• Key theorists: Jean Piaget, Schmidt, Ellis, Swain, VanPatten.

• Declarative knowledge (what the learner knows – a grammatical rule, e.g. 3^rd person singular ‘s’. Considered step one) →   Procedural knowledge (how to do something without conscious reflection – automatic performance. This is considered step two). 

L2 is learnt through forms and structures.

Processing: incoming information → short-term memory → long-term memory.

1. Interaction hypothesis (proposed by Long in 1983). Important role of conversational (modified) interaction in SLA. Usefulness in engaging in conversations because modifications contribute to comprehension.  

- Negotiation for meaning (making adjustments in the speech until understading is achieved).  

- Negative feedback (drawing attention to incorrect utterances). 

When a learner says “I buy sandwich” and the instructor follows up with “Oh, you bought a sandwich”. 

2. Comprehensible output hypothesis (Swain, 1985). Communicating in the target language leads to improvement. producing output can help the learner analyze grammatical aspects of the target language, as the learner attempts to structure his or her thoughts. 

3. Noticing hypothesis (Schmidt, 1995). Distinction between input, intake and ouptut. What learners notice in the input (the language to which the learner is exposed – listening to the teacher in class) is the intake (hat part of the input that the learner notices). The distinction is necessary because learners do not necessarily register all of the input to which they are exposed. 

• Differences between noticing - conscious registration of specific instances of language (necessary for SLA) - and understanding - generalizations across instances which would characterize rule knowledge (facilitative but not required).  

• Implicit learning (learning without awareness of what is being learned) vs. Explicit learning (learning with awareness of what is being learnt). 

4. Input processing (VanPatten 1996;2004;2007). Model of how learners make form-meaning connections. Learners have limited processing capacity so give priority to meaning (do not notice language form).  

• Critics who say that the model fails to offer valuable insights into the role of processing in SLA. 

• Heavy reliance on laboratory studies (language examined outside of real communicative contexts). 

• Role of noticing (is noticing a fundamental necessity for language learning?) 

• Emergentism → learning emerges out of use of practice. Usage-based: language constructions emerge from real communicative events.  

Grown out of emergentism and usage-based: 

• Connectionism.  

• Cognitive linguistics. Meaning as central lo language (contrast to UG). Language is seen as inextricably linked to cognition. 

• Complex adaptative system (CAS). Language has a social function: it allows us to communicate with each other. The view that language is acquired and developed through the combined influences of social interaction and cognitive processes. 

SLA is understood as a dynamic and complex process.

- Mind (in terms of capacity) and attention are limited. Lightbown and Spada focus their view in "learners' inability to spontaneously use everything they know about a language at a given time" (Lightbown and Spada, 2009), which affects the SLA process.

The focus was more on the theoretical aspects of SLA.

The Natural Approach, related to Krashen’s theories, says that learners progress through predictable stages in acquiring new terms of L2, this means that they learn by understanding messages. "It is characterized by an emphasis on communicative activities, including exposure to large amount of comprehensible input, or input slightly beyond students' current level. To reduce anxiety, students were encouraged not to speak until they were ready" (Hummel, 2014, p. 74).

b.     Internalization: individuals interiorize knowledge acquired through social interactions, through which they gain control over their mental process.

c.     ZPD (zone of proximal development): Learners advanced further through social interaction, meaning they perform at a higher level because there is external support. This leads to self-regulation.

d.     Scaffolding (feedback): as a tool from derived from the previous concept, the betterment of one understanding may come from the feedback of teachers and peers.

e.     The cultural context shapes how we learn, the learner cannot be studied apart from the social and cultural context, putting the emphasis on concrete experiences and interactions in social community.

b. Feedback: giving specific notes to each individual based on their performance and capabilities.

c. Project-based: Through repeated participation in activities with more capable peers within a sociocultural environment, language learners acquire the linguistic, cultural and other knowledge needed to function within a given society.

d. Immersion learning: were students are expected to adapt to their environment through interaction and self-actualization, given that the cognitive process begin as an external mediated activity.

• Errors occured even in similar languages and are difficult to evaluate objectively which discredited behaviourum. 

• Criticism by Chomsky in the 1960s language acquisition based on imitation and reinforcement produced a decline in behaviourist explanation

Behaviourism in SLA was influenced by B.F. Skinner’s psychology of learning, which understands learning as process of stimulus–response– and possitive or negative reinforcement. In North America, Nelson Brooks (1960) and Robert Lado (1964) adapted these concepts to SLA between the 1940s and the l970s.

• Learning occurs through imitation, practice, and positive and negative reinforcement (feedback), and habit formation based on Skinner’s theory.  

• Thus, SLA begins with the habits formed in the acquisition of L1.   

• Inspired by Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH) Behavioursm believes:

  • Similarities between L1 and L2 → easy learning

  • Differences → difficulty and errors. 

• Corder (1967) promoted Error Analysis (EA) → learner errors are seen as evidence of their interlanguage, not just as L1 interference. Errors show what is happening in the mind of the L2 learner.