First and second language acquisition arises from natural and not academic techniques; in other words, children acquire them by means of exposure and interaction in environments where the target languages are spoken. Children are conscious that language is used to communicate; however, they are unable to explain its grammatical rules. For this reason, the acquisition of a language is considered a subconscious process. Throughout this part of the study, different perspectives concerning the acquisition of both linguistic systems will be presented. First, language acquisition is understood as the process in which the mother tongue is acquired.
It declares that learners have two different and detached approaches of improving their capacity in the target language. The first approach is language acquisition , which is a procedure analogous to the way that kids learn their source language. Language acquisition is a subconscious procedure , the effect of language acquisition is acquired efficiency , which is also subconscious. In general , we don’t have enough information about the rules that we have acquired , but we have a spontaneous feeling to correct the mistakes which we have picked up through the speech that we have heard. Other approaches of describing acquisition contains , implicit learning , informal learning , and natural learning.
However, the article challenges this idea by revealing that social and psychological factors can come into play, and that in many cases adults perform better than young children. With the second myth, the article reveals that younger children may have better pronunciation, but older children may be able to approach an L2 better due to memorization skills. Regarding the third myth, the article reveals that time of language exposure do not necessarily reflect language competence, and that promotion of home language could also allow better literacy skills. In busting the fourth myth, the article expresses that good oral skills are not always reflected in reading and writing. Last but not least, L2 learners do not learn language at the same rate, the matter of culture, social class, attitude, personality, can all become factors that influence the learning rate of a child.
And in this case, bilingual instructional support can be practical to help students learn common subjects well in a language that they can understand. Thereupon, they won’t fall behind because of the language difficulty. Besides, the acquirement of English proficiency is equally important to LEP students’ academic development. Bilingual education can not only be helpful in school curriculum, but also is a practical program in which LEP students are able to learn both English and their primary language and also use their first language to acquire English proficiency for a long
To enter the assumptions is the most important assumption in second language learning in both theory and practice, because, the assumptions related to the recognition languages directly. The assumption has entered the mainstream recognition that language. Students need to know the meaning of the language, but later they realize the grammatical structures. (Krashen, 1978, pp.20-21). Comprehensive Input.
One of the techniques to reinforce the learning of SVA is listening to English song. The song lyrics should be treated as grammar text to reinforce grammar. According to Affendi & Shazwani (2010), by using songs to teach grammar, the educators have nothing to lose but to add variety to the lesson, help to boost students” motivation and extend the students’ attention span. I agree with the above statement, the students will not pay attention on a monotonous grammar class. This will not motivate them to learn nevertheless this will decrease the enthusiasm of the students to learn grammar.
The CAPS (2011:15) envisages that both the communicative approach and grammar teaching are equally important for learners to acquire language proficiency. The CAPS document put emphasis on the learning of the language rule as well utilisation thereof acquired language. In contrast the communicative language deems learning of language rules as of no
But some others perceived that memorizing the vocabulary is ineffective. The reason why the students perceived that memorizing the vocabulary is effective is because it was applied for the students in elementary level or for the younger ones like for elementary students (pupils). While the ones who perceived that memorizing vocabulary is ineffective is when it is applied in the upper level of age like for senior high school students. For the junior high school students, it will be impressive and easy to memorize the vocabulary if the English teacher assigning them to do certain activities based on the topic or real life situation. Conclusions By knowing the characteristics of effective English teacher based on the students’ perception, the English teachers are expected to follow and pay attention on those characteristics that can make them effective in teaching English.
Mother Tongue Interference Recently, learning or having another language besides the native language is important. As learners begin to study second or foreign language, they may face some difficulties and problems. Firstly, language acquisition refers to the ways by which persons own the ability to perceive and understand language, also to make and use words and sentences to communicate (Lightbown& Spada, 2013). According to Yule (2010) “it is the gradual development of ability in a language by communicating with the native speaker of this language” p.187. While the second language refers to the added language, so it may be the third, fourth or tenth to be received (Torike,2006).
Children learn to speak popular view, by copying the utterances heard around them, and by having their responses strengthened by the repetitions, corrections, and other reactions that adults provide. In recent years, it has become clear that this principle will not explain all the facts of language development. Children do imitate a great deal, especially in learning sounds and vocabulary; but little of their grammatical ability can be explained in this way. Two kinds of evidence are commonly used in support of this criticism one based on the kind of language children produce, the other on what they do not produce. The first piece of evidence derives from the way children handle irregular grammatical patterns.