Synonyms

Foreign language learning; L2 acquisition; Second language acquisition

Definition

Second language learning (SLL) is concerned with the process and study of how people acquire a second language, which is often referred to as L2 or target language, as opposed to L1 (the native language). Generally, the term second language in this context can refer to any language (also a third or fourth language) learned in addition to the native language. However, second language learning would be contrasted with a bilingual learning situation, in which a child acquires two languages simultaneously (e.g., when the parents speak two different languages). We only speak of second language acquisition if another language is acquired after the first language.

The terms learning and acquisition are frequently treated as synonyms in the literature. Some researchers, however, distinguish between acquisition and learning, stating that acquisition refers to the gradual subconscious development of language abilities by using the language naturally (similar to the process of children acquiring their first language), whereas learning refers to the conscious process of accumulating knowledge of a language, typically as the product of formal instruction (Krashen 1982). In the same vein, the term second language learning is sometimes associated specifically with the learning of languages through formal instruction, while the term second language acquisition is commonly used as a generic cover term to refer to learning a target language in all situations, including the classroom. Another relevant term in this context is foreign language learning, which some researchers use to differentiate between learning environments. In their view, foreign language learning refers specifically to the learning of a nonnative language in the environment of one’s native language, while the term second language acquisition to them refers to language learning in the country where this language is spoken (which may or may not take place within a classroom setting). Not all researchers, however, agree with this distinction.

Theoretical Background

The study of second language learning/acquisition is a fairly recent phenomenon, belonging to the second half of the twentieth century. In the various periods of SLL research, there were conflicting views about the nature and development of the learner’s language knowledge, depending on the prevailing linguistic theory of the time (for a detailed discussion, see Ellis 2008).

Around the 1950s, the established theory was behaviorist learning theory, which saw language learning, like any other learning, as a habit formation. Most scholars claimed that knowing a language means knowing a number of items and their potential arrangements, and a second language learner was seen as exhibiting imperfect knowledge of these items and rules, with gaps in L2 knowledge naturally filled by the grammar of the learner’s L1. Consequently, it was predicted that the main cause of errors in the L2 were interferences of the L1 (called negative transfer). With a method called contrastive analysis, the linguists of the time contrasted the L1 and L2 language systems and looked for potential areas of difficulty due to differences between the language systems.

As research showed, however, not all learner errors can be attributed to the phenomenon of transfer. Rather, learners appear to be actively involved in constructing their own rules, and behaviorists were criticized for ignoring the creative side of language. Subsequently, researchers’ attitude toward learner errors changed, and contrastive analysis was replaced by error analysis, where errors were not seen as examples of non-learning