Comparative Essay

Language Acquisition Hypotheses

Students: Valentina Acua Z.

Alexa Reichelt B.

Concepcin, April 24th 2016

Learning and Acquisition of English as a Foreign Language

Language Acquisition Hypotheses

It is well known that language is the method in which people can express and share
their ideas, emotions and information with others. Furthermore, according to
Cambridge Dictionary webpage (2016), mother tongue is the first language that you
learn when you are a baby, rather than a language learned at school or as an adult.
This idea is possible because the infant is exposed to spoken language from the
moment of her or his birth. However, acquiring a second language is undeniably not
an easy action to undertake. In spite of, the complication that this can present it is
extremely important to achieve a second language. In our days, English has become
a necessity, because of the globalized society where we live. Thus, it gives an
extraordinary benefit not only as a professional but also in individual goals. Due to
this, people have decided that learning and speaking a second language is a priority
nowadays. In linguistics terms, there exist plenty of different hypotheses which can
clarify how a second language is learnt or acquired. In this essay we are going to
focus our attention on three well-known authors, their variations and their
agreements in order to elucidate the concept of SLA and how the language is
achieve and develop in our brains.
Every human must have acquired the language in some stage of their lives. Mostly
and ideally when they are young and also, when they are growing up in a natural
context or/and by psychological input. According to Stephen Krashens Acquisition
Learning Hypothesis we have two very different ways of developing ability in
language; we can acquire a language, and we can learn a language. The author
considers that learning is a conscious process. When we are learning, we know we
are learning and we are trying to learn. Language learning is what we did in school;
in everyday language, when we talk about rules and grammar, we are talking
about learning (p.1); on the contrary, according to Krashen (2013) acquisition
occurs subconsciously. While it is happening, we are not aware that it is happening.
We think we are having a conversation, reading a book, watching a movie. Of
course, we are, but at the same time, we might be acquiring language. (p.1). On the
other hand, Chomskys hypothesis is based on the language acquisition process
which the majority of human being live when they are in the growing up process;
hence, as this linguists hypothesis contemplates the first language acquisition

process, and does not mention the second language acquisition or learning, he did
not need to make a distinction between both concepts.
Secondly, as it is said in Cook (n.d.), Krashens Comprehensible Input Hypothesis
states that in order to acquire language, it is necessary a previous minimum
knowledge, refuting the idea that children are blank slates. This belief is similar to
the one proposed in Syntactic Structures by Chomsky and cited by Birchenall and
Mller (2014), which is a proposal about the existence of a mental tool which can be
found, hypothetically, inside the learners brain. This is called Language Acquisition
Device -also known as LAD- and it is supposed to hold the principles and rules of the
language. Hence, both theories states that it is necessary an initial element in order
to work and develop further structures. Nevertheless, Chomsky states that when the
child, who is being exposed to the language and to the acquisition process, faces
her/his mother tongue input, the LAD will automatically determine which one will be
the L1. Then, as the kid starts acquiring vocabulary, this device will provide the
correct grammatical structures for creating phrases and sentences by itself.
Furthermore, it is thought that this first language acquisition process occurs
unconsciously and that the child is not in condition of controlling what he acquires
and what he does not. On the other hand, Krashen, cited by Zafar (2011), assumes
that there is a natural and predictable order for acquiring a second language and that
learners acquire grammatical structures in a predictable order. In fact, he has also
overlooked the considerable influence of L1 on L2 and the role of positive and
negative transferences (p. 142), believing that grammatical structures of L2 could be
similar to the ones from the mother tongue of the person. Taking this both statements
into consideration, there is a huge difference in how Chomsky and Krashen believe
that a person will understand and acquire grammatical structures.
In the third place, as it was said before, Chomskys theory of the Language
Acquisition Device involves a process which happens in children when they start
being exposed to language, and in order to succeed, according to the linguist, cited
by Lightbown and Spada (2006), it has to occur during the Critical Period. The
Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH) is a theory developed by Lenneberg, cited by
Abello-Contesse (2008), this is the idea of thinking that there is a certain period of
time in human beings life when language acquisition occurs commonly, ending at
puberty. This statement implies that grown-ups might not able to acquire a language,

