Input
When
learning a second/ foreign language, the first thing people are exposed to is
input, that is, any type of language that a learner is exposed to. Behaviorist
linguistics used to think that the answer for language learning success was
external to the individual and therefore it was a learner’s duty was to get as
much exposure as possible to learn a second language. The understanding of
learning back then was interpreted as mere exposure and imitation. Successful
learners would eventually “pick up the language” through hard work and constant
practice. After Noam Chomsky’s universal
grammar breakthrough, researchers quickly shifted their focus on the learning
processes that occurred inside the brain, leaving behind all attempt to
demonstrate that the answer for language acquisition was in the corpus. A new
era had begun and a new definition was shaped for the term input thereon.
Corder in 1967 made a distinction between input and intake. The first being
considered by current applied linguistics as the language available that a
learner hears or receives from which is possible to learn, and the latter as
the language which is internalized.
Krashen
in 1985 would present his “input hypothesis” in which he claims that second language learners can acquire a L2 “by
understanding messages or by receiving comprehensible input”. Input that needs
to be I +1 meaning slightly more advanced for the learner’s level of language
proficiency. The reason is that the
available input that has not been internalized yet is the only one that can
alter the current language learner’s grammar. This is based on a basic learning
principle, If the available information is totally known by the learner, no
learning beyond the current developmental stage takes place. Krashen’s input hypothesis claims that output
is the result of acquisition and acquisition a consequence of sufficient
internalized input.
In
my opinion, this hypothesis is effective in explaining why L1 language learners
go through a silent period before they utter their first sentences. Babies do
it because there is no available language information in their brains (apart
from the learning device) to what they can resort when there is a need for
communication. They have to be exposed to the language until they have
internalized enough input. In the case of second language learners, there
is linguistic information already available other than the target language, so
it would be questionable to claim that this type of learners need to go through
a silent period as L1 learners do. In fact, as a teacher, you can take
advantage of this prior information to have your ESL/ EFL students produce language
from day one.
Comprehension.
Understanding
and to be understood is what guarantees the success of communication. Trouble
in understanding messages generally occur when native and nonnative speakers
cannot grasp what they mean due to their pronunciation, vocabulary choice and
grammar among other language aspects.
One
area of difficulty is pronunciation. Even if the sentences produced by the NNS
are grammatically accurate, a failure in pronunciation can cause a change in
the meaning of an utterance or unable the understanding of it. The same happens with non-target-like word choice
or grammar errors. What of these aspects is more relevant for the authors? Their opinion suggests that grammar is less
important than pronunciation and vocabulary.
Why have they made this conclusion? The authors explain that there is
more limited number of grammar possibilities as opposed to vocabulary items or
possible pronunciations.
Notwithstanding
the aspects abovementioned, some people have developed an ability to understand
NNS’s utterances irrespective of the difficulty because they have experience in
talking with them. One of these
abilities is using backchannel cues to understand. Nods, gestures, indications
or simple sound expressions such as “uh, uh” can help NNS comprehend their
utterances were understood or not. The
ability to fill the missing information or negotiate meaning other ways of
facilitating communication, especially if both speakers have some shared
background knowledge.
As I
have observed in my experience as a former student teacher, there is still a
great concern on grammatical correctness. An example of this took place some
years ago when a teacher following a notion-functional methodology decided to
lower his student’s speaking presentation grade because the student made
several unimportant mistakes that did not interfere with communication. The
explanation for this demotivating experience for the learner is merely based on
behaviorist perspectives of language acquisition that consider it as something
negative; a product of the lack of practice.
In terms of evaluation, one should consider the way in which
communication takes places regarding the use of linguistic and paralinguistic
elements so as to achieve it.
Interaction
When
two or more people communicate with each other, they are involved in a type of
interaction. The interaction hypothesis
claims that language acquisition takes place through meaningful interaction.
Unlike the input hypothesis, this considers language production from an early
stage.
According
to the authors, interaction involves three concepts: negotiation, recast and
feedback. The first one according to
teachingenglish.org is “a process that speakers go through to reach a clear
understanding of each other” The second:
recasts is a type of negative feedback in which there is always involved a more
competent interlocutor that reformulates incorrect or incomplete utterances.
