Second Language Acquisition Theories and Teaching Practice: How Do They Fit?
Author(s): Renate A. Schulz
Source: The Modern Language Journal , Spring, 1991, Vol. 75, No. 1 (Spring, 1991), pp.
17-26
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the National Federation of Modern Language Teachers
Associations
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/329831
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
National Federation of Modern Language Teachers Associations and Wiley are collaborating with
JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Modern Language Journal
This content downloaded from
122.53.61.63 on Thu, 02 Jun 2022 14:28:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Second Language Acquisition Theories
and Teaching Practice: How Do They Fit?
RENATE A. SCHULZ
Department of German
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721
acquired a functional proficiency in two non- then a college senior - was diagnosed as sufprimary languages be suddenly considered as
fering from Attention Deficit Disorder, a learnlacking in foreign language learning aptitude?
ing disability characterized, in her case, A
bycloser look at my daughter's second language
short attention span, easy distractability, poor
learning history may provide some explanation
motor coordination, poor handwriting, and
for the apparent inconsistency.
inconsistent spelling.' Results of the Woodcock-My daughter acquired German as a "mother
Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery indicated
tongue." That is, the language spoken to her
above average verbal ability and reading aptiby her mother up to about age seven was pretude, but a severe deficit in visual perceptual
dominantly German. In addition to the input
speed, and below average scores in math and
she received from her mother in the US, she
AT THE AGE OF TWENTY-TWO, MY DAUGHTER
written language aptitude. All other abilities
spent an average of about six weeks annually
tested, such as broad cognitive ability, reasonin Germany during her early childhood. Since
ing, memory, and knowledge aptitude, were
the age of seven, English became with rare
well within the average ranges.
exceptions the exclusive language in the home.
You may wonder about the relevance of my
My daughter did, however, continue to spend
intermittent summer vacations with German
daughter's learning disability to the topic of this
paper. Of interest is that, as a result of that
relatives. The two times she attempted to
learning disability diagnosis, my daughter re"learn" German as a foreign language in high
ceived a waiver for requirements in matheschool and college she did not do particularly
matics and foreign languages. Still more
interesting is, however, that my daughter--
well. At the time I gave the fault for her
mediocre performance to the teachers whowhose psychological test profile indicates in my opinion--were unable to deal with her
apparently little talent for learning a foreign
language--is functionally trilingual. She has
native fluency in English, rates probably a "ter-
minal two" on the ILR Scale in German, and
about a 1 + in Spanish.2 When she was diag-
nosed as lacking foreign language learning apti-
tude, she had already fulfilled her language
requirement and was enrolled in a third-year
Spanish composition course - with which she
did, however, have major problems.
A superficial examination of the facts
reported may lead one to doubt the construct
superior conversational fluency within the constraints of a grammar-oriented classroom.
My daughter's efforts to learn Spanish
started in high school, but she dropped the
course because she found the highly analytical
grammatical approach boring. She then took
the first two semesters at the university, completing both courses with a grade of C. After
her year of elementary college Spanish she
spent one summer in an intensive study pro-
gram in Mexico, and the following summer
holding summer employment in Costa Rica.
and predictive validities of the psychological
To make a long story short, my daughter has
tests used to determine learning disabilities. been successful in acquiring three languages in
How, after all, can an individual who has
a predominantly natural acquisition environment but has considerable problems learning
The Modern Language Journal, 75, i (1991)
0026-7902/91/0001/017 $1.50/0
?1991 The Modern LanguageJournal
a language in a formal school setting where the
instructional goals, activities, and tests emphasize analysis and mastery of the grammatical
code. Her experience has led me to reexamine
This content downloaded from
122.53.61.63 on Thu, 02 Jun 2022 14:28:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
18 The Modern Language Journal 75 (1991)
theoretical assumptions and research
pertainlectual processes;
4) those attempting a nativist
ing to the differences betweenornaturalistic
biological explanation,and
emphasizing inborn,
classroom language learning and
toabilities;
an attempt
genetic
and 5) those emphasizing the
to reconcile the conflicts between
prevalent
lanlearner
and learning strategies.
Because of
guage acquisition theories and teaching
space constraints,
practice.
I will limit myself to reviewWhy can practically all "normal"
ing five theoretical
children,
models which I believe most
adolescents, and young adults relevant
"acquire"
a lan-1) Acculturation/
to FL educators:
guage when immersed in the target
Pidginizationlanguage
Theory; 2) Linguistic Universals
Theory, particularly
it interfaces with Interculture, but so many fail to succeed
in a asclassroom setting? Why do people who have
language Theory; 3) Discourse Theory; 4) Cogacquired a second language in actual communi- nitive Theory; and 5) the Monitor Model.
cative contexts remember the language much
longer than individuals whose language experi- ACCULTURATION/PIDGINIZATION THEORY
ence was limited to a tutored setting? Are there
insights from L2 acquisition theory which can
The Acculturation/Pidginization Theor
be applied to instruction to make the classroom vanced, among others, by Schumann,
resemble more closely a natural acquisition that second language acquisition is part
acculturation process and that the degree
setting?
