CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION
It is undebatable that children acquire their first language without explicit learning.
Language acquisition refers to the learning and development of a persons language. The
learning of a native or first language is called first Language Acquisition, and of a second or
foreign language. A foreign or second language is usually learned but to some degree may
also be acquired or pic!ed up" depending on the environmental setting. Its also emphasi#ed
that $econd Language Acquisition according to %ichards &ac! '. &ohn (latt and )eidi (latt in
'heng*un +ang ,-../0123, the term acquisition" is often preferred to learning" because the
latter term is sometimes lin!ed to a behaviorist theory of learning. This is a contradictive
statement and tends to hit what we learned in the previous discussion we consider that the
acquisition *ust occurs in first language.
There are three main points broadly discussed regarding the theories in second
language acquisition. They are nativist, environmentalist and interactionist theories. 4ut, this
paper will mainly focus on discussing about environmentalist theory which carries many
questions appear regarding what discussed previously. And the questions are how second
language in the other term can be called acquisition, what is the linguistic input under the
linguistic environment, what are types of linguistic environments for second language
acquisition and, what is an effective environment for foreign language acquisition.
1
CHAPTER II
DISCUSSION
1. Linguistic Input for Second Language Acuisition
5ne scholar has to say0 The concept of input is perhaps the single most important
concept of second language acquisition. It is trivial to point out that no individual can learn a
second language without input of some sort" ,6ass, 7//83. Input provide the linguistic data
that a developing linguistic system needs in order for acquisition to be possible. +hen learner
receives input, they are feeding their developing linguistic system the data it need to start the
process of acquisition. Input is fundamental without input language acquisition will not
success.
1.1 T!e Ro"e of Input in Second Language Acuisition
Input or primary linguistic data is language that contains instances or examples of
various grammatical forms and other linguistic information in the linguistic environment of
the language acquirer ,$chwart#, 7//93. In the first language acquisition children used to
receives by input in their environment which they commonly hear in their daily li!e 0 do you
want a drin! of water: ;ont forget to wash before dinner, ma!e sure you ate your all
vegetables". $econd language learners such as immigrants or language learner studying
abroad also receive input on their acquisition from they are surrounded by second language
input as they go about daily routines li!e < at the ban! they may hear please fill out this
deposit slip", at the supermar!et they may be as!ed do you prefer paper or plastic:". Input
may also be written li!e billboard along the highway and advertisement or signs on a buss all
constitute source of input. 5ther source of input may be come from watching movie, listening
to songs, maga#ine etc. and also interacting with the other in the second language.
The important input characteristic of second language acquisition is that is must be
comprehensible. $uch if the input involves of communication of message, the learner must be
able to receive the extract meaning of the message. It does not mean that learners need to
understand every word of the message but they should be able to ma!e sense of the message
in some way.
2
=llis ,7//>3 ma!es a distinction between two types of input for acquisition0
interactional and non?interactional input.
1. Interactiona" input is the input which received in the context of interaction involve
communicating exchange such learner may be conversing with native spea!ers,
another learners or an instructor. (laying games and conversations with friends,
family and classroom also the example of interactional input.
#. Non$Interactiona" input is occurs in the context of non?reciprocal discourse ,=llis,
7//>3 when the learners is not the part of interaction when the process of acquiring
such as listening radio@music or watching television.
1.# Input %ode" of Second Language Acuisition
Aany scholars in $LA agree that in order to input to be usable for acquisition, it must
be noticed or attended to in some way ,e.g, 6ass, 7//8< Ban (atten, 7//C< wong D simard,
-..73. +hat do we mean by attending" to input:. 'urrently, $LA researchers are not all in
agreement as to what attending to input entails. $chmidt ,7//., 7//9, 7//1, -..73 said that
only feature of input that have been consciously noticed by learners are usable for
acquisition. 5ther researchers say that input must be detected" but that this detection does
not have to involve conscious awareness ,Tomlin D Billa, 7//>3.
