Acquisition and learningIf, as we h

Acquisition and learning
If, as we have said, children acquire language subconsciously, what does this tell us about
how students should get a second language? Can we (indeed, should we)attempt to replicate the child’s experience in the language classroom?

Some theorists, notably the American applied linguist Stephen Krashen in the 1980s, have suggested that we can make a distinction between acquisition and learning. Whereas the form er is subconscious and anxiety free, learning is a conscious process where separate items from the language are studied and practised in turn. Krashen, among others, suggested that teachers should concentrate on acquisition rather than learning and that the role of the language teacher should be to provide the right kind of language exposure, namely comprehensible input (that is, language that the students understand more or less, even if it is a bit above their own level of production). Provided that students experience such language in an anxiety-free atmosphere, the argum ent goes, they will acquire it just as children do, and, more importantly, when they want to say something, they will be able to retrieve the language they need from their acquired-language store. Language which has been learnt, on the other hand, is not available for use in the same way, according to this argument, because the learner has to think much m ore consciously about what they want to say. The principal function of learnt language is to monitor what is coming from our acquired store to check that it is OK. As a result, learnt language tends to ‘get in the way’ of acquired-language production and may inhibit spontaneous communication.

This apparently convoluted discussion becomes relevant when we consider what we should do with students in class. If we believe that acquisition is superior to learning, we will spend all our time providing comprehensible input. W hat we will not do is to ask the students to focus on how the language works. Yet there are problems with this approach. In the first place, the ability to acquire language easily tends to deteriorate with age. Secondly, as we saw in Chapter 1, teenagers and adults have perfectly good reasoning powers and may want to think consciously about how language works. To suggest that they should not think about language if they want to (that is, learn it consciously), would seem absurd. And we should rem ember that for many language learners, one of the biggest differences between them and children acquiring their first language is the amount of exposure they get (in terms of hours), and the situation in which this language is used. Learners in foreign language classrooms are in a very different situation from that of children of loving parents.Describing learning and teachingPerhaps, mere exposure to comprehensible input is not enough, therefore, for older children and adults.

Perhaps, as some claim, they should have their attention drawn to aspects of language so that they can notice these aspects; as a result they will recognise them when they come across them again, and this recognition will be the first stage in their ‘knowing’ of the language which, once known in this way, will be available for them to use.

We can go further and say that a rich classroom environment would not only expose students to language (of course), but also give them opportunities to activate their language knowledge. Furtherm ore, we should offer them chances to study language and the way it works too, since for some learners this will be the key to their success, and for all others (apart from young children) it will be an added bonus to the other activities which we take into the classroom. In other words, both acquisition andlearning have their part to play in language getting for students after childhood.

Kết quả (Việt) 1:

Mua lại và học tậpNếu như chúng tôi đã nói, trẻ em có được ngôn ngữ tiềm thức, những gì hiện này cho chúng tôi biết về làm thế nào học sinh sẽ nhận được một ngôn ngữ thứ hai? Chúng tôi có thể (thực sự, nên chúng tôi) cố gắng để nhân rộng kinh nghiệm của trẻ trong lớp học ngôn ngữ?Some theorists, notably the American applied linguist Stephen Krashen in the 1980s, have suggested that we can make a distinction between acquisition and learning. Whereas the form er is subconscious and anxiety free, learning is a conscious process where separate items from the language are studied and practised in turn. Krashen, among others, suggested that teachers should concentrate on acquisition rather than learning and that the role of the language teacher should be to provide the right kind of language exposure, namely comprehensible input (that is, language that the students understand more or less, even if it is a bit above their own level of production). Provided that students experience such language in an anxiety-free atmosphere, the argum ent goes, they will acquire it just as children do, and, more importantly, when they want to say something, they will be able to retrieve the language they need from their acquired-language store. Language which has been learnt, on the other hand, is not available for use in the same way, according to this argument, because the learner has to think much m ore consciously about what they want to say. The principal function of learnt language is to monitor what is coming from our acquired store to check that it is OK. As a result, learnt language tends to ‘get in the way’ of acquired-language production and may inhibit spontaneous communication.This apparently convoluted discussion becomes relevant when we consider what we should do with students in class. If we believe that acquisition is superior to learning, we will spend all our time providing comprehensible input. W hat we will not do is to ask the students to focus on how the language works. Yet there are problems with this approach. In the first place, the ability to acquire language easily tends to deteriorate with age. Secondly, as we saw in Chapter 1, teenagers and adults have perfectly good reasoning powers and may want to think consciously about how language works. To suggest that they should not think about language if they want to (that is, learn it consciously), would seem absurd. And we should rem ember that for many language learners, one of the biggest differences between them and children acquiring their first language is the amount of exposure they get (in terms of hours), and the situation in which this language is used. Learners in foreign language classrooms are in a very different situation from that of children of loving parents.Describing learning and teachingPerhaps, mere exposure to comprehensible input is not enough, therefore, for older children and adults. Perhaps, as some claim, they should have their attention drawn to aspects of language so that they can notice these aspects; as a result they will recognise them when they come across them again, and this recognition will be the first stage in their ‘knowing’ of the language which, once known in this way, will be available for them to use.We can go further and say that a rich classroom environment would not only expose students to language (of course), but also give them opportunities to activate their language knowledge. Furtherm ore, we should offer them chances to study language and the way it works too, since for some learners this will be the key to their success, and for all others (apart from young children) it will be an added bonus to the other activities which we take into the classroom. In other words, both acquisition andlearning have their part to play in language getting for students after childhood.