Unfortunately, theoretical inquiry and
guage proficiency is determined by the
empirical research into areas related to lanto which a learner acculturates to the targ
guage (TL) group.
guage acquisition orient themselves most often
This acculturation process is affected b
to L1 (native language) acquisition or to L2
social and psychological "distance" betwe
(second language) acquisition in a naturalistic
home and the foreign cultures. These soc
(non-tutored) setting. While scholars recognize
the differences inherent in the acquisition envipsychological variables determine the eff
guage learners will make to come into c
ronment when language development depends
on classroom instruction only, without the reinwith speakers of the TL and the degree to
they are open to the input they receive
forcement and support of a target language
of the factors which, according to Schu
setting and natural communicative constraints,
are believed to be conducive to positive
the psycholinguistic processes of acquiring a
distance are the perceived social equa
language (i.e., of gaining proficiency in a language) are believed to be similar, regardless of
between the L1 and L2 groups, the simi
between the native and TL cultures, low
whether the language is acquired in a classsiveness by the "outsiders" as a cultural
room, in a natural setting, or through classroom instruction with access to a natural
within the TL culture (i.e., easy integ
setting.
Let me provide a thumbnail sketch of some
and assimilation into the TL culture), po
currently prevalent theories which try to
explain, at least in part, how second or foreign
languages are learned. McLaughlin discusses
five of those theories: Interlanguage Theory,
Linguistic Universal Theory, Acculturation/
Pidginization Theory, Cognitive Theory, and
Krashen's Monitor Model. Ellis (2) adds several
more: Accommodation Theory, Discourse
Theory, the Variable Competence Model, and
the Neurofunctional Theory.3
Wode points out that language acquisition
theories fall into five general categories: 1) those
attempting a behavioristic explanation, emphasizing the role of conditioning; 2) those
attempting an interactionist explanation,
emphasizing communicative/social need,
purpose, and setting; 3) those attempting a cognitive explanation, emphasizing logical, intel-
attitudes toward each other, and an ex
tion by the L2 learner to stay in (or pos
travel to?) the TL area for an extended
Positive psychological distance is estab
if learners encounter neither language n
ture shock nor culture stress and if they
high motivation and ego permeability
task.
Acculturation Theory suggests that
social and psychological distance is great
when attitudes toward the TL and its sp
are negatively loaded and integrative m
tion is lacking, learners will have diffic
progressing beyond the early stages in la
development, and the language will s
pidginized (i.e., will fossilize in reduc
simplified forms).
Acculturation accounts mainly for natu
tic L2 acquisition. However, we need t
This content downloaded from
122.53.61.63 on Thu, 02 Jun 2022 14:28:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Renate
in
A.
mind
vation
Schulz
19
marked
structures would
need to occur much
the
import
in
the
L2
more frequently
in the input of the
learner than a
the less marked a
ones to assure
their acquisition.
might
play
simila
If,
indeed, all natural languages are conlanguage
learning.4
notion that affective factors determine the effort
strained by universal principles inherent in our
a student makes in and out of the classroom
genetic make-up, and if these principles can be
to obtain input and to use the language for
arranged in a certain "accessibility hierarchy,"
communicative purposes.
it follows that first and second language learners
should make similar errors at similar stages in
the acquisition process. This assumption is
indeed supported by a number of studies,
By examining surface featuresinvolving
of a wide
several different languages, examin-
LINGUISTIC UNIVERSALS THEORY
ing
theconinterlanguages (the language output at
range of human languages, linguists
are
tinuing to discover general sets of aprinciples
particular stage of linguistic development) of
variousof
learners
that apply to all languages. The theory
Lin- in naturalistic as well as in
learning situations. While error
guistic Universals, or Universal classroom
Grammar
Theory, tries to explain language analyses
acquisition
indicate that interlanguages are influencedinnate,
by a number of factors, studies have
(L1 and L2) by hypothesizing a shared,
a tendency for some errors to occur at
biological, linguistic component in shown
the genetic
make-up of homo sapiens which accounts
for
particular
stages of acquisition, regardless of the
learner's
mother tongue or age or the way the
these universally shared linguistic
features.
