Comparative Essay

about Language Acquisition Hypotheses

Students: Valentina Acua Z.

Alexa Reichelt B.

Concepcin, April 8th 2016

It is well known that language is the method in which people can express their ideas,
emotions and information. 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. 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 in three wellknown authors, their contrasts and their agreements in order to elucidate the concept
of SLA and how it is input in our brains.
Every human must have acquired the language in some stage of their lives. Mostly
and ideally when they are young and grow up in a natural context or/and
psychological

input. According

to

Stephen

Krashens Acquisition

by

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 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) (Krashen, 2013). On the other hand,
Chomskys hypothesis is based on the language acquisition process that the majority
of human being live when they are in the growing up process; hence, as this linguist
does not mentions the second language acquisition or learning, he never needed to
make a distinction between both concepts.
Secondly, as it is said in Cook (n.d.), Krashens Comprehensible Input 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 dispositive 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 acquiring process, faces
her/his mother tongue input, the LAD will automatically determine which one will be
the L1. Then, as the kid starts acquiring the 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 both linguist believe the person
will understand and acquire grammatical structures.
In the third place, as 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 the human
beings life when language acquisition occurs more properly, ending at puberty. This
statement implies that grown-ups are 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 and Hoenagel-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 splited in five different hypotheses which are different
factor 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 reaching the LAD in the acquirer's 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 the teachers management
of the class which causes demotivation (Lin, 2008). Nonetheless, nor feelings,
neither an emotional barrier is explicitly mentioned or considered in the data review
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 the two linguist
believe that the acquisition process occurs inside the 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 the 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 significatively
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, showed clearly the contrasts between Krashen and Chomsky
hypothesis and how both of them explain the acquisition process. Moreover, it is
accurate to point out some of this believes just like the Language Acquisition Device
which existence help us as human beings, to earn grammatical skills and also, how
to communicate with others. Roughly, Stephen Krashen has an expanded
perspective of the linguistic evolution than Noam Chomsky. The theories of the last
author are mostly placed in the cognitive approach or in the innate knowledge. In
spite of both linguists are in agreement that we have a device in our brains that
allows us to get the 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

Chomsky, N. (1992). On the nature, use and acquisition of language. Thirty Years of
Linguistic Evolution. Studies in Honor of Ren Dirven on the Occasion of his
Sixtieth Birthday. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Retrieved April 06th, 2016
from

https://books.google.es/books?

hl=es&lr=&id=RL1OAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA3&dq=acquisition+chomsky&o
ts=mnUkqdC3Tr&sig=81p4YiWG9Nymwe4Uj3i4f20q7o#v=onepage&q=acquisition
%20chomsky&f=false
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

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). Cambridge English Dictionary. Retrieved April 05,
2016 from http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/mother-tongue
Snow, C., & Hoenagel-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