- Distinguish conscious learning from unconscious acquisition.
- Explain the natural order, monitor, comprehension, and affective-filter hypotheses.
- Identify the three conditions required for monitor use.
- Apply supported techniques for making language input more comprehensible.
The Acquisition–Learning Framework
The five language-acquisition hypotheses discussed here come from Stephen Krashen. A scientific hypothesis is a best guess rather than an absolute certainty; scientists use evidence to support a hypothesis or reject it and develop a new one.
How do learning and acquisition differ, and can the same rule exist in both knowledge systems?
Learning is conscious knowledge, while acquisition is unconscious knowledge. A person can possess both kinds of knowledge of the same rule.
The Natural Order Hypothesis
The natural order hypothesis concerns unconscious acquisition rather than conscious learning. It holds that grammatical structures are acquired unconsciously in a fixed order, although language rules can be consciously studied in any chosen order.
- The English plural -s is acquired relatively early.
- The English present-progressive -ing form is acquired relatively early.
- Some English acquirers may never acquire the third-person singular -s unconsciously.
A learner consciously studies a late-acquired structure before an early-acquired structure. Does this contradict the natural order hypothesis?
No. Rules can be consciously studied in any chosen order, while the natural order hypothesis concerns the fixed order of unconscious acquisition.
The Monitor Hypothesis
- Listening and reading are forms of language input.
- Speaking and writing are forms of language output.
Conscious learning can correct an error in output before it is spoken or written. This monitor use requires three conditions to be present together.
- Knowledge of the relevant rule.
- Enough time to apply the relevant rule.
- Conscious attention to correctness.
Which three conditions must be present together for monitor use?
The person must know the relevant rule, have enough time to apply it, and consciously attend to correctness.
The Comprehension Hypothesis
The input hypothesis and the comprehension hypothesis are two names for the same hypothesis. The hypothesis holds that languages are acquired through understandable language input and predicts that understanding more language leads to acquiring more language.
If input contains some language slightly above an acquirer's current level but remains mostly understandable, which principle does it illustrate?
It illustrates i+1, which describes input slightly above the acquirer's current level; McQuillin describes ideal i+1 input as approximately 95% understandable.
The Affective Filter
Some people may fail to acquire language even when they receive comprehensible input. The affective-filter hypothesis proposes an emotional filter that can prevent input from reaching the language-acquisition system.
- Anxiety may contribute to an affective filter that obstructs acquisition.
- Low confidence in one's ability as a language learner may contribute to that obstruction.
- Low motivation may contribute to that obstruction.
McQuillin recommends a relaxed, comfortable, and safe classroom to avoid emotional obstruction of acquisition. Helping learners identify as members of the English-speaking community may also lower their affective filter.
A learner becomes afraid of mistakes and stops speaking after repeated correction. How can this be interpreted through the affective-filter hypothesis?
Repeated correction can make a learner afraid of mistakes and discourage speaking. McQuillin suggests that excessive teacher correction can raise the learner's affective filter.
Making Input Comprehensible
Nonverbal supports such as visuals and gestures can make language input more comprehensible. Clear speech supports comprehensible input, and speaking somewhat more slowly can help students understand more.
- Use relevant background knowledge to make language input easier to understand.
- Use stories to provide learners with comprehensible input.
- Provide comprehensible input with gradually increasing difficulty; this can lead students to acquire the language over time.
McQuillin describes English as closer to Spanish than to Farsi. He argues that this relative closeness makes English input more comprehensible to Spanish speakers than to Farsi speakers.
Which supported adjustments can make spoken language input more comprehensible for students?
A teacher can use visuals or gestures, speak clearly, speak somewhat more slowly, and draw on relevant background knowledge.
Common misconceptions
Watch out: Conscious learning automatically becomes unconscious acquisition.
Instead: Conscious learning does not automatically become unconscious acquisition.
Watch out: The order of conscious study must match the natural order of acquisition.
Instead: Rules can be consciously studied in any chosen order, while the natural order hypothesis concerns unconscious acquisition.
Watch out: Prolonged exposure produces acquisition even without comprehension.
Instead: In McQuillin's Spanish example, prolonged exposure without comprehension would not produce acquisition.
Lesson recap
- Learning is conscious knowledge; acquisition is unconscious knowledge.
- The natural order hypothesis concerns unconscious acquisition in a fixed order.
- Monitor use requires rule knowledge, enough time, and conscious attention to correctness.
- The comprehension hypothesis holds that languages are acquired through understandable language input.
- The affective-filter hypothesis proposes an emotional filter that can prevent input from reaching the language-acquisition system.
- Visuals, gestures, clear speech, somewhat slower speech, and relevant background knowledge can support comprehension.