Universal Grammar Theory holdslanguage
"that the
was acquired. In other words, the
child starts with all the principles of
Universal
types
of errors made by L2 as well as FL
Grammar available" and that "the right
learners
enviare constrained by their universal
ronmental input at the right time furthers
grammar the
(14: p. 98). Here is where Universal
Theory interfaces with Interlanacquisition process" (14: pp. 93,Grammar
94). The
theory posits that Universal Grammar
guage
becomes
Theory.
operative in L1 as well as L2 acquisition, in
child language learning as well as INTERLANGUAGE
in that for THEORY
adults. While initially it was believed that this
"mental language organ," or languageSelinker
acquisi- defines interlanguage as a sep
linguistic
system, constructed by the lea
tion device (LAD), atrophies with the
onset of
theno
result
of five central cognitive proce
puberty, a number of studies indicate
qualilanguage transfer from the mother ton
transfer of training, resulting from spec
child learner, except in pronunciation ability.5
In fact, adults -because of increased channel
tures of instruction; 3) second language le
4) second language commun
capacity due to maturational factors - mightstrategies;
be
strategies; and 5) overgeneralization of th
the more efficient foreign language learners,
of the target language. Through error a
particularly if exposure time and input are
of speech and writing samples of learn
limited to that of a traditional language course.
various stages, researchers have found
In a totally naturalistic setting the child coninterlanguages reflect systematic patter
tinues to be superior, not because of a better
error and communication strategies. Man
functioning LAD, but, it is now believed,
these errors are developmental and will
because of differences (in quantity and quality)
tually disappear if the learner receives suf
in the available input.6
appropriate input.
What is of interest to us is that Linguistic
Universals Theory posits an inherent hierarchyInterlanguage forms found in early lan
acquisition can also be found in pidgi
of difficulty among the universal "rules" which
guages. The speakers of a pidgin lang
are dependent on the "degree of markedness,"
at a relatively early stage of in
or complexity, of a certain structure.' Itfossilize
is
believed that those structures which fall under
guage development because, it is believed
receive insufficient input and lack the m
the universal core grammar are less marked
tion or need to perfect their language skill
and more easily acquired than the structures
tative differences between the adult and the
their limited communication needs can be satisidiosyncratic to a particular language
(peripheral grammar). The more highly factorily fulfilled without grammatical accu-
This content downloaded from
122.53.61.63 on Thu, 02 Jun 2022 14:28:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
20 The Modern Language Journal 75 (1991)
racy. Continued comprehensible input,
however
exposed most
frequently];
(and, I assume, continued efforts
by
the acquires
lan- commonly
b) the
learner
guage learner to approximate theoccurring
standard
of and then later
formulas
the target language), can help learners
over-these into their
[stress added] analyses
come that stage and continue to component
move toward
parts;
closer approximation of the target
language.
c) the learner
is helped to construct senWhat are the implications of Interlanguage
tences vertically [i.e., by borrowing
Theory for FL teaching? Extended comprehensible
parts of speech of preceding discourse,
input helps learners shape their output
an
also knownto
as "scaffolding"]
.
increasingly closer approximation of the TL
COGNITIVE
norm. Formal instruction
(i.e.,THEORY
grammar
analysis and discrete-point grammar practice)
Rather than stressing innate, universal l
can temporarily improve performance on disguistic processes, affective factors, input,
crete-point tests, but apparently
has relatively
interaction as causative factors for second lan-
little influence on spontaneous language use.
guage development, Cognitive Theory sees
second language learning as a mental process,
leading through structured practice of various
Discourse theory posits that learners
developsubskills to automatization and
component
competence in a second language not
simply
integration
of linguistic patterns. While Disby absorbing input, but by actively participatcourse Theory posits that language is available
DISCOURSE THEORY
ing in communicative interaction,
by after it has been acquired or
fori.e.,
analysis
negotiating meaning and filling information
routinized, Cognitive Theory maintains that
gaps. Ellis (2) states a main hypothesis
of automatic or routinized only after
skills become
processes. Controlled analytical proDiscourse Theory, which applies toanalytical
L1 as well
as L2 acquisition: "The development of
the- forcesses
including, of course, structured pracmal linguistic devices for realizing
basic
tice
- are lanseen as "stepping stones" for automatic
guage function grows out of the interpersonal
processes use
(14: p. 135).
[stress added] to which language is put"
Rather than positing a hierarchical develop(p. 259).
ment of linguistic structures, such as suggested
Like other theories mentioned, Discourse
by Interlanguage Theory, Cognitive Theory
Theory addresses L2 acquisition in a naturalis- posits a hierarchy of complexity of cognitive
tic setting. We might nevertheless want to subskills which lead from controlled practice to
examine the principles advanced by Hatch and automatic processing of language. As the
summarized by Ellis (2: pp. 259-60) for impli- learner develops increasing degrees of mastery,
cations for foreign language learning:
he or she engages in a constant process of
1) SLA follows a "natural" route in syntacrestructuring to integrate new structures with
tical development. [Hatch believes this those previously learned. Cognitive learning
"natural" route is determined by the pre-
dictable discourse--which, of course,
thus is seen to consist of several different phases
where the learning tasks become refined,
restructured, and consolidated.8
learners engage.]
The notion that analysis and structured prac2) Native speakers adjust their speech in tice foster automatic processing of language and
order to negotiate meaning with non- are essential to foreign language development
native speakers [intuitively they speak in a classroom setting is not new. Increasingly,
more slowly, louder, use shorter sentences however, researchers question whether L2
includes predictable input - in which L2
and less complex structures.]
