cook, V, 1985). But the children also have to learn
aspects of language that are peripheral, that do not conform to Universal Grammar. The
child’s mind ‘prefers’ to adopt rules based on the handy set of principles with which it is
equipped; they are in a sense the easy way out, and need only triggering experience to
be learnt. By listening to the language around him, he can decide how to fix the
parameter of sentence order as SVO or SOV, for instance. His mind ‘prefers’ not to
adopt peripheral solutions, as they fall outside his pre-programmed instructions; they
are more demanding. This may be interpreted through the concept of markedness: the
child prefers to learn ‘unmarked’ knowledge that conforms to Universal Grammar, rather
than ‘marked’ knowledge that is less compatible with it.Â

Chomsky’s work has been highly controversial, rekindling the age-old debate over
whether language exists in the mind before experience. Despite its few limitations, The
Innateness Hypothesis is rich enough to provide a substantial idea of how a child
acquires his/her first language.

The Critical Period Hypothesis

According to Eric Lenneberg’s Cirtical Period Hypothesis in 1967, the hypothesis
theorized that the acquisition of language is an innate process that determined
biologically. The notion of critical period was connected only in the first language
acquisition (freeservers.com, 2012). Lenneberg assumed that the structural
reorganizations within the brain were developed only from roughly the age of two to
puberty which was around thirteen or fourteen. Language skills which were neither
learned nor being taught during this age would remain permanently undeveloped
(Schouten, 2011). Lenneberg’s hypothesis claimed that the absence of language was
very limited in the first language acquisition during the early childhood exposure
(citizendium.org, 2009). He believed that the brain would lose the plasticity after two
sides of the brain has developed specialized functions.

The Critical Period Hypothesis is Lenneberg’s response to the long-standing debate in

language acquisition over the extent to which the
acquire language is biologically linked to age (citizendium.org, 2009) Lenneberg
proposed that the ability of brain to acquire a language is stopped at puberty with the
onset of brain lateralization. He refers that brain lateralization, which is a process which
the both sides of brain develop specialized function, in which after the process, the brain
would lose its plasticity as the function of the brain is set.

Lenneberg stated that if the child did not learn the language before the puberty, the
language could never be learned in a full and functional way. He proves his theory by
referring to cases of feral children, such as Genie. Discovered in the age of thirteen and a
half in 1970 in an isolated and neglected living condition, Genie did not had any form of
communication, and she was neither able to speak nor write. After being saved from her
ordeal, she began to learn language slowly, but she never regained full language
capabilities.

According to Lenneberg, first language learners should receive exposure on their first
language prior to puberty for the best acquisition results. He contends that the critical
period for learning a first language would same apply to acquiring a second language
Studies have shown that before the brain is fully developed a second language can be
learned more easily. However, while many people have been able to master the syntax
and vocabulary of a second language after puberty, not many achieve native-speaker
fluency, compared to first language learners, or bilinguals who start off at a young age.
A notable trait for FLL is that their phonological is the most obvious evidence for the
critical period hypothesis, as their learning a second language would be impacted by
their first language accent.

Lenneberg’s works is still highly regarded as one of the most well regarded
psycholinguistic argument of language acquisition.

Krashen’s Theory of Second Language Acquisition

Stephen Krashen’s theory of second language acquisition has been of much debate in
the psycholinguistic circles. His theories are well regarded, and provide a different
insight into how the mind works in learning a second language.

The first of the five of Krashen’s theories is the Natural Order Hypothesis. Based on a
powerful analysis of research results, Krashen’s natural order hypothesis suggests that
the acquisition of language, especially the rules of language, follows a predictable
natural order. For any given language, some grammatical structures tend to be acquired
earlier than others. This idea reflects Noam Chomsky’s revolutionary notion that have a
built-in Language Acquisition Device (LAD), which within the first year of the children
lives begins to enable them to understand and acquire language.

Because of the nature of the LAD, children tend to learn different structures at different
levels as young children. Researchers have found that the same pattern occurs for older
learners – not a surprise to seasoned language teachers! This is the “predictable natural
order” of this hypothesis.

Secondly, is the Acquisition or Learning Hypothesis. The distinction between acquisition

and learning is the most fundamental of all the hypotheses in Krashen’s theory, since it
suggests that language comes to children in two rather different ways. Acquisition is
one. Language can be acquired by using it for real communication while learning, which
he describes as “knowing about” language, is quite a different thing.

Acquisition is the product of a subconscious process very similar to the process children
undergo when they acquire their first language. It requires meaningful interaction in the
target language-natural communication, in which speakers concentrate not on the form
of their utterances, but in the communicative act. Learning, on the other hand, provides
conscious knowledge about the target language. It is therefore less important than
acquisition for basic communication, but it still plays an important role in language
learning. In short, learning is likely to occur in the “study” segment of an English lesson,
while acquisition takes place during language activation.