There two models of Input of $LA0
A. Input %ode" &' (an Patten )1**+,
+hen learners attend to or notice input and comprehend the message, a form?meaning
connection is made. -or. could also be use at the word level to refer to word form ,4arcroft,
-...3 for example the word boy" is has the form of letters b?o?y". %eaning is refer to the
meaning of word form, example from boy" the meaning is young male". +hen learner hear
boy" they understand that boy is refer to young male, here Eorm?Aeaning 'onnection is
happen. Eorm?Aeaning 'onnection is the relationship between meaning and the way to
encoded it linguistically ,young male F boy3.
3
Input
/ => (Input Processing)
Inta0e
/ 12 ( System processing)
De3e"oping S'ste.
/ 12 (Output Processing)
Output
I. Input Processing4
)ow learners ma!e sense out of the language they hear and how they get linguistic
data" ,the creation of inta!e3
II. S'ste. processing4
Accommodation0 how learner actually incorporated a grammatical form or
structure into the implicit system of the language they are creating.
%estructuring0 incorporation of inta!e into developing system
III. Output Processing4
)ow learners acquire the ability to ma!e use of the implicit !nowledge they are
acquiring to produce utterance in real time.
Eorm?meaning connection also !nown as inta0e and the process in $LA that involved
in converting input into inta!e is called Input (rocessing. This inta!e is held in wor!ing
memory and has the potential to be internali#ed. +hen this happens, the developing linguistic
system must ma!e room for accommodate this new linguistic data. 5nce a new inta!e has
been accommodated, the developing system changes and is restructuring. The process that
entails accommodation of inta!e data into developing of that system is called s'ste. c!ange.
Einally, linguistic data that has been incorporated into the developing system may be
eventually accessed by learners as output or production, this process called output s'ste..
4
5. Input %ode" &' 6ass )1**7,
INPUT
/
APPERCEI(ED INPUT
/
CO%PREHENDED INPUT
/
INTA8E
/
INTERACTION
/
OUTPUT
Apperceived input is input that has been notice in some way by the learner and
functions as a priming device that prepares the input for further analysis ,6ass, 7//83 li!e in
Ban (atter model, 6asss model also shown that in order to apperceived input to become
inta!e, must be comprehended. 'omprehension of input entails that the learner analy#es the
input in some way to extract meaning.
1.9 Linguistic and Con3ersationa" Ad:ust.ent to Non$Nati3e Spea0ers.
+hat the nature of the input to language learner: Eerguson ,7/873, in a study
designed to loo! at issues of linguistic simplicity, noted that in language directed toward
linguistically deficient individuals such young children and Gon?Gative spea!ers of language,
Gative spea!ers ma!e ad*ustments to their speech. $peech directed toward young children
called baby tal!" while speech directed toward linguistically deficient Gon?Gative $pea!ers
it called foreigner tal!.
The interaction between Gative $pea!ers ,G$s3 and Gon?Gative $pea!ers ,GG$s3
become a common phenomena. In this phenomena we can see how native spea!ers
communicate with GG$$, they will ma!e appropriate linguistic and conversational
ad*ustment depending on the language competence of their partners. Hsually G$$ modify
their speech to be simpler and easier for GG$$. Eor example0 G$ usually spea! slowly, ma!e
clear of pronunciation in every word, there are pauses between utterances . The also use a
more generic term to mention specific thing, li!e they rather say flower" than tulip". $ome
time G$$ also separate the utterance with more repetition, more clarification, and more
comprehension chec!. 4oth of linguistic and conversational ad*ustment purposed to ma!e
speech more easily to be understood ,and it commonly call as Eoreigner Tal! ,ET3. $o ET
5
has a meaning as the simplified version that sometime use by Gative spea!er when
communicate addressing to Gon?Gative spea!ers.
As discussed by %oad =llis there are two type of foreigner tal! < grammatical and
ungrammatical. $everal early studies, notably Eerguson ,7/813 and Aeisel ,7/813, reported
that Gative $pea!er of =nglish, Erench, 6erman, and Einnish switched to an ungrammatical
variety of their language when addressing Gon?Gative $pea!er. Eerguson claimed, was a
socially conditioned speech variety, which he named foreigner tal!". The ungrammatically
was the result of three main processes 0 5mission, =xpansion, and
replacement@rearrangement ,Eerguson 7/81< Eerguson and ;e4ose 7/8C3.