3) The conversational strategies used to
negotiate meaning, and the resulting
adjusted input, influence the rate and
route of SLA in a number of ways:
acquisition is a skill- similar to driving a car
or playing the piano--that can be mastered
exclusively through controlled operations of
subskills which lead eventually to their auto-
matic processing, i.e., to spontaneous com-
a) the learner learns the grammar of the municative language use. Cognitive Theory L2 in the same order as the frequency with a sprinkling of Discourse Theory and
order of the various features in the
behaviorist conditioning- seems to account
input [i.e., the learner masters first
most closely for what foreign language teachers
those structures to which he or she is
and current textbooks try to accomplish in
This content downloaded from
122.53.61.63 on Thu, 02 Jun 2022 14:28:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Renate
A.
Schulz
21
The Input
Hypothesis, in Krashen's words,
classroom
instructi
refers to his belief that "humans acquiredo
lanmatical
syllabus
through guage
analysis
an
in only one way --by understanding
messages, or
by receiving
'comprehensible
processing)
to
autom
albeit
limited
pract
input' .. ." (12: p. 2). Two corollaries
of the
of
Cognitive
Theory
Input Hypothesis (12:
p. 2) state:
ciently
reflected
in
t
1) Speaking is a result of acquisition and not
books.
Cognitive
The
its cause. Speech cannot be taught directly
continuing
restruc
but "emerges"
on its own as a result of
through
various
rec
building competence via comprehensible
other
theories
whic
input.
acquisition,
Cognitive
2) If input
is understood,
and there is enough
tain
spiral
or
cyclica
of
it,
the
necessary
grammar
skills,
where
the is automatiint
cally provided.
The language teacher
dent
permits
continu
need not attempt deliberately
to teach
the
approximation
to
the
next
structure
along
the
natural
orderroom
teaching
and
te
it will be provided
in just the right quansufficiently
recogniz
tities and
automatically reviewed
if the
refinement
with
con
Our
student receives a sufficient amount of
expectations
mastery
theory.
comprehensible
input.
are
not
of
supp
The Monitor Hypothesis holds that formal
learning has no effect on acquisition except that
THE MONITOR MODEL
it can serve as a monitor or editor for the
learner's output, provided 1) there is sufficient
The most ambitious and widely known
- the
as focus of the interaction is on form
time; 2)
well as presently the most controversial
- theory
rather
than meaning; and 3) the learner knows
theFL
rule
in question.
which attempts to account for L2 and
acquisition is Krashen's Monitor Model. This
Thetheory
Affective Filter Hypothesis posits a mental screen
between the learner and the environis also the only one from which direct
pedagogi-
cal extrapolations have been madement
in the
sowhich
is activated by affective factors
called Natural Approach (13). Since
the self-confidence, etc.) and which
(e.g., anxiety,
Monitor Model has received extensive atten-
controls the amount of input a student is
tion (laudatory and critical) in the professional
exposed to and the amount of input a student
literature, I provide only a brief summary ofconverts into intake. A high affective filter
its five main tenets.
inhibits acquisition, a low affective filter proKrashen's Acquisition/Learning Hypothesis motes it. In Krashen's words (12: p. 33):
maintains that adult or adolescent language". .. comprehensible input and the strength of
learners have two processes at their disposal tothe filter are the true causes [stress added] of
help them in developing language fluency. Onesecond language acquisition."
is acquisition, the other, learning. Acquisition Krashen's Monitor Model has been criticized
is subconscious and takes place through natural
on a number of points. Of major interest to us
language interactions, similar to those available are the criticisms levied against his acquisition/
to children when they acquire their motherlearning dichotomy and his view of comprehentongue. Learning, on the other hand, requires sible input as sole explanatory factor for second
conscious thought and analysis and takes place language acquisition. Clearly, we can all attest
predominantly in formal instruction. Accord-from personal experience that skills which at
ing to Krashen, only language that has beenone time were learned consciously through
acquired is available for use in spontaneoussegmentation and analysis can eventually
communication.
become automatic through practice and be
The Natural Order Hypothesis, inspired byavailable for spontaneous use. To what extent
Universal Grammar and Interlanguage Theory,
this conscious analysis is "necessary" or helpful
maintains that we acquire grammatical strucfor foreign language learning when sufficient
tures in a predictable order not determined and
by appropriate comprehensible input is not
the order in which they are taught (12: p. 1).
available remains a major question.
This content downloaded from
122.53.61.63 on Thu, 02 Jun 2022 14:28:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
22 The Modern Language Journal 75 (1991)
FROM THEORY TO PRACTICE
on many. And because of the nature of learn-
ing, in general, which proceeds on a highly
individualistic
Language acquisition - be it first,
second, basis,
or students are frequently at
foreign - is an extremely complex different
process,
levels
parof language development, even
ticularly difficult to penetrate since
itthey
cannot
though
are in the same class. What, then,
are some
common tenets, shared by the theories
be directly observed. None of the
theories
discussed,explawhich do have implications for
discussed offers a complete and coherent
nation. Most attempt to explain how
a second
teaching?
