Krashen tried to distinguish between acquisition and learning. According to Krashen, language acquisition is a subconscious process, while language learning is a conscious knowledge. It really makes sense. However, there is a controversial issue. In Krashen’s view, the acquired system is used to produce language while the learned system serves as an inspector of the acquired system. Furthermore, learned knowledge cannot lead to acquired knowledge. However, I am wondering how we can prove that there are separate systems between the acquisition and learning. When I first heard this distinguish, I agreed with that. However, I reminded that speaking is initiated through the acquired system. If Krashen’s view is true, how have learners like me ever produced L2 production?
Schmidt proposed the noticing hypothesis. Awareness through attention is necessary for noticing which in turn is essential for learning. For this hypothesis, there is the idea of noticing a gap. That is, a second language learner will begin to acquire the target like form if and only if it is present in comprehended input and ‘noticed’ in the normal sense of the word, that is consciously. However, noticing alone does not mean it is automatically acquired, but it is the essential starting point. But I am wondering whether a learner must consciously notice something.
Krashen introduces Monitor Model. The Monitor is an important term for understand Krashen’s view. The Monitor is also related to the distinction between acquisition and learning. The learned system has a special function to serve as a Monitor which alters the output of the acquired system. In other words, the Monitor is responsible for linking the acquired and learned systems in a situation of language use. The only function of the Monitor is editing utterance. For activating the monitor, there are three conditions that must be met; time, focus on form, know the rule. However, Krashen mentioned that these three conditions are necessary, but they are not necessarily sufficient. That is, the Monitor may not be activated even when all three conditions have been satisfied. But I’m wondering whether we have enough time to monitor during real conversation. And also, how do we prove where the rule used for utterance comes from.
Schmidt proposed the noticing hypothesis. Awareness through attention is necessary for noticing which in turn is essential for learning. For this hypothesis, there is the idea of noticing a gap. That is, a second language learner will begin to acquire the target like form if and only if it is present in comprehended input and ‘noticed’ in the normal sense of the word, that is consciously. However, noticing alone does not mean it is automatically acquired, but it is the essential starting point. But I am wondering whether a learner must consciously notice something.
Krashen introduces Monitor Model. The Monitor is an important term for understand Krashen’s view. The Monitor is also related to the distinction between acquisition and learning. The learned system has a special function to serve as a Monitor which alters the output of the acquired system. In other words, the Monitor is responsible for linking the acquired and learned systems in a situation of language use. The only function of the Monitor is editing utterance. For activating the monitor, there are three conditions that must be met; time, focus on form, know the rule. However, Krashen mentioned that these three conditions are necessary, but they are not necessarily sufficient. That is, the Monitor may not be activated even when all three conditions have been satisfied. But I’m wondering whether we have enough time to monitor during real conversation. And also, how do we prove where the rule used for utterance comes from.
Can you think of some ways to prove/falsify Krashen's hypotheses?
답글삭제