5mission is deletion of some part of speech or part of grammatically terms.
=xpansion has meaning as addition an unanaly#ed tags to question or as confirmation of
question and also addition as insertion sub*ect pronoun of imperative sentence. +hile
replacement@ arrangement include forming negatives with no plus the negated item, replacing
sub*ect with ob*ect pronoun, converting possessive ad*ective?plus?noun construction to noun?
plus ob*ect pronoun.
=xample of ungrammatically processes0
(rocess Gormal Gative $pea!er Eoreigner Tal! =quivalent
5mission
? Tobe
? 'opulas
? 'on*unction
? $ub*ect pronouns
? Inflection morphology
? +hy do you cry:
? That car looks fast
? The water was warm,
&ut I didn't go
swimming.
? $he is spea!ing right
now
? +hy you cry:
? That car fast
? The water warm, I
no go swimming.
? $he spea! now
=xpansion
? Additional 'onfirmation
,to question3
? Additional sub*ect
pronoun before imperative

? Are you member of this
class:
? 'lose the doorI
? you member of this
class, yes:
? Jou close doorI
%eplacement@ rearrangement
? Gegative with no plus ? I dont read your ? I no read your
6
? %eplacing sub*ect with
ob*ect pronoun
? converting possessive
ad*ective?plus?noun
construction to noun?plus
ob*ect pronoun.
messages.
? )e !ill himself
? Ay sister doesnt li!e the
man
messages
? )im !ill himself.
? $ister me no li!e
man.
Learn for those research of the ET phenomena may appeared a question li!e, why is
input to Gon?Gative $pea!ers sometimes grammatically and sometime ungrammatically: The
answer of this question is unclear. Long ,7/273 identified four factor which tend to predict
deviant speech by the Gative $pea!ers.
Bery $econd Language proficiency of Gon?Gative $pea!er
(erceived higher social status of Gative $pea!er
(rior ET experience, but only with Gon?Gative $pea!er of low $L proficient
$pontaneity of the conversation
#. Co.pre!ensi&"e Input for Second Language Acuisition
According to KrashenLs input hypothesis suggests that humans acquire language in
only one way, it is by understanding messages or by receiving comprehensile input ,+ilson,
-...3. )owever, Krashen suggests that this comprehensile input should be one step beyond
the learners current language ability in order to allow learners to continue to progress with
their language development. The hypothesis is more popular to be called as i!", where i
represents the current competence of a learner and " for the next level ,Krashen, -../, pp.
-.?-73.
Eurthermore, Ereeman and Long ,7//7, p. 7>.3 asserted that development from a
learnerLs current stage of IL development, i, to the next stage, i!", is achieved through the
learner comprehending language. Thus, Krashen believes that comprehension is necessary in
order for the input to become inta!e.
In addition, Krashen states that to move from stage i to i!", it is necessary for the
learner to understand input that contains i!"# 'HnderstandL here means that the learner focuses
on the meaning or the message being communicated and not the form of the utterance only
7
,(ar!, -..-3. The main assumptions of the KrashenLs input hypothesis are as follows0 ,73
access to comprehensible input is characteristic of all cases of successful language
acquisition, in both first and second language acquisition< ,-3 greater quantities of
comprehensible input seem to result in better or faster L- acquisition< and ,93 lac! of access
to comprehensible input results in little or no acquisition ,Long, 7/2- as cited in (ar!, -..-3.
Erom the assumptions above, it can be derived that the role of input comprehension is
very important in the process of second language ac$uisition ,$LA3. Eurthermore, in relation
to the linguistic environment, there are three types of linguistic environment chosen as the
potential sources of comprehensible input based on (ar!Ls research study0 ,73 modified input<
,-3 interactionally modified input< and ,93 modified output ,(ar!, -..-3.