Thirdly, is the Monitor Hypothesis. The fundamental distinction between acquisition and
learning leads directly to the next hypothesis. The monitor hypothesis relegates
language learning (that is, a student’s responses to what the teacher teaches) to a
secondary place in the scheme of language learning.Â

The monitor hypothesis is the idea that conscious learning – that is, the outcome of
grammar instruction and other activities that were the traditional stock in trade of the
language teacher – serve only as a monitor or an editor for the language student. Real
acquisition takes place as “meaningful interaction in the target language – natural
communication – in which speakers is concerned not with the form of their utterances
but with the messages they are conveying and understanding.”Â

Following that is the Input Hypothesis. The input hypothesis suggests that people
acquire language in only one way: by understanding messages, or by receiving
‘comprehensible input’. According to the input hypothesis, learner’s progress by
receiving second language input that is one step beyond their current stage of linguistic
competence. Acquisition for learners with language knowledge “i” can only take place if
they are exposed to comprehensible input at a slightly higher level, which Krashen
describes as level “i + 1”.Â

And last but not least, the Affective Filter Hypothesis. Finally, the Affective Filter
Hypothesis proposes that a mental block caused by affective or emotional factors can
prevent input from reaching the student’s language acquisition device. The affective
filter hypothesis says that affective variables like self-confidence and anxiety play a role
in language acquisition. When the filter is up, that is, when negative emotional factors
are in play, language acquisition suffers while when the filter is down, language
acquisition benefits.

Similarities between First Language Acquisition and

Second Language Learning
There have been many arguments about language acquisition, some claims that
acquisition and learning is the same process, whilst some beg to differ. Here are some
similarities between first language acquisition and second language learning that have
been argued before.

Physical process wise, the learners of both first language and second language hear the
spoken language and begin to understand how it sounds, the mind works to grasp the
basic sounds, which in turn, facilitates learning. The learners pick up words and phrases
in the language and begin to build up a vocabulary, this is then followed up by grasping
the grammatical structure and learning how to form simple and complex sentences in
the language. Subsequently the learners are eventually able to understand new words
by context and they are able to express complex ideas and thoughts in the language,
and finally, learn to pick up writing and reading skills in the language (Panse, 2010).

Universal grammar may influence learning either independently or through the first
language in second language learning. For both first language acquisition and second
language learning there are predictable stages, and particular structures, are acquired
in a set order. Individuals may move more slowly or quickly through these stages, but
they cannot skip ahead.

Making errors is a part of learning. Learners need to make and test hypotheses about
language to build an internal representation of the language. In the initial stages of
learning, learners may use chunks of language without breaking them down or
processing them as independent units. In later stages, they may make new errors as
they begin to process the parts of each chunk according to the rules of their language
system. For example, a learner may start out using the correct form of an irregular
verb as part of a language chunk, but later overgeneralize and place a regular affix on
that same verb.

Differences between First Language Acquisition and

Second Language Learning
Many studies addressed the distinction between first language acquisition and second
language learning. The first distinction is the natural process in which first language
learners acquire their knowledge naturally and the conscious process in which second
language learners learn their second language.

First language acquisition is a natural process which is genetically triggered at the most
crucial stage of the child’s cognitive development in which children subconsciously
process and develop the linguistic knowledge of the setting they live in and are unaware
of grammatical rules.

In contrast, second language learning takes place where the target language is the
language spoken in the language spoken in the language community that differs from
the first language. Second language is not genetically triggered in any way unless the
child grows up bilingually in which case, it is not considered second language learning
at all.

First language acquisition is mostly passive. Children usually listen to the people
around them, their speech melody, their sounds, their words, and their sentence
structures. Before the child can even read or write a single word in his first language, he
is already using an impressive vocabulary and many important grammar structures.
Some people never learn how to read or write but can still speak their first language
fluently. Most babies learn rules while listening to the people around them. They are
able to distinguish sentence structures at the early age of seven months as experiments
have shown. They also pick up new words from their surrounding people. At the age of
six, most children have acquired their native language(s) without any effort.
Second language learning, on the other hand, is an active process. Second language
learners need to learn vocabulary and grammar in order to achieve their goals. Most
people will need an instructor, either a teacher at school or the instructions of a course
book or audio course. For those learners to achieve fluency or near fluency in a second
language, it requires years of studying and likely a long stay in another country. Many
people will never reach anywhere near fluency with any second language. Most experts
see the ages between three to four years as the critical age when first language
acquisition ends and second language learning begins.

Another area of difference between first language acquisition and second language
learning is input – specifically the quality and quantity of input. Language learning
process depends on the input frequency and regularity. The quantity of exposure to a
target language a child gets is immense compared to the amount an adult receives. A
child hears the language all day every day, whereas an adult learner may only hear the
target language in the classroom – which could be as little as three hours a week. Even if
one looks at an adult in a total submersion situation the quan