Second Language Acquisition and Second ... - Stephen Krashen

More documents

Recommendations

Info

the Dulay and Burt child second language studies used the BSM, the Bailey et al. adult study used the BSM, and when Larsen-Freeman used the BSM she obtained a similar order, but when she used other tasks she did not. Also, Porter (1977) reported that child first language acquirers produced what appeared to be the second language acquisition order when the BSM was used; as pointed out above, first and second language acquisition orders are somewhat different. While this evidence is at first glance suggestive, recent studies and reanalysis show conclusively, I believe, that the natural order is not an artifact of the BSM. First, we have obtained the natural order without the BSM, in the composition studies cited above, and more recently in free (spontaneous) speech in a study of adult second language acquirers (Krashen, Houck, Giunchi, Bode, Birnbaum, and Strei, 1977). Also, the SLOPE test gives an order quite similar to that found in the grammatical morpheme studies (Krashen et al., 1976; Fuller, 1978). (Some of these data were obtained and reported on after this objection was raised.) Second, Porter's child first language BSM order is not at all dissimilar to first language orders previously published in the literature (rho = 0.67 with de Villiers and de Villiers, 1973, which just misses the 0.05 level of significance, quite impressive for a rank order correlation using just seven items). (For a fuller discussion, see my response to Porter (Krashen, 1978c) in Language Learning.) 2. Do cross-sectional and longitudinal studies agree? It has been suggested that there is considerable individual variation in morpheme orders, and that longitudinal and cross-sectional studies do not always agree (Rosansky, 1976). In an attempt to determine just how much variation really exists, I recently reviewed every study available to me where grammatical morphemes were analyzed in obligatory occasions. This included child L1, child L2, delayed L1, and adult agrammatics. It included both grouped and individual studies, and longitudinal and cross-sectional studies. The complete list of reports consulted is given in Table 1. Following de Villiers (1974) I only included morphemes with at least ten obligatory occasions in a given study. This is an extremely small number, and I originally thought that this would produce large 56
Table 1. Studies analyzing grammatical morphemes in obligatory occasions ____________________________________________________________________________ I. Child L1 acquisition A. Individual cross-sectional: none. B. Individual longitudinal: Brown, 1973 (Adam, Eve, Sarah); Curtiss, Fromkin, and Krashen, 1978 (Genie). C. Grouped cross-sectional: de Villiers and de Villiers, 1973; Kessler, 1975. D. Grouped longitudinal: Brown, 1973 II. Child L2 acquisition A. Individual cross-sectional: Kessler and Idar, 1977 (Than, three cross-sections); Rosansky, 1976 (Jorge, ten cross-sections, Marta, Cheo, Juan). B. Individual longitudinal: Rosansky, 1976 (Jorge); Hakuta, 1974 (Uguisu); Kessler and Idar, 1977 (Than). C. Grouped cross-sectional: Dulay and Burt, 1973; Dulay and Burt, 1974a. III. Adult L2 acquisition A. Individual cross-sectional: Birnbaum, 1976 (Hector); Strei, 1976 (Gerardo); Holdich, 1976 (Holdich); Rosansky, 1976 (Alberto, Dolores). B. Individual longitudinal: none C. Grouped cross-sectional: Bailey, Madden, and Krashen, 1974; Larsen-Freeman, 1975; Krashen, Houck, Giunchi, Bode, Birnbaum, and Strei, 1977; Andersen 1976; Birnbaum, Butler, and Krashen, 1977 (also in Krashen, Butler, Birnbaum, and Robertson, 1978). IV. Agrammatics A. Individual cross-sectional: de Villiers, 1974 (A3, 50, 14, 5, 24, 6, 43 (two cross-sections)). B. Individual longitudinal: none. C. Grouped cross-sectional: de Villiers, 1974. ____________________________________________________________________________ variation; just one additional correct response, for example, could change a subject's score on a morpheme by 10 percentage points. Nevertheless, I found an amazing amount of uniformity across all studies that used Monitor-free instruments, that is, in all studies where language was used for communication. (Rosansky (1976), it should be noted, allowed items to be analyzed that appeared in less than ten obligatory occasions for an individual cross-section. This probably accounts for our different conclusions, which are based on some of the same data.) Table 2 lists the particular relations discovered and describes the criteria for selection. The counterexamples to these generalizations (Table 3) are rarely "serious". As Table 3 indicates, they often fall within 10 percentage points, are items represented by less than twenty obligatory occasions, or are within one or two ranks where percentages 57