Even considering
language is learned by examining only
one of the currently rather inconclusive state of aL2 acquisition theory and
the many contributing factors. Eventually,
research, inputwill
and interaction clearly play a
more complete theory of L2 acquisition
major role in language
learning, in- or outside
have to account for the biological/innate,
the
the classroom.
Motivation also clearly affects
social/interactive, the cognitive,
and the
both the amount
of input students seek and the
behaviorist aspects of language learning.
And
number
of communicative
interactions
a sound pedagogy will, in addition,
have
to
which
they are willing to engage.
keep in mind the many possible
individual
in
learner factors which facilitate or inhibit second
language development in a classroom setting.
Probably wisely, few psycholinguists venture
into the pedagogical implications of current
theories. I am, however, first and foremost a
practitioner who sees the prime value of theory
and research in their potential for leading us
to possible practical implications and applications to improve teaching and learning. Unfor-
tunately, those of us who are FL teachers do
not have the luxury of waiting around for the
definitive theory and its verification by research
before deciding on what to do in the classroom.
THE INPUT FACTOR
According to Ellis (2: p. 276):
Input comprises (1) the inherent properties of
target language system, and (2) the formally a
interactionally adjusted features found in foreig
and teacher talk. Input constitutes the data u
which the learner strategies work, but also the i
is itself in part determined by the learner's us
communication strategies. Thus the relationship
tween input and learner processes is an interac
one.
The implications of the input facto
Let me, therefore, be foolhardy enough to
attempt to find some pedagogical implications siderable for foreign language teach
in the theories discussed.
they point to the need for language
on the part of the teacher who is fre
Extrapolating from naturalistic child lanonly "live" source of input (other tha
guage acquisition to adult or adolescent foreign
vided by other learners) available to
language learning in a classroom is difficult
because, clearly, major differences exist This does not mean that all teachers must have
between these modes: differences in the physinative speaker competence. But it does mean
that teachers must be able to speak a language
cal, psychological, and intellectual maturity
fluently and accurately enough to feel comfortbetween both groups of learners, in situations
able in using it as exclusive means of communiand settings in which interaction occurs, in the
cation, whether for instructional purposes,
type and amount of input available, in the types
of communicative acts that occur and their
classroom management, or social interaction.
underlying purposes, in available language-useA rating of "advanced" on the ACTFL/ETS
opportunities, in personal motivation to availoral proficiency scale would indicate the minioneself of such opportunities, etc. As a prac- mally required competence.9
tical example, input and interaction opportuni- The importance of input has implications for
ties available in the classroom differ from thoseinstructional time. Regardless of the quantity
and quality of input provided in the classroom,
encountered on the playground or in a local
bar. And the Chinese student hoping to studythe time available in a conventional foreign language program - for the majority of students
in the US is likely to make a greater effort finding target language texts and speakers tolimited to one or two years - is simply inadeinteract with than the American student who
is taking Chinese to fulfill a language
requirement.
Obviously, naturalistic language learning
takes place one-on-one; classroom learning, one
quate, if we hope to have them develop any
meaningful, lasting communicative proficiency.
The importance of input has further implications for developers of instructional software,
including textbooks. I invite you to count the
This content downloaded from
122.53.61.63 on Thu, 02 Jun 2022 14:28:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Renate
A.
Schulz
23
tice, i.e., that thetextboo
learners' general know
pages
in
your
puter
software,
or
th
of the language governs the
quantity
of
in which they take part.
audiotape tice
programs
t
Practically speaking, this means si
tha
ing,
linguistically,
should and
not plan to teach
comparative a
authentic
appr
"input"
is
tives, but
provided
rather to compare the world's
and countries as to their
size, population
the
classroom.
We
ne
prevalent
"frontal
sity, living
standard, and use of natur
instruction
sources. We
(i.e.,
should not focus
whe
on teaching
of
most
input
and
th
subjunctive - but provide
situations where
tion)
goals.
is
Language learning- regardless of theoretical
orientation - necessitates frequent recycling of
lexical and grammatical structures in different
contexts. While we pay lip service to the cyclical nature of language learning, indicating at
least an awareness that the frequency in which
vocabulary and grammatical patterns are
encountered in the input contributes to their
eventual retention and use, a large percentage
of the words and structures we expect in the
students' active command appear only once or
twice in the textbook. (Recycling should, of
course, not just be limited to receptive skill
modalities. But appropriate written, oral, and
visual input - that showing target-culture
specific settings and situations - can provide for
most
dents have to make
appropr
polite requests or conj
about the future of humanity if we conti
the present course of polluting and explo
our environment. And yes, incidental
grammatical pattern exists that can be us
many polite requests. ... In other wor
advocate a content and problem-solving appro
FL instruction. ESL instructors have known for
a long time that even those students lacking in
academic language learning aptitude and who
are unsuccessful in analyzing and reciting
grammatical paradigms can benefit greatly
from content-based language instruction.
