Theories and hypotheses Flashcards
structural conformity hypothesis
all universals that are true for primary languages are also true for IL
concept oriented approach
function –> form, assumption that learners have the need to express a given concept in which the investigation begins with the identification of one function or concept and follows the way it’s expressed through development
aspect hypothesis
form –> function, initially influenced by the inherent semantic aspects of verbs or predicates in the acquisition of tense and aspect markers associated with those verbs
prototype theory
there are good members and marginal members in the category, learners start with prototypical examples and extend outward
discourse hypothesis
form-to-function approach - learners use emerging verbal morphology to distinguish foreground from background in narratives
cross linguistic influence
creative process in which learners actively select features of other known languages to hypothesize about TL
transfer to somewhere principle
L1 doesn’t have influence in the beginning (similarities not recognized), when similarities recognized knowledge is consciously applied
markedness differential hypothesis
more common forms are unmarked and easy, less common forms are marked and more difficult
fundamental difference hypothesis
what happens in child LA is not the same as what happens in adult SLA
access to UG hypothesis
the innate language faculty is alive in SLA and constraints the grammar of L2 learners as it does for L1 children
L1 is the basis of the initial state - which 2 hypotheses?
full transfer/full access, minimal trees
UG is the initial state - 2 hypothesis
initial hypothesis of syntax, full access without transfer
representational deficit hypothesis
the only features and categories available to L2 learners are those that are present in their L1
prosodic transfer hypothesis
one of the reasons the Lerners don’t acquire L2 morphology is because of the transfer of L1 phonological representations
missing surface inflectional hypothesis
no representational deficit, but the only issue is difficulty of mapping intact representations onto the surface morphology of the L2
feature reassembly hypothesis
learners complete a process where they reconfigure features from their L1 onto different lexical items in the L2
shallow structure hypothesis
processing by L2 learners involves less detail in their syntactic representations during sentence comprehension
full transfer
starting point is the L1 grammar, but full access to UG
minimal trees
both L1 and UG are available
full access
starting point is UG, disconnect between L1 and L2
bottleneck hypothesis
learners are able to acquire syntax and semantics but inflectional morphemes and formal features might be problematic
interface hypothesis
structures that involve an interface between syntax and another cognitive domain are more difficult to acquire
similarity differential rate hypothesis
rate difference between the acquisition of similar vs dissimilar sounds
processing approaches
concern with the processing mechanisms and capacities of the human brain for comprehending and producing language
spreading activation model
activation can move backward through levels
2 processing approaches
spreading activation model, modular model
modular models
activation can only move forward, any error that is detected will cause a return
processability theory
concept of a linguistic process, as a feature of the mind
canonical order strategy
strategies that separate linguistic units require greater processing capacity than strategies that involve direct mapping onto surface strings
initialization/finalization strategy
elements will be moved into initial and/or final position rather than somewhere in the middles
subordinate clause strategy
movement in subordinate clauses is avoided
three mechanisms that constrain movement from one stage to the next
canonical order strategy, initialization/finalization strategy, subordinate clause strategy
processing determinism
the lower the processing cost of different parts of language, the earlier and more easily that part will be acquired
autonomous induction theory
attributes difficulty in learning to parsing problems
shallow structure hypothesis
representations adult L2 learners compute for comprehension are shallower and less detailed than that of native speakers, rely more on non-structural information
emergentist approaches to language learning
patterns emerge from the input learners receive, general learning processing not innate language modules
competition model
assumption that form and function can’t be separated, language processing involves competition among various cues
unified competition model
neurocognitive, developmental, social elements
frequency-based accounts
humans are sensitive to the frequencies of events in thier experience
parallel distributed processing
neural network approach
complex dynamic systems theory, chaos
outcomes of interactions of variables over time can’t be predicted using math
critical period hypothesis
limited developmental period during which it’s possible to acquire a language to native-like levels
MLAT
modern language aptitude test
Skehan - components of aptitude
phonemic coding ability, language analytic ability (inductive ability, grammatical sensitivity), memory and learning
Hi-LAB
high level language aptitude batter, which cognitive factors predict attainment of highly advanced L2 learners
three temporal steps of motivation
preactioanl stage - motivation is generated, selection of goal
actions stage - execuitive motivation, sustained activity
postactional stage - retrospection
L2MSS
3 interacting components - ideal L2 self, ought-to L2 self, L2 learning experience
contrastive analysis hypothesis
the greater the difference between NL and TL, the more difficult it is to learn TL
mentalist approach, creative construction hypothesis
SLA resembles L1 acquisition
recapitulation hypothesis
if a child is surrounded by TL natives, L1 is not important
regression hypothesis
children may use L1 skills when difficulties with L2, but only at a very low level
monitor model
acquisitional model (implicit process), learning model (explicit knowledge)
three conditions of the monitor model
time, focus on the form, knowledge of the rule
affect filter hypothesis
based on affect input is either blocked or passes through
weak CAH
start with learners’ errors, attempts to account for them on the basis of the NL-TL difference
L2 status factor
the initial state for the L3 is the L2 and transfer comes from L2 not L1
dynamic model of multilingualism
relies on dynamic systems theory to understand how L3 happens, the role of metalinguistic awareness
perceived positive language interaction
the perception held by many multilingual that languages studied in the past are interrelated in a positive way that can help support ability to learn more languages
cognitive phonology model
explains learner errors for sign language - two sources: accurate perception of sign formulation, poor motor dexterity
focus on form
students’ attention on linguistic elements as they arise incidentally, focus on meaning or communication
focus on formS
explicit grammatical information given by teacher, precedes activity and isn’t prompted by student errors
notion of task essential
distinguishes between whether a form is natural in the task, useful in the task, essential to the task
involvement load
motivational-cognitive model that looks at vocabulary gains induced by different activities
cognition hypothesis
task complexity, task condition, task demands
CAF
complexity - length of utterances, coordination…
accuracy - deviation from the norm
fluency - oral-fluency, speed, pauses…
cognition hypothesis
not a limited attention, system, separate attentional pools
primacy of content words
learners process content words in the input before anything else
lexical-preference principle
if grammatical forms express a meaning that can also be encoded lexically, learners will not initially process those grammatical formst
the first-noun principle
learners tend to process the first noun or pronoun they encounter in the sentence as the subject
