Theoretical Perspectives on Second Language Learning

Abstract Contending theories are typical of disciplines that endeavor to explain multifaceted phenomena. Similarly, research on second language (L2) acquisition reflects the complexity of learning a language other than one's native tongue. Is there one unified theory of L2 acquisition? What are the theoretical bases of various approaches to L2 acquisition? What are the practical implications for L2 teaching and material development? This article examines several theoretical approaches which have evolved in the field in the past three decades and their practical implications for L2 teaching. Background In the past twenty-five years, there has been much growth in research accompanied by broader views of language, consideration of its dynamic nature, and attention to many contexts of L2 learning (Kaplan, 2002). Krashen (1981, 1982, 1985, 1990) has suggested theoretical perspectives, articulated in a set of interrelated hypotheses about L2 acquisition which many recognized at that time as the most influential in the field (e.g., Omaggio Hadley 1993; Swaffar and Bacon 1993). Although proficiency in L2 is now understood not only as familiarity with its linguistic system, but also as the ability to communicate effectively in the target language (Ellis, 1997; Mitchell & Myles, 1998), many researchers (e.g., Juffs, 2002; Schwartz, 1999; White et al. 1997) advocate the role of formal linguistics in the explanation of L2 competence. At the same time, cognitive models present learning as an active process in which learners consciously select and organize information, relate it to what they already know, retain the information they consider to be important, use the information in appropriate contexts, and reflect on their own success in learning (Schmidt, 1990; Harrington, 2002). A sociocultural approach to language learning (Warschauer, 1997; Lantolf, 2002; Savignon & Sysoyev, 2002) places L2 acquisition in a context of social practices. In addition, because of recent developments in educational technology, according to Chapelle (2002), in the twenty-first century, many concepts in applied linguistics are likely to be examined and developed with CALL (computer assisted language learning). Language Acquisition vs. Learning According to Krashen (1981), adult L2 learners have two means for internalizing a target language. The first is "acquisition," a subconscious and intuitive process, similar to that used by a child to "pick up" a language. The second is conscious "learning," in which a learner attends to form and is aware of his/her own learning process; the conscious learning processes and the subconscious acquisition processes are mutually exclusive (1982). Thus, the scholar uses his claim of "no interface" between learning and acquisition as the principal argument for recommending large doses of acquisition activities in the classroom, and asserts that speech would "emerge" after the acquirer had been exposed to "enough comprehensible input" (1985, p. 65). He further suggests that the best acquisition occurs in environments where anxiety is low and defensiveness is absent, and proposes the Affective Filter Hypothesis. The Monitor Model, the Input Hypothesis, and the Affective Filter Hypothesis have been hotly disputed both by linguists and psychologists (Gregg, 1984; McLaughlin, 1990; Odlin, 1986), to name but a few. For example, Brumfit (1992) reports that L2 learning in a school context requires active participation of learners and teachers alike, and emphasizes the role of interaction, feedback, and "intake" in L2 learning. In addition, Juffs (2002) asserts that formal linguistic theory has a "crucial role to play" (p. 103) in the explanation of L2 competence. The scholar emphasizes that although the results of this research do not have direct pedagogical application, they can help us understand the process of L2 acquisition and may assist teachers in understanding learners' progress in the classroom. …