Again, the importance of interaction holds
implications for our instructional materials as
well as classroom activities. I invite you to
count textbook activities which require students
to interact with other living beings in or out-
much of the needed recycling.)
side the classroom in a communicative context
THE INTERACTION FACTOR
and information has to be obtained. From the
table of contents of textbooks and the number
where meaning actually has to be negotiated
As for the importance of interaction,
we need
of pages
devoted to it, can one doubt that gramto examine the amount and type of practice
we the real content of present FL
mar remains
instruction?
provide in and outside the classroom.
While
folk wisdom tells us that practice makesYet
perfect,
general agreement exists among theoreticians and
researchers
that the textbook does not
it may not be the quantity of practice
but
the
kind of practice that enhances acquisition.
determineNot
the order of grammatical mastery,
all practice may be equally effectiveand
for
thatlearngrammatical grading and sequencing
- such
as for
we encounter in most instructional
ing a foreign language. Ellis (3: p.
32),
instance, conjectures that "controlled"
ornot necessary for language acquisitexts - are
tion in
or outside the classroom. I mentioned
"focused" practice (i.e., practice that
focuses
learner attention on a discrete linguistic
feature)
earlier
that several studies indicate that, regardmight not be as effective as "free practice"
less of how or
students have acquired their lan"unfocused performance" (i.e., communicative
guage fluency, they develop predictable
practice that focuses learner attention
on
sequences
in an
the second language. This "natural
exchange of information). Based on
a review
sequence
of development" may in part be based
of available research on the practiceonvariable,
an innate "universal grammar" which makes
some
rules easier to learn than others and
he questions whether any grammar
learning
takes place in controlled practice and
concludes
requires
that certain structures be acquired
that "correct responses merely indicate
that
the can be integrated. Or it may be
before
others
learner has accessed the appropriate based
cognitive
on the frequency of certain structures in
strategies for reproducing the target
structure;
the
input to which the students are exposed
they do not show that learning is taking
place."
(Hatch);
or on the frequency of need for cerEllis suggests not so much that practice
causes
tain structures
in basic human interaction; or
acquisition, but that acquisition causes
pracin part
on all of these and yet additional
This content downloaded from
122.53.61.63 on Thu, 02 Jun 2022 14:28:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
24 The Modern Language Journal 75 (1991)
unknown factors. It is certainly
not based
onthrough real-life inpu
proficiency
mainly
interaction. Her
motivation to avail hersel
the sequence chosen by well-intentioned
textbook authors.
that input and engage in language intera
What are possible implications for FL teachhas been particularly great with Spanish
ing? Grammatical analysis and extendedevery time she visited a Spanish-speaking
pattern practice may well enable some students
try I was faced with the possibility of a Sp
to pass a discrete-point grammar test, but it isspeaking son-in-law.
unlikely that students will use specific construc- That my daughter's German profici
tions correctly in real communicative interacappears to have become arrested some dis
tions immediately after having been "covered."from grammatical accuracy I blame main
Our teaching and testing practices have to
insufficient input. Also, her anxiety to b
reflect the fact that "covering" and "teaching"
taken for German may have played a
are not synonymous with learning, acquiring,Already as a small child, resisting th
or mastering.
permissive, highly structured environme
Research in the near future will probably not
her grandmother's household, she would
yield a dependable acquisition order of gram- test loudly when she was mistaken for Ge
and would thrive on the attention which her
matical structures to guide our anticipation of
mastery. Our articulation and placement efforts
"foreign" status brought her. Since by name and
will doubtless continue to be plagued by indi-physical appearance she can be easily mistaken
vidual variability in language proficiency
for German, she might have subconsciously
acquired as a result of one, two, or more years
resisted error correction, lest it would threaten
of classroom study. As McLaughlin (p. 149)
her identity as American.
points out, "there seems to be considerable indiCONCLUSIONS
vidual variation in how learners acquire second
languages due to different learning, perIn the last decade, FL learning has regain
formance, and communication strategies."
increasing attention, and enrollments are
Individual learners will continue to acquire
specific structures, lexical items, or com-again on the rise. Even FL requirements
in vogue again. The ACTFL-initiated pr
municative functions at different rates in spite
ciency movement has done much to reinvi
of common instruction. Particularly, our testate the profession with renewed commitm
ing procedures need to reflect that while we
to developing students' communicative pro
hope to raise an awareness of morphological
ciency. Scholarly and research activities
and syntactical patterns, we do not expect their
abound; in fact, L2/FL acquisition and teachimmediate mastery.
ing are emerging as separate fields of inquiry,
I am not arguing for the elimination of gram-
interdisciplinary in nature, at a number of
mar instruction. What I am arguing for is that
institutions.
grammar should not play the main role, but As we examine and revise our curricula in
a supportive role only, clearly limited in the
amount of time we devote to it and in the
response to this renewed interest and try to ful-
fill a national mandate to develop usable lanweight we allot to it in formal teaching and
testing.