%odified Input
Aodified input is characteri#ed by input that has been modified or simplified in some
way before the learner sees or hears it. Input modifications can be repetitions, paraphrasing,
and reduction of sentence length and complexity when spea!er addressing a child or an L-
learner. This modified speech usually occurs in ay talk, %oreigner talk, and teacher talk.
+ithin the context of $LA research, simplified input most often refers to L- input that
has been modified by a nati&e speaker ,G$3 to facilitate non'nati&e speaker ,GG$3
comprehension, which is called %oreigner talk ,ET3. It is believed that such simplification
serves to facilitate comprehension better.
4ased on many studies related to modified input, it can be concluded that modified
input ,whether simplified or elaborated3 enhances GG$ comprehension. )owever, there have
also been reports of evidence that different types of modifications may have differential
effects for learners at different proficiency levels. Therefore, such evidence may be the case
that the definition of modified speech can be quite different for learners at different stages of
development.
At this point, it can be speculated as follows0 ,73 linguistic ad*ustments made in G$
speech when addressing a GG$ have a considerable effect in increasing comprehension, ,-3
input simplification may facilitate comprehension for beginners, and ,93 elaborative
modifications may be more suitable for advanced students ,5h, -..7 as cited by (ar!, -..-3.
8
Interactiona""' %odified Input
The next linguistic environment chosen as the second potential source of
comprehensible input for L- acquisition is characteri#ed by opportunities for G$?GG$
interactions in which both parties modify and restructure the interaction to arrive at mutual
understanding" ,(ica et al., 7/28 as cited by (ar!, -..-3. According to Long ,7/2-, 7/293,
the important distinction between modified input and modified interaction is that the tal! is
not only modified by the spea!er but also directed to the learner ,cited in (ar!, -..-3.
Eurthermore, Long identified that there are strategies employed by both parties to
negotiate their way through the conversational discourse. These strategies included aspects of
conversation such as comprehension chec!s, clarification requests, topic shifts, and self and
other repetitions and expansions. Long claims that spea!ers modify interactions using these
devices in order to avoid conversation problems, and repair discourse when non?
understanding sequences arise ,(ar!, -..-3.
Later, the term of LongLs interactional modi%ication became more widely referred to
as negotiation. Long defines negotiation as ...the process in which, in an effort to
communicate, learners and competent spea!ers provide and interpret signals of their own and
their interlocutors perceived comprehension, thus provo!ing ad*ustments to linguistic form,
conversational structure, message content, or all three, until an acceptable level of
understanding is achieved" ,(ar!, -..-3.
4ased on the above explanation, it can be assumed that the informational structure of
the two?way communication involved in interactionally modified input obliges G$s and
GG$s to negotiate for meaning, and in an effort to communicate, ad*ustments to linguistic
form, conversational structure, and message content are sought , in order to ma!e what they
say comprehensible to their interlocutors. In addition, this negotiation process of see!ing
acceptable meaning helps to ma!e input comprehensible ,Ereeman and Long, 7//7, p. 77>3.
%odified Output
The third type of linguistic environment chosen as the last potential source of
comprehensible input is the one where a learner modifies his@her output to ma!e it more
target?li!e, thereby ma!ing it more comprehensible to the interlocutor ,(ar!, -..-3.
The theoretical basis on the importance of output was derived from $wainLs
'omprehensible 5utput )ypothesis and LongLs Interaction )ypothesis. $wain ,7/213 argues
that comprehensible input is not sufficient for successful second language acquisition ,$LA3,
9
but that opportunities for non?native spea!ers ,GG$s3 to produce comprehensible output
,'53 are also necessary ,cited in $hehadeh, -..>, p. 91-3.
In addition, $waim ,7/213 states that when learners are required to produce pushed
output, they may be forced to move from Lsemantic processingL ,required for comprehending
input3 to Lsyntactic processingL ,needed for encoding meaning3. $he argues that producing the
target language ,TL3 may serve as the trigger that forces the learner to pay attention to the
means of expression needed in order to successfully convey his or her own intended
meaning" ,cited in Aoin#adeh and Jouhannaee, -.7-, p. 7.83.