being this almost impossible. On the other hand, the most supported idea about the
age factor in language acquisition is Krashen's hypothesis. According to Krashens
position on the topic, cited by Snow & Hoefnagel-Hhle (1978), it is openly explained
that human beings do not necessarily have a maximum phase that can be
considered as a stop to easily acquire language. In fact, he simply believes that we
as humans are able to acquire language even though at the time of puberty and also
when we have become adults, contradicting what it is state by Chomsky's theory.
Fourthly, Krashens theory is splitted in five different hypotheses which are different
factors of the language acquisition theory suggested by the linguist: Natural Order
Hypothesis, Acquisition/Learning Hypothesis, Monitor Hypothesis, Input Hypothesis
and the Affective Filter Hypothesis (Krashen, n.d.). The Affective Filter proposed by
Krashen states that there is a mental barrier which is created by mental factors that
do not allow input from being completely acquired by the acquirers mind. This
statement implies that language learners could get distracted during the process
because of emotional factors. This hypothesis recognizes three individual variables,
such as students motivation, self-confidence and anxiety, which might impact on the
L2 learning/acquiring process and determine whether the learner will succeed or fail.
Indeed, it is said that according to Krashens hypothesis, some students might not
absorb what has been taught during the class because of teachers management of
the class which causes demotivation (Lin, 2008). Nonetheless, neither feelings, nor
emotional barriers are explicitly mentioned or considered in the data reviewed about
Noam Chomskys theory.
Fifthly, Chomsky and Krashen have both created, even though they are different,
theories focusing on the cognitive approach of learning, meaning that these two
linguists believe that the acquisition process occurs inside humans mind. On one
hand, Noam Chomsky believes, specifically in biological terms, that every human is
born with an innate way to achieve the language and that we are prepared to
develop it through the LAD, which is found in learners mind. Similarly, Krashen also
explains language acquisition as a process that occurs inside the mind, since he
says that once the comprehensible input is received, it is processed inside the
students mind (Cook, 2001). Notwithstanding, Stephen Krashens theory, apart from
focusing on the cognitive field, he also believes that language is significantly related
to society, since he claims that:

[..] The most important part of language is social aspect. There are two
versions of this. One is that L2 learning usually takes place in a social
situation where interact with each other, whether in the classroom or outside.
[...] The second version is that L2 learning takes place within a society and
has a function within a society. (Cook, 2001, p.193)
The theory that this linguist suggests, as it implies communicating with society, it is
part of the socio cognitive approach. The social factor involved in Krashens theory,
makes a huge difference between his and Chomskys point of view of language
acquisition.
To conclude this essay, we can state that the diversity of concepts that we have
exposed previously in this essay, showed clearly the contrasts between the authors
hypotheses and how both of them explain the acquisition process. Moreover, it is
accurate to remark some of these beliefs such as the Language Acquisition Device
which existence helps us as human beings, not only for earning grammatical skills,
but also for communicating with others. Roughly, Stephen Krashen has a more
expanded perspective of the linguistic evolution than Noam Chomsky. The theories
of the last author are mostly placed in the cognitive approach or mainly in the internal
process of acquisition. Finally, in spite of, both linguists are in agreement with the
fact that we have a tool in our brains that allows to all of us to get knowledge;
however, Krashen is the one that has the appropriate theory for the actual learning
style.

References
Abello-Contesse, C. (2008, December 13). Age and the critical period hypothesis.
Retrieved April 06, 2016, from
http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/content/63/2/170.full
Birchenall, L. B., & Mller, O. (2014). La Teora Lingstica de Noam Chomsky: del
Inicio a la Actualidad. Lenguaje. 417-442. Retrieved April 05, 2016 from
http://www.scielo.org.co/pdf/leng/v42n2/v42n2a08.pdf
Cook, V. (n.d.) Krashen's Comprehension Hypothesis Model of L2 learning: Notes by
Vivian Cook. Retrieved April 06, 2016, from
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/vivian.c/SLA/Krashen.htm
Cook, V. (2001). General models of L2 learning. Second language learning and
language teaching. (pp. 181-198). London: Arnold. Retrieved April 06, 2016,
from
https://uvirtual2.ucsc.cl/pluginfile.php/325155/mod_resource/content/2/Cook_
Modes_of_Learning.pdf
Krashen, S. (2013). Language Acquisition and Application. Second Language
Acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved April 06, 2016,
from http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/articles/krashen_sla.pdf

Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2006). How Languages are Learned. Oxford
University Press.

Lin, G. H. C. (2008). Pedagogies Proving Krashen's Theory of Affective Filter. Online

Submission.

Retrieved

April

06,

2016,

from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED503681.pdf
Mother Tongue [Def. 1]. (2016). In Cambridge English Dictionary. Retrieved April 05,
2016 from http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/mother-tongue
Snow, C., & Hoefnagel-Hhle, M. (1978). The Critical Period for Language
Acquisition: Evidence for Second Language Learning. Retrieved December
06, 2016, from
http://www.kennethreeds.com/uploads/2/3/3/0/2330615/article.pdf
Zafar, M. (2011). Monitoring the 'monitor': A critique of Krashen's five hypotheses.
Dhaka University Journal of Linguistics, 2(4). pp. 139-146. Retrieved April 06,
2016 from http://www.banglajol.info/bd/index.php/DUJL/article/view/6903/5484