Page 1 and 2:
Second Language Acquisition and Sec
Page 3 and 4:
Acknowledgments I would like to tha
Page 5 and 6:
Introduction This book is concerned
Page 7 and 8:
performance..." (p.35). Corder (196
Page 9 and 10: when it does not get in the way of
Page 11 and 12: language (some similarities to firs
Page 13 and 14: In the second part of this chapter,
Page 15 and 16: far more valuable then the exercise
Page 17 and 18: Monitoring generally improves accur
Page 19 and 20: overconcern with correctness, howev
Page 21 and 22: language is spoken or may be expose
Page 23 and 24: 2. Attitude and Aptitude in Second
Page 25 and 26: 1973, p. 8). Carroll also suggests
Page 27 and 28: outines and patterns, and at a more
Page 29 and 30: Sentences, Paired Associates, and S
Page 31 and 32: stay-ins appeared to be integrative
Page 33 and 34: motivation played no role because o
Page 35 and 36: (1977), after interviewing teachers
Page 37 and 38: did not produce the same results. T
Page 39 and 40: a stage many people, but not all, r
Page 41 and 42: The Good Language Learner Revisited
Page 43 and 44: predict differences in student achi
Page 45 and 46: settle the issue of whether adults
Page 47 and 48: language had higher scores than stu
Page 49 and 50: Table 1. English proficiency and ye
Page 51 and 52: The "self-study" reinterpretation o
Page 53 and 54: series the evidence for learning is
Page 55 and 56: 4. The Domain of the Conscious Gram
Page 57 and 58: Ann Fathman, confirmed our earlier
Page 59: significant differences for any of
Page 63 and 64: Table 3. Counterexamples to orderin
Page 65 and 66: Table 4 (cont.) ___________________
Page 67 and 68: ut *der Katze Ohr (The cat's ear).
Page 69 and 70: Research Findings 1. First language
Page 71 and 72: First-language-influenced errors he
Page 73 and 74: and (4) Ich weiss nicht, I know not
Page 75 and 76: ain", the right hemisphere, appears
Page 77 and 78: second language acquisition in adul
Page 79 and 80: hemisphere is removed, and the pati
Page 81 and 82: Monitor, to exist, and the degree t
Page 83 and 84: advantage in the first language. En
Page 85 and 86: while English "orients its users to
Page 87 and 88: 7. On Routines and Patterns in Lang
Page 89 and 90: adulthood. A. Smith (1966) describe
Page 91 and 92: "That's a _______") which were char
Page 93 and 94: variation. Nelson, for example, dis
Page 95 and 96: which he had learned by imitation.
Page 97 and 98: and often incorporated them into hi
Page 99 and 100: what utterances mean by observing h
Page 101 and 102: Furthermore, she associated strings
Page 103 and 104: and patterns other than as discours
Page 105 and 106: similar difficulty orders for gramm
Page 107 and 108: understanding language that is "a l
Page 109 and 110: up to the intermediate level. As Wa
Page 111 and 112:
practical only in a foreign languag
Page 113 and 114:
is making some effort at making him
Page 115 and 116:
It may be useful to distinguish thr
Page 117 and 118:
the luxury of building up acquired
Page 119 and 120:
marker /-s/, and the regular and ir
Page 121 and 122:
to speak the language they were lea
Page 123 and 124:
9. The Theoretical and Practical Re
Page 125 and 126:
contact with. "Teacher-talk" is the
Page 127 and 128:
language in Los Angeles. S. K. also
Page 129 and 130:
Caretaker Speech and Language Acqui
Page 131 and 132:
speech is so well rooted in the "he
Page 133 and 134:
speech is: they are simpler than na
Page 135 and 136:
Freed (1980) reports that foreigner
Page 137 and 138:
e boredom. When they overshoot, the
Page 139 and 140:
class was conducted entirely in Fre
Page 141 and 142:
more expansions as well as repetiti
Page 143 and 144:
Broen, P. (1972) The Verbal Environ
Page 145 and 146:
Dulay, H. and M. Burt (1977) "Remar
Page 147 and 148:
Hakuta, K. and H. Cancino (1977) "T
Page 149 and 150:
Learning Aptitude. Rowley, Ma.: New
Page 151 and 152:
Academy of Aphasia. Victoria, Briti
Page 153 and 154:
Smith, A. (1966) "Speech and other
show all

Second Language Acquisition and Second ... - Stephen Krashen

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?