$wain ,7//13 also identifies a number of different roles for output0 ,73 it may help
learners to recogni#e a gap ,i.e., notice3 between what they want to say and what they can say
,-3 it serves as a means by which learners can test hypotheses about comprehensibility or
linguistic correctness, and ,93 it can help learners to develop metalinguistic !nowledge of
how the L- wor!s. Last, she maintains the position that both comprehensible input and
comprehensible output are important for L- acquisition ,cited in (ar!, -..-3.
Aodified output is also derived from LongLs interaction hypothesis ,7/29, 7/21 as
cited by (ar!, -..-3. )e recogni#ed that learners could get interactionally modified input in
the process of negotiation. This input, ta!en by the learners previous output, helps them to
comprehend the input, and focus their attention on new or partially learned linguistic forms,
which enables their acquisition.
Eurthermore, in his interaction hypothesis, the position that learner output facilitates
acquisition when it ta!es modified input from a G$, and viewed GG$ output as a sort of a
trigger for foreigner tal!. This meaning negotiation process will lead learners to modify their
own output which in turn may stimulate the acquisition process ,(ar!, -..-3.
To summari#e, these three different !inds of linguistic environment are all potential as
sources of comprehensible input. =ach linguistic environment is inherently related to each
other, and that the three types are inevitably integrated. As =llis ,7/// cited by (ar!, -..-3
says +hat constitutes interaction for one learner serves as potential input for other learners."
Last, it should be specifically noted that Aodified 5utput does not occur by itself, and
that Interactionally Aodified Input and Aodified 5utput wor! in partner since one learners
modified output often wor!s as another learners comprehensible input.
10
9. T'pes of Linguistic En3iron.ents in Second Language Acuisition
The linguistic environment for language acquisition is very important. Eor the
children, they often exposure to different languages and spea! in different languages. They
do not only acquire their first language, but also can acquire the foreign language.
Learning environments places or situations where students are involved and are
learning, sometimes consciously li!e at school but often fully unconsciously li!e in the
family.
A typical formal learning environment is the classroom and outside the classroom.
There are many other environments0 real informal environments such as cafM, theatre, home,
museum, playground, etc.
Aoreover, nowadays the most popular informal learning environments are virtual li!e
blogs, social networ!s, forum, chats, etc. 6reenfield ,-../0 C/3 states, Birtual informal
learning environments produce learners with new cognitive s!ills0 strengths in iconic
representation and spatial visuali#ation but wea!nesses in higher?order cognitive processes0
abstract vocabulary, mindfulness, reflection, inductive problem solving, critical thin!ing, and
imagination."
There are basically two sorts of linguistic environments0 artificial, or formal
environments, found for the most part in the classroom, and natural or informal environments
,Krashen, -..-0 >.3.
9.1 -or.a" Linguistic En3iron.ents
Eormal, from Nform, means that the teaching action happens inside a structure,
usually school. A fixed place with a fixed timetable following fixed goals with various
methods, supported by some but not unlimited means, and foreseeing evaluations and
examinations. That is to say this !ind of action is structured, organi#ed, intentional and
supposed to have feedbac! that is also conscious and intentional ,6ramegna, -.7-0 73.
Today, in language schools all over the world, most of students consists of people
who have studied =nglish at school but feel they !now nothing and want to start again.
)owever, this is not to say that classroom instruction is useless. Indeed, there is
evidence to suggest that instruction does help. Eor example, learners who have had formal
instruction and who then spent time in the country concerned are li!ely to achieve a higher
degree of accuracy than those who have not had formal instruction. Jet, language lessons on
11
their own bring no guarantee of success. Eormal instruction is rarely a sufficient condition for
learning a language ,'heng*un, -..>0 1/3.
Therefore, to sum up, there are some advantages and disadvantages in formal
linguistic environments.
$ome advantages of formal teaching are that teachersL professionality, planning of
actions, fixed goals and accreditations lead often to results.
+hereas, the disadvantages are that studentsL learning times are not always the same
as the requested times, that school activities are often meaningless for students and too far
from studentsL real life.
