Language Acquisition Hypothesis

CHAPTER II

2.1.The five hypothesis of second language acquisition

2.1.1.The acquisition learning hypothesis:

The acquisition / learning hypothesis is one of the most essential hypothesis to be offered here. It declares that learners have two different 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 where 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

We acquire several grammatical parts earlier than others. The arrangement is not exact , not all learners can learn the grammatical rules with same order , however ,their levels are very approximate and if there are any differences they will be very little (Oller and Krashen, 1988). In English as a target language , for example , the (ing) sign , the present continuous (James is playing the guitar) is between the initial grammatical signs , the function words , to be acquired , whilst , the third person singular s is acquired lastly. Actually several learners who is their English language is very good , haven’t acquired this sign. Some studies have discussed several unexpected facts that include the natural order , firstly , it is not correct that easy rules are acquired before the complex rules. Several rules that seems to be easy , for example , (third person singular) are acquired later. While linguists think that the learners will face difficulties with the complex rules , in fact , the learners acquire it early. These facts confused the curriculum designers to design the appropriate curriculum for learners (Brown, 1973). A rule perhaps seems to be straightforward to a grammarian , however , it could be acquired lastly. Secondly, the natural order is constant , we cannot change the arrangement that learners acquired the language with and that’s through increasing the explanations and

However, it doesn’t declare how they are utilized in target language performance. According to the monitor hypothesis acquisition and learning are used in very particular approaches. Acquisition starts our speech in target language and it is in charge of our fluency (Gass, Behney and Plonsky, 2013). Learning has just one job or one purpose that is like a monitor. Therefore, the monitor hypothesis refers to learning to create corrections to alter the produce of the acquired capacity, this could occur prior we write or speak and sometimes after, which is known as the self-correction. Our capacity of the output in other language came from our acquired efficiency and our subconscious information. In accordance with the monitor hypothesis explaining information of the rules of the language is not enough for using of the monitor. The monitor hypothesis indicates that essential rules or conscious learning just play a restricted rule in target language performance (Gass, Behney and Plonsky, 2013). The monitor hypothesis indicate that learners could utilize conscious rules just when three cases are occurred (Krashen, 1995). These cases are needful but it is not sufficient , that is a learner might not be completely used his conscious grammar , even when the three cases are happened. The three cases are presented here with a summary