Theories in Second Language Acquisition by Unknown

Author:Unknown
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9781135928674
Publisher: Taylor and Francis

Summary of Predictions

Here I summarize some of the main nonneurobiological predictions, focusing on similarities and differences between L2 and L1. First of all, in some ways, the predictions are similar in first and second language. In both L1 and L2, declarative memory should underlie the learning, storage, and use of all idiosyncratic knowledge in language. Thus idiosyncratic lexical knowledge should always be stored in this system, across linguistic subdomains (e.g., simple words and their meanings, irregular morphology, syntactic complements, idioms). In both L1 and L2, aspects of grammar should initially be learned in declarative memory. In parallel, procedural memory should also gradually learn grammatical knowledge. After sufficient experience with the language, procedural memory-based grammatical processing should tend to take precedence over analogous declarative knowledge, resulting in increasing automatization of the grammar.

However, L2 acquisition is also expected to differ in important ways from L1 acquisition. Perhaps most importantly, grammar should tend to depend more on declarative memory and less on procedural memory in L2 than L1, for several reasons. First, L2 learners will always have had less language exposure than L1 learners at the same age, simply because they began learning the L2 later. The later the L2 age of acquisition, the more pronounced this difference. Since declarative memory learns quite rapidly, while procedural memory learns only gradually, at any given age a learner’s L2 grammar should be less proceduralized and should thus depend more on declarative memory than their L1 grammar. Thus, just for this reason alone, L2 grammar should tend to rely more on declarative memory than L1 grammar.

Second, because learning in procedural memory seems to be established early and then declines, while declarative memory shows the opposite pattern, L1 learners (and early L2 learners) should tend to rely particularly on procedural memory for learning grammar (especially after a reasonable amount of language exposure), while later (L2) learners should rely more on declarative memory, and indeed may never proceduralize their grammar to the same extent as L1 learners. Importantly, this pattern should hold even after the same amount of language exposure in L1 and L2. However, most neurocognitive studies do not compare L1 children with L2 adults (e.g., both after 10 years of language exposure). Rather, as pointed out earlier, most studies comparing the neurocognition of L2 with L1 examine both groups at the same age (e.g., a given subject’s L1 and L2), and thus at different points in the learning trajectory. This is not problematic per se, but it must be kept in mind when interpreting the data.

Third, even the type of language experience may influence learning and the learner’s relative dependence on the two memory systems. As we have seen, explicit, classroom-like instruction of the grammar may encourage learning in declarative memory, perhaps at the expense of learning in procedural memory. Conversely, the lack of explicit instruction, as often occurs in immersion contexts, may encourage learning in procedural memory. These predictions should hold for both L1 and L2 learners. However, L1 learning generally occurs primarily in an

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.