THE MOTIVATION FACTOR
guage skills in our students, we can all benefit
by critically examining the implicit and explicit
assumptions which guide our teaching in light
of recent theoretical and research developIf we succeed in providing sufficient
high
ments. Based
on the present state of L2 acquisi-
interest input and practice activities tion
which
focus
theory
and research, I recommend that our
on content and human interaction, curriculum
the third
planning and teaching activities be
guided by three basic questions:
prerequisite to foreign language learning--
motivation - might take care of itself. 1)
I How
am can
conwe supply students with the optivinced that students will be more willingmum
to seek
amount of interesting, comprehenand use opportunities for foreign language
sible input?
"practice" if this practice is not limited 2)
toWhat
gramcan we do to provide students with
matical manipulation.
opportunities to interact in the language
in realin
communicative contexts and with
Before I conclude, you may be interested
how all of this applies to my daughter.
real Obcommunicative purposes?
3) What can we do to increase students'
viously, she acquired her foreign language
This content downloaded from
122.53.61.63 on Thu, 02 Jun 2022 14:28:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Renate
A.
Schulz
25
motivation
soresponses
that
I predict that satisfactory
to these
additional
input
questions will improve
our success rate in
t
an
tunities
and
teaching.
In other words,continu
student motivation,
the
year
or
two
of
language
input, and communicative
interaction
which
convention
c
may well be the most important factors in FL
becoming
learning and communi
may, in the final analysis, decide
guage?
our students' level of language proficiency. 10
of a language. Each language differs in certain unique
aspects (peripheral grammar).
NOTES
7For instance, it is believed that the difficulty level, when
relativizing a particular noun phrase, proceeds from subject
'A revised version of a keynote address presented
relativization
at the as least difficulty via direct object, indirect
object,
object of a preposition, and genitive to the relativiMLJ/Ohio State Univ. Symposium on Research
Perspectives in Adult Language Learning and Acquisition,
zationColumof the object of a comparative as most difficult.
bus, Ohio, November 1989.
8Interestingly, error analysis is used to support both the
2The descriptor "terminal two" was coined by Theodore nativist/biological and the cognitive explanation of language
V. Higgs and Ray Clifford to refer to the phenomenon of acquisition. While adherents to Universal Grammar Theory
so-called "street learners" who acquire a second language interpret the learners' transitional grammars to be evidence
in a natural setting, without formal instruction. These indi- of the activation of innate principles, more cognitively
viduals demonstrate relatively sophisticated vocabulary oriented researchers interpret them to be evidence of cogusage with, however, certain faulty, fossilized grammati- nitive procedural strategies intended to restructure their
cal patterns which appear difficult if not impossible to
internal representation of the TL. Such strategies include,
correct. The "two" refers to the oral proficiency scale,
for instance, during the initial stages of language learning,
ranging from zero to five, originally developed by the Forsimplifying, regularizing, overgeneralizing, and reducing
eign Service Institute and now used by all members of ILR, redundancy. Inferencing and hypothesis testing strategies
i.e., all agencies of the federal government involved in for- are more prevalent at later stages.
eign language instruction.
9For a description of the ACTFL/ETS Oral Proficiency
3For a short overview of current L2 hypotheses, see entry
4 in the Bibliography.
4For a review of research on the role of attitudes and moti-
vation in L2 learning, see entry 5 in the Bibliography.
5For a review of research dealing with the age factor in
L2 learning, see entry 6 in the Bibliography.
6"Universal Grammar," or core grammar, should, however, not be expected to be a set of specific grammatical
rules in the traditional sense. Rather, it consists of general,
shared features in all natural languages. Also, we should
not expect Universal Grammar to account for all features
Scale see entry 1 in the Bibliography. That many teachers
are not "advanced" speakers of the target language was
brought home by a Texas study (see 10) which indicated
that teachers' oral competence is often considerably below
this level. This sad fact is not necessarily an indictment of
the teachers, but rather of our system of teacher training,
which does not provide easy and affordable access to study
abroad opportunities.
'ODuring the 1990-91 academic year, the author's address
is: Department of Foreign Languages, US Air Force
Academy, CO 80840.
5. Gardner, Robert C. Social Psychology and Second Language
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Learning: The Role of Attitudes and Motivation. Balti-
more: Arnold, 1985.
6. Harley, Birgit. Age in Second Language Acquisition. San
1. American Council on the Teaching of Foreign
LanDiego:
College-Hill, 1986.
guages. "ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines
1986."
7. Hatch,
Evelyn. "Discourse Analysis and Second Lan-
Defining and Developing Proficiency: Guidelines,
guage Acquisition." Second Language Acquisition. Ed.
Implementations and Concepts. Ed. Heidi Byrnes
Evelyn&Hatch. Rowley, MA: Newbury House,
1978: 401-35.