9.# Infor.a" Linguistic En3iron.ents
Informal means that the learning process happens unconsciously, unintentionally,
incidentally, naturally, at anywhere and anytime without any method, by various means,
alone or in cooperation with others, often for pleasure ,6ramegna, -.7-0 -3.
The following is for example a definition of informal learning by the 'ommission of
the =uropean 'ommunities ,-..70 9-?99< in 6ramegna, -.7-3. Informal learning resulting
from daily life activities related to wor!, family or leisure. It is not structured ,in terms of
learning ob*ectives, learning time or learning support3 and typically does not lead to
certification. Informal learning may be intentional but in most cases it is non?intentional.
Aost of us !now or !now of people who have learnt to spea! a foreign language quite
fluently without any teaching at all0 people who travel and wor! abroad a lot< people who
stay in their own country but who mix with spea!ers of another language. =ven quite young
children, who drop out of school, often classed as unteachable", become unofficial tourist
guides and end up managing to communicate in several foreign languages. They are not
always totally accurate, but they achieve a level of language ability that is entirely adequate
for their needs. There is another case that many young children whose parents spea! different
languages ,first language and foreign language3 can acquire a second language in
circumstances similar to those of first language acquisition, the vast ma*ority of people are
not exposed to a second language until much later.
12
CHAPTER III
CONCLUSION
And the conclusion of what discussed today, that there some differences view among
the linguists, whether acquisition process and term occur in $econd Language or not.
=nvironmentlist ague that acquisition proses can happen caused by environment setting as
they say that an organisms nurture or experience are more importance to development than
its nature or inate contributions. meaning that experience can be reache only in the
invironment. +hen learner receives input, they are feeding their developing linguistic system
the data it needs to start the process of acquisition. Input is fundamental without input
language acquisition will not success. Aore over the linguistic environment for language
acquisition is very important, especially for the children, they often exposure to different
languages and spea! in different languages. They do not only acquire their first language, but
also can acquire the foreign language.
13
References
'heng*un, +. ,-../3. On (inguistic )n&ironment %or *oreign (anguage +c$uisition.
'hongqing0 Jangt#e Gormal Hniversity (ress.
=uropean 'ommission ,-.773. =uropean Oualifications Eramewor!. About =OE. Last
accessed Govember -.79. ec.europa.eu@eqf@aboutPen.htm
Ereeman, ;. L. D Long, A. ). ,7//73. +n Introduction to Second (angugae
+c$uisition ,esearch. London0 Longman 6roup.
6ramegna, 4. ,-.7-3, *ormal (anguage Teaching &ersus In%ormal (anguage (earning
Supported y -oile .e&ices, 'aL Eoscari Hniversity, Benice.
6reenfield, (. ,-../3, Technology and In%ormal )ducation/ 0hat Is Taught, 0hat Is
(earned, $cience ,Bol. 9-9, Go. 1/7., p. C/?87.
Krashen, $. ; ,-..-3. Second (anguage +c$uisition and Second (anguage (earning. Los
Angeles0 (ergamon (ress Inc.
Krashen, $. ;. ,-../3. Principle and Practice in Second (anguage +c$uisition. Los
Angeles0 (ergamon (ress Inc.
Aoin#adeh, A. D Jouhannaee, A. ,-.7-3. %ecasts, Aodified 5utput and L- ;evelopment0 A
'ase of (ersian =EL Learners. )nglish (anguage and (iterature Studies, Bol. -,
Go.7, pp. 7..?777.
(ar!, =. $. ,-..-3. 5n Three (otential $ources of 'omprehensible Input for $econd
Language Acquisition. T)SO(, Bol. -, Go. 9, pp. 7?-7.
$hahedah, A. ,-..>3. Aodified output during tas!?based pair interaction and group
interaction. 1ournal o% +pplied (innguistic, Bol. 7.9. pp. 917?92-.
+ilson, %. ,-...3. + Summary o% Stephen 2rashen's 3Principles and Practice in Second (anguage
+c$uisition4. Last accessed Govember -.79,
languageimpact.com@articles@rw@!rashenb!.htm
14