I asked Chat GPT to list 20 second language learning hypotheses which you will find further down the page. I'd like to suggest you read this first section before diving into the hypotheses! But you'll do as you please!
First, let's consider what a hypothesis is, and how it differs from a model and a theory.
In second language learning research, a hypothesis is a specific idea or prediction that can be tested, such as Schmidt’s Noticing Hypothesis, which proposes that learners must notice a language feature before they can acquire it. A model is broader and shows how different parts of a process fit together, often combining several hypotheses; for example, Anderson’s Skill Acquisition Model illustrates how practice turns explicit knowledge of rules into automatic use. A theory is the widest framework, offering a big-picture explanation supported by extensive evidence, such as Krashen’s Second Language Acquisition Theory, which integrates several hypotheses into one overall account of how learning happens. In simple terms, a hypothesis is a testable idea, a model is a representation of how learning works, and a theory is a comprehensive explanation that brings everything together.
In science, a key aspect of hypotheses, models and theories is that they should be falsifiable, i.e. you can prove them wrong with evidence. In second language learning, however, many hypotheses are difficult to falsify. This is because language learning is highly complex, with outcomes influenced by numerous factors such as age, motivation, aptitude, and learning context. In addition, some hypotheses are worded so broadly that almost any evidence seems to support them; for example, the Affective Filter Hypothesis (Krashen) explains both success and failure through differing levels of anxiety, making it hard to disprove. The problem is compounded by the many ways learning can be measured (vocabulary, grammar, fluency, comprehension), the long timescale of language development, and wide individual differences among learners. For these reasons, while second language learning hypotheses offer useful insights, they are often challenging to test in a way that could clearly falsify them.
What can you draw from this as a teacher? Firstly, don't accept that every hypothesis is correct. For instance, if you are told, following Krashen's Input Hypothesis that acquisition only occurs through exposure to comprehensible input and that output does not help build the language system, you should question this claim. What does your own experience tell you? Is it possible that by speaking and writing, you strengthen your long-term memory of constructions, thereby making you more proficient? This seems very likely. Speaking a lot, including reading aloud, will improve fluency.
If a hypothesis claims that you have to notice something to acquire it, you might ask: "What does notice actually mean?" Sometimes we produce new words without ever apparently being aware of having 'noticed' them. Does this mean we can just pick things up implicitly (unconsciously)? The evidence suggests we do and most researchers will say that the implicit route is the most powerful.
If someone suggests to you that young learners acquire languages more easily than older learners, then consider that many adults seem to learn new languages very effectively. The Critical Period Hypothesis mentioned below, has now been shown through evidence to be at best partially correct. Adults may be less good at qcuiring grammar rules and an authentic accent, but are very good at learning vocabulary.
Dekeyser's Skill Acquisition Hypothesis is appealiong aince we often think that learning a language is like learning a musical instrument. But it's a very imperfect analogy. It does seem that practising a skill repeatedly in lessons can be useful and lead to automatisation, but it only seems to work really well with a minority of higher-achieving students. DeKeyser acknowledges this. So my view is that you can take aspects of different hypotheses to form your overall view of what works best. Skill acquisition can play a role, but implicit learning through comprehensible input and repetition are more important. They can be used together.
Whether a hypothesis seems right may depend a lot on your particular setting. In a secondary school, when learning a modern language, some hypotheses may be more useful than others. If I were to choose from the list below, I'd pick out the Interlanguage Hypothesis (don't worry too much about errors - these are a natural part of acquisition); the Input Hypothesis - input IS the foundation of language acquisition, even if it's not enough on its own; the Affective Filter Hypothesis - I wouldn't necessarily call it that, but Krasdhen was clearly right in pointing out the obvious fact that motivation and anxiety affect acquisition; the Noticng Hypothesis - in school settings where time is limited, getting attention and forcong students to notice form- meaning associations is crucial; the Output and Interaction Hypotheses - getting students to produce language and communicate is key to improving proficiency; Processability Theory and the Natural Order Hypothesis - are relevant to language teachers as it suggests that students do not acquire grammatical constructions in the order you teach them.
Second language learning is a complex process, hard to pin down - Wilga Rivers compared it to the blind men trying to describe an elephant (from a poem). No single hypothesis will account for how we learn a language. As school teachers, key very broad-brush 'best bets' are, in my view:
- Use the target language a lot (not necessarily 90% or more) - students need masses of listening input they can understand
- Keep language comprehensible at all times
- Provide opportunities to speak, write and communicate - especially speak
- Provide lots of repetition and recycling of chunked language
- Don't overburden students with too much new language at once - more new language equals less repetition of old. Tend to prioritise high-frequency vocabulary.
- Maximise enjoyment and reduce anxiety - gamifying may help
- Exploit the four skills in an integrated way, with each supporting the others - prioritise listening and speaking
- Ensure everyone gains a feeling of success (self-efficacy)
- Promote positive attitudes to other cultures (especially now when xenophobia seems to be on the rise)
- Be clear what the syllabus goals are to help students get exam success
- Give the right level of challenge to every student, keeping content interesting
- Don't overdo grammar - remember vocabulary is more important and correlates more strongly with proficinecy
Here is the list. Apologies for the formatting. Copying a table into Blogger is tricky.
| Hypothesis | Key Idea | Main Researcher(s) |
|---|---|---|
| Critical Period Hypothesis | Best time to acquire language is before puberty; native-like mastery less likely after. | Lenneberg |
| Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis | Errors come from differences between L1 and L2; comparing languages predicts difficulties. | Lado |
| Interlanguage Hypothesis | Learners create a dynamic “interlanguage” that is neither L1 nor L2 but evolves with exposure. | Selinker |
| Monitor Hypothesis | Grammar knowledge only monitors/edit output; fluency comes from acquired knowledge. | Krashen |
| Input Hypothesis | Progress happens when learners get input just above their current level (i+1). | Krashen |
| Affective Filter Hypothesis | Anxiety, motivation, and self-confidence influence how much input is processed. | Krashen |
| Noticing Hypothesis | Learners must consciously notice language features in input before acquiring them. | Schmidt |
| Interaction Hypothesis | Negotiating meaning in interaction helps make input comprehensible and aids learning. | Long |
| Output Hypothesis | Producing language helps learners test hypotheses and notice gaps in knowledge. | Swain |
| The Natural Order Hypothesis | Learners acquire grammatical structures in a predictable order which is immune to teaching. | Dulay and Burt |
| Skill Acquisition Hypothesis | Practice converts explicit knowledge (rules) into automatic use (procedural knowledge). | DeKeyser |
| Competition Model | Learners rely on cues (word order, intonation, morphology), shifting from L1 to L2 cues over time. | Bates & MacWhinney |
| Universal Grammar Hypothesis | Innate grammatical principles guide SLA; learners reset parameters based on L2 input. | Chomsky; White |
| Transfer Hypothesis | Learners transfer knowledge (rules, vocabulary, structures) from L1, which may help or hinder. | Odlin |
| Processability Theory | Learners acquire grammar in a predictable order based on what the brain can process. | Pienemann |
| Dynamic Systems Hypothesis | Language learning is nonlinear and shaped by many interacting factors (input, motivation, context). | Larsen-Freeman; de Bot |
| Input Processing Hypothesis | Learners process meaning first, then form, which shapes how grammar is acquired. | VanPatten |
| Sociocultural Theory | Learning happens socially through interaction, scaffolding, and mediation in the ZPD. | Vygotsky; Lantolf |
| Implicit Learning Hypothesis | Much language learning occurs unconsciously through exposure and pattern recognition. | Reber |
| Complexity Hypothesis | Some structures are inherently harder to learn due to cognitive and processing demands. | Housen & Simoens |
Comments
Post a Comment