Michael Canale. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook, 1987: 15-24.
8. - . "Discourse Analysis, Speech Acts and Second
2. Ellis, Rod. Understanding Second Language Acquisition.
Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1986.
3. - . "The Role of Practice in Classroom Learning."
AILA Review 5 (1988): 20-39.
4. Ferguson, Charles A. & Thom Huebner. "Foreign Language Instruction and Second Language Acquisition
Research in the United States." NFLC Occasional
Language Acquisition." Second Language Acquisition
Research. Ed. W. Ritchie. New York: Academic,
1978.
9. Higgs, Theodore V. & Ray Clifford. "The Push toward
Communication." Curriculum, Competence, and the For-
eign Language Teacher. Ed. Theodore V. Higgs.
Skokie, IL: National Textbook, 1982: 57-79.
Papers. Washington: National FL Center, Johns 10. Hiple, David V. &Joan H. Manley. "Testing How Well
Hopkins Univ., 1989.
Foreign Language Teachers Speak: A State Man-
This content downloaded from
122.53.61.63 on Thu, 02 Jun 2022 14:28:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
26 The Modern Language Journal 75 (1991)
date." Foreign Language Annals 20for
(1987):
147-53.
Second
Language Acquisition. Rowl
11. Krashen, Stephen. Principles and Practices
Second1978.
Lanburyof
House,
guage Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon,
1982.
16. Selinker,
Larry. "Interlanguage."
210-31. Implications.
12. . The Input Hypothesis: Issues and
London: Longman, 1985.
17. Wode, Henning. Psycholinguistik. Eine Einfiihrung in die
13. - & Tracy Terrell. The Natural Approach:
Lehr- und Lernbarkeit
Language
von Sprachen. Munich: Hueber,
Acquisition in the Classroom. Oxford: 1988.
Pergamon, 1983.
14. McLaughlin, Barry. Theories of Second-Language
18. Woodcock, Richard W.Learn& Mary Bonner Johnson.
ing. London: Arnold, 1987.
Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery. Allen,
15. Schumann, John H. The Pidginization
TX:Process:
DLM Teaching
A Resources,
Model 1978.
Information about The Modern Language Journal
Major Focus: a refereed publication devoted primarily and tables); leave a 2" left margin, 1 2" elsewhere;
to research in methods, pedagogy, and applied submit original and two clear copies (only original
linguistics pertaining to modern languages including will be returned).
TESL; publishes articles, reports, teaching tips, Manuscript Length: twenty pages preferred (excluding
news, book reviews, professional advertisements, and bibliography, tables, notes); longer acceptable, deoccasional essays on the state of the profession.
Circulation: approximately 7000.
pending on merit.
Manuscript Style: MLA Style Manual (1985).
Frequency of Publication: four issues per year (approxi- Multiple Submissions: manuscripts submitted simulmately 150 pages each).
taneously for publication elsewhere not considered;
Evaluation: manuscripts refereed by at least two author(s) must inform editor at time of submission
specialist readers.
of similar/related versions of manuscript that have
Time from Submission to Decision: normally sixty days; appeared or are being considered elsewhere.
longer during academic vacation periods; time from Special Requirements: 1) indicate full name of instituacceptance to publication usually no longer than one tion where (each) author is employed; 2) include a
self-addressed 9 x 12 manila envelope and US $5.00
year.
Acceptance Rate: ten to thirteen percent of manuscripts
in loose postage or thirteen international postal
submitted are accepted.
coupons (non-US submissions $10.00 or twenty-five
Articles Published per Volume: thirty to forty.
international postal coupons if air mail return
desired); 3) prepare cover sheet containing the title
Ownership: The Modern Language Journal is owned and of the manuscript, separate short title (see 4 below)
copyrighted by the National Federation of Modern for identification, name, address, and both office and
Language Teachers Associations and published by home telephone numbers of author(s); 4) select one
it at the University of Wisconsin Press. The MLJ or two key words from the title of the manuscript
has no legal relationship to the Modern Language to function as identification markers; type those
Book Reviews per Volume: approximately 200.
Association of America (MLA).
words at the top right of all pages of the manuscript
Payment: authors of articles receive two complimentary
followed by the appropriate page number; 5) refer
copies of the issue in which their work is published;
book reviewers receive one gratis copy.
Offprints.: available at cost, but must be purchased
directly from the reprint service at the time author
reads galley proofs.
Language of Publication: English.
to your own previous publications in the third
person-not "as I said in . . .," but "as Jane Smith
out (including bibliography, notes, citations, figures,
entry are indented four spaces.
noted . . . "; 6) refer to an institution where research
was conducted or where the author teaches as "insti-
tution X" during the refereeing process; 7) number
consecutively each entry in the "Bibliography," being
Manuscript Format: typewritten, double-spaced through- sure that the second and subsequent lines of each
This content downloaded from
122.53.61.63 on Thu, 02 Jun 2022 14:28:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms