Download - Is Second Language Acquisition Like First Language Acquisition

8/2/2019 Is Second Language Acquisition Like First Language Acquisition

1/8

Is second language acquisition like first language acquisition?

Discuss this question based on the findings of empirical studies

into first and second language acquisition.

The main aim of my essay entitled Is SLA like FLA? Discuss this question based on the

findings of empirical studies into first and second language acquisition will be to answer

the proposed question in terms of the empirical studies that have examined similarities


2/8

between first and second language acquisition. A brief overview of some differences

between first and second language acquisition will be given.

The term first language refers to the first language that a child learns. Other terms used for

the first language are mother tongue, primary and native language. The term second

language (L2) is used to describe any non-native language learned after the learning of an

L1 or native language; also it refers to any language regardless of whether it is the second,

third, fourth or even fifth language. Second language acquisition (SLA) refers to the

process of learning a non-native language after the learning of the native language (Gass

and Selinker, 2008:7).

The development sequence can give us the first insight into the

similarity between first and second language acquisition. Ellis (1991, as

cited in Ipek, 2009:155-156) studied the development sequence and has

proposed three stages of development: the silent period, formulaic

speech, and structural and semantic simplification. He views the silent

period as a period of listening of a language that first language learners

are exposed to; formulaic speech is thought as expressions which are

considered to be wholes that cant be analyzed and are used in

particular situations (Ellis,1991, as cited in Ipek, 2009:155-156). The last

stage, structural and semantic simplification, the first is defined asomitting grammatical factors such as articles and auxiliary verb, while

the later is defined as omitting content words such as nouns and verbs

(Ellis,1991, as cited in Ipek, 2009:156). I agree with Ipek who concludes

that from these three stages we can see that the L1 and the L2 learners

are similar because both L1 and L2 learners have similar development

stages. The only difference is in the silent period where the L2 learners

are urged to skip it (Ipek, 2009:156).

In addition to the developmental sequence, Ipek (2009:156) proposes other aspects in

which similarity can be found between first and second language acquisition. SLA is

similar to FLA, among others, in input and in the acquisition order. Input

is vital to first language acquisition. Ipek agrees with Chomsky (1965,


3/8

Ellis, 1994; McLaughlin, 1991 as cited in Ipek, 2009:157) who states that

input is vital for first language acquisition but also he finds that input

alone can not be a sufficient source because it contains

ungrammaticalities and disfluencies. This means that if children rely

only on input they would not be able to determine what is grammatical

and what is not grammatical. Chomsky points out that children must

have an inner knowledge that helps them to overcome the deficiencies

of input because input alone cant provide the necessary information

that they need to discover the rules of the L1 (1965, Ellis, 1994; McLaughlin,

1991 as cited in Ipek, 2009:157). Ipek believes that these arguments for

the inadequacy of input in the first language acquisition can also be

found in the second language acquisition (Ipek, 2009:157). The

similarity between FLA and SLA can also be seen in the order of

acquisition. Brown selected a set of 14 most frequently used English morphemes and

studied the order of acquisition of these morphemes in three English-speaking children

from MLU stages through II to V (Brown, 1973, as cited in James and Khan, 1982:381).

The results of the study have shown that the order of acquisition of these morphemes was

similar in all three children (Lee, 2005)1. Furthermore, Corder states:The L2 Morpheme

Order Studies have suggested that second language learners errors might be essentially

similar to those committed by children learning first language (Corder, 1967, as cited in

Meisel, 2011:64). Dulay and Burt (1974, as cited in Lee, 2005) conducted a cross-sectional

study in which they examined the order of acquisition of 11 English morphemes in native

Chinese- and Spanish-speaking children learning English in an environment that included

native speakers of English. The results have shown that both Spanish and Chinese children

acquired the 11 morphemes in the same way. From this we can come to a

conclusion that in the first and second language acquisition there is a

similar pattern according to the order of acquisition of morphemes (Dulay

and Burt, 1974, as cited in Lee, 2005). However, it is worth mentioning that

some researchers have found that the order of acquisition varies

1 Article taken from internet source:http://jeas.co.kr/sub/cnt.asp?num=38&volnum=4, taken 10.2.2012., no

page numbering
http://jeas.co.kr/sub/cnt.asp?num=38&volnum=4http://jeas.co.kr/sub/cnt.asp?num=38&volnum=4http://jeas.co.kr/sub/cnt.asp?num=38&volnum=4


4/8

somewhat according to the learners first language. Schmidt (1983, as

cited in Ellis, 1997:6) conducted longitudinal study of an adult Japanese

learner of English named Wes over a period of 3 years (as cited in

Kasper and Schmidt, 1996:151-152). Without formal instruction and with

only rudimentary classroom learning in Japan, Wes performed plural-s

very poorly, much less accurately than irregular past ( Schmidt, 1983, as

cited in Ellis, 1997:7). In other words, Wes did not follow the natural

order. It has been argued that second language learning is built

completely upon transfer from the first language and cannot tell us

anything more general about language learning (Bever, Weksel, 1965,

as cited in Ervin-Tripp, 1974:112). Ervin-Tripp (1974:113) proposes that

if second language learning relies on skills and processes similar to the

ones from first language acquisition, the answer to the question Is

there a change in the learning rate or process with age? may be

generalizable to first language acquisition and we will be able to

manipulate the functional, social and structural circumstances in which

learning occurs. Ervin-Tripps empirical study consisted of thirty-one

participants, children aged 4 to 9. The participants were all English-

speaking children who went to a school where French was an

instructional medium. They have not been exposed to French for more

than nine months. The method used to test the participants was a

comprehension test consisting of 24 sentences with passives, actives,

reversed anomalous passives, indirect objects and telegraphic

sentences in which the children acted out the situation with dolls or

animals (Ervin-Tripp, 1974:113). In other words, the tests involved the

comprehension of morphology and syntax. The first question Ervin-Tripp

(1974:126) wanted to answer was whether the process of second

language acquisition looks like the first. The results of the study have

shown that the functions of early sentences, as well as their forms, their

reliance on short term memory, semantic redundancy, the

overgeneralization of lexical forms and the use of simple order strategy


5/8

are similar to processes in first language acquisition. Ervin-Tripp came to

the conclusion that first and second language learning is similar in

natural situations. The results regarding the second question Is there a

change in the learning rate or process with age? have shown that, with

regard to every aspect tested, older children (in the age range of 4 to 9)

showed an advantage over the younger children in terms of the rate of

acquisition and learned faster than younger children (Ervin-Tripp,

1974:126). The research conducted by Ervin-Tripp, among others, has

shown that the fact that an L2 learner builds on previously acquired

concepts and it is not what differentiates L2 learning from L1 learning

(Firth, 1975). Another similarity found between first and second

language acquisition can be found in terms of linguistic universals and

markedness. The findings in these areas show that unmarked features

are learned easier and faster than marked rules in both first and second

language (Ipek, 2009:156-157).

Despite all the evidence presented above, in favor of the claim that first

and second language acquisition are similar, it is worth mentioning that

there are some differences that distinguish first and second language

learning. An important difference between children learning their first

language and adults learning a second language is the contextual

support for learning. It is argued that the contexts for L1 acquisition

cannot be duplicated in the L2 learning (Firth,1975:137). However,

studies conducted by Gardner and Lambert (1972, as cited in Firth,

1975:137) and H. Douglas Brown (1973, as cited in Firth, 1975:137)

have shown that if the settings in which the learning of the L2 takes

place offer instances of meaningful communication then the rate and

the quality of L2 learning will be greater than L1 acquisition

(Firth,1975:137). Pronunciation is another area in which first and second

language learning might differ. A child that learns his native language

acquires the pronunciation of the regional and social dialect to which he

is exposed. This is rarely the case when the adult learns a second


6/8

language. Studies have shown that some extralinguistic and social

factors, such as ability and personality, might play a certain role in the

ultimate attainment of pronunciation (Firth, 1975:137).

From this paper we can conclude that the SLA is similar to FLA in many

aspects However, there are a lot of differences between SLA and FLA

which suggests that they are not nearly similar as we think. The

question of SLA and FLA similarity needs additional research because

the present evidence does not give us a clear answer to which extent is

SLA similar to FLA, only speculations to the claim.

Word count: 1525

Literature:

Bever T, and W. Weksel (1965), On the acquisition of syntax: a critique

of contextual generalization, Psychological review, 72, 467-482

Brown Douglas, H. (1973). Affective variables in second language

acquisition, Language learning, 23, 231-243.

Chomsky, N (1965),Aspects of the theory of syntax, Cambridge, Mass:

MIT Press

Corder, S.P. (1967), The significance of learners errors, International

Review of Applied Linguistics, 5, 161-170

Dulay, H.C. and Burt, M.K. (1974), Natural sequences in child second

language acquisition, Language learning, 24, 37-53


7/8

Ellis, R. (1994), The study of second language acquisition, China: Oxford

University Press

Ellis, R. (1997.), Second language Acquisition, New York: Oxford

University Press

Ervin-Trip, S. M. (1974), Is second language learning like the First?,

TESOL Quarterly, 8, 111-127.

Firth, M.B. (1975), A comparison of first and second language learning,

M cGill Journal of Education, 2, 131-140

Gardner, R. and Lambart W. (1972), Attitudes and motivation in second

language learning, Rowle, Mass: Newbury House

Gass, S. M. and Selinker, L. (2008.), Second language acquisition: An

introductory course, New York and London, Routledge Taylor and Francis

Group

Ipek, H. (2009), Comparing and contrasting first and second language

acquisition: Implications for language teachers, English language

Teaching, 2, 155-163.

James S. L. and Khan, H. L. (1982), Grammatical morpheme acquisition:

An approximately invariant order, Journal of Psycholinguistic research,

11, 381-388

Kasper G., and Schmidt R. (1996), Development issues in interlanguage

pragmatics, SSLA, 18, 149-169

Lee, S. A. (2005), The role of the L2 in the Morpheme order studies,

Journal of English and American studies, 4

McLaughlin, B. (1991), Theories of second language learning, Great

Britain: Arnold

Meisel, J. M. (2011), First and second language acquisition: Parallels and

differences, USA: Cambridge University Press

Schimdt, R. (1983), Interaction acculturation and the acquisition of

communicative competence. In N. Wolfson and E. Judd( Eds.),

Sociolinguistics and second language acquisition, Rowley. MA: Newburry

House


8/8

Download - Is Second Language Acquisition Like First Language Acquisition

Top Related