Moreover, the objective of this type of feedback is to draw the less competent
interlocutor’s attention to the form being corrected. Finally, the latter: feedback refers to any
information that learners receive explicitly or implicitly concerning their
performance in the L2.
Susana
Sotillo in a study of corrective feedback via instant messenger concluded that
competent NNS when providing feedback to less proficient NNS tend to give
explicit metacognitive explanations in the TL, usually focusing on grammar
correctness whereas NS to NSS tend to correct implicitly, focusing on meaning
rather than on form (Negotiation of meaning generally)
Output
This
term refers to the language a learner produces which can be spoken or
written. According to the output
hypothesis, Swain (1985) language acquisition not only occurs when there is
comprehensible input but also comprehensible output. The effort that the learners make to
communicate with other interlocutors pushes them to a position that forces them
to notice aspects of their performance that would not see in other way. This
eventually leads to acquisition.
I
agree with Swain (1985) on his claim that “comprehensible output” is crucial
for SLA because it rejects partially the input hypothesis without objecting its
usefulness and importance, and it takes into account the need for production
the learners have when they want to learn how to communicate effectively in the
TG. In a speaking lesson I prepared for 4th grade students in 2013,
I considered the fact that they were not empty recipients of information, but
active learners who could speak despite their low proficiency in the L2. How
did it work? I started by providing a set of words on the whiteboard (Toys,
fruits, sports, animal related vocabulary) my students could use to talk about
their likes and dislikes. After a moment of preparation, the students formed
pairs and began talking. To my satisfaction, they were able to maintain a
conversation in English regardless of their low proficiency level. Of course,
their output was not absent of errors, but they achieved to made themselves
understood. I confirmed the apparent success of the activity when my students
stated they understood each other.
Feedback
This
concept can be defined as any information that allows an individual to modify
his “behavior” There are two types of
feedback: explicit feedback which is stating that there is a problem and
implicit feedback: not mentioning there is a problem, but using strategies to
make the interlocutor aware of their errors or mistakes.
Negotiation
It
can be understood as a set of strategies used to enable interlocutors to
communicate with each other successfully by focusing on incorrect utterances.
Some examples of negotiation of meaning are: foreign talk, paralinguistic
elements, language speed modification and implicit feedback providing. Swain and Selinker (2001) express these
strategies take part in a constant restructuring of linguistic knowledge.
Recast.
It
is a type of implicit feedback which is provided by a more proficient language
user who replaces (by changing a problematic feature) a wrong utterance for a
correct one. The authors mention that
the effectiveness of recast has not been confirmed yet since research in the
field has shown mixed results.
Automaticity.
It
is the ability to process information which involves “no effort or need for
attention”
The
role of input and interaction in language learning.
Input
plays a fundamental role in language teaching since it provides the data
learners are exposed to. This also contains the information the student need to
process from input to output to develop automaticity. Among the most important assumptions the
authors evidence are:
·
Adults tend to receive more correction than
children.
·
Syntax can develop out of a conversation.
·
Negotiation of meaning can facilitate
acquisition.
·
Effective learning takes place during
interaction.
·
Conversation stimulates later learning. It has positive effects on motivation.
·
Negotiation might direct a focus on the
correct form which may lead to a successful uptake and therefore development in
language acquisition.
·
There are mixed opinions related to the role
of interaction in SLA. The issue
continues to be discussed.
Attention.
This
is the ability to concentrate on a language feature which, according to the
interaction hypothesis, plays a major role in language acquisition. Examples of attention directing occur during a
negotiation of meaning episode in which the learners need to focus on a
linguistic form in order to communicate intended meaning.
Conclusion
Even
though great progress has been made in the field of SLA, there is still much work to do to find new supportive
evidence that allows researchers come to an agreement regarding how input is
processed, produced and modified.
Whereas
input hypothesis suggests learners should focus on meaning limiting their
production until they feel linguistically prepared, the output hypothesis
claims that languages can be acquired through meaningful interaction which
involves meaning processing and output production on early stages of language
acquisition. As language teachers, the information
presented in this article is absolutely valuable to understand how different perspectives
in SLA can help open up our minds to employ more teaching styles and
communicative strategies to help our students overcome their difficulties to
communicate effectively.
