Stephen Krashen [PDF]

Zitiervorschau

Stephen Krashen’s Theory of second language acquisition Stephen Krashen developed five different hypotheses in the field of linguistics, more specifically, about how to acquire a second language. They have to do with the importance of acquiring rather than learning, self-correction, how language is acquired, the importance of the input and how the affective filter affects the acquisition of a second language. The first hypothesis is called the one that has to do with acquisition-learning. It establishes that any person could learn any second language in the same way that the mother tongue was acquired; this is subconsciously and without caring too much about grammatical structures. In my opinion this could not really be applied in our context because students are only in contact with the language when they are inside the classroom, that is –most of the times- the only place in which they can practice it and those reasons make it really difficult for them to really acquire the language. Though listening to music and watching TV in English could help, they may not have the same opportunities to practice and be corrected by others, as they were when they were children and all the attention was on them. The second is the monitoring hypothesis and it is about how a learner relates acquisition and learning, while the part of the learner that acquired the language produces speech unconsciously, the part that learned the language examines that what is being said is correct. It is important not to let students over use this monitoring, because speech must be fluent and by using this monitoring too much, speech could seem to be constantly interrupted. On the other hand, it is not correct is a student speaks fluently but has no accuracy; after all most of the times we are looking for accuracy in speeches. I think that this cannot be divided, for me it would not be possible to be conscious all the times I just speak and the times I am “thinking” of what to say; I believe it is, as everything, a process in which first students have to think more before speaking, and it is the duty of the teacher to make students speak faster every time and without “thinking” that much. The third hypothesis is about the natural order. This one states that the process of acquiring a new language is natural and predictable, and that there is no need of learning grammatical structures. There again, I do not think this is really possible inside our classrooms. We can give them one of two hours of exposure of the language, but it will never be the same as if they were exposed to the language all the time; and there is also the fact that students are conscious that they are learning a new language, there are only a few who think that they can also learn unconsciously, that is why they will always be expecting an explanation for every grammatical structure that is taught. The next hypothesis is about the input. This hypothesis is related to the previous one in the sense that a learner can acquire new language depending on the kind of input to which is exposed. This sounds quite logical, if a student is for example used to listen to other partners who are false beginners to say “May I come in?” every day,

he sooner or later will understand that this is a phrase to request for permission to enter a place, though he does not understand the grammatical rule. Unfortunately, this is not the way in which a complete language can be learned, at least not by the method that is used at this school and to which we are used to. The last hypothesis, deals with the affective filter. It states that motivation, selfconfidence and anxiety can be a barrier that impedes the process of learning or that helps the student to learn easier, I totally agree at this point of the theory. There are a great amount of reasons for a student to pay or not to pay attention during a class; it is not possible to forget about everything that is happening outside when we enter the classroom. However, it is as well a duty of the teacher trying to make the experience of learning not that hard. Of course a teacher is not a psychology or a therapist, but in my experience, when a class is dynamic, students pay more attention and if they are kind of worried, they somehow forget about their problems. After all, it is said that laughter is the best medicine. In conclusion, I feel that the process of learning or acquiring a language is not as easy as Krashen says; he somehow simplifies it too much. I think that according to this theory everything is or totally white or totally black. Of course I do not have studies or experiences on this subject neither have I made all those researches that Krashen did at his time, I am only giving my opinion according to my own experience in the process or learning a language.

REFERENCES • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Krashen • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monitor_Theory • http://www.sk.com.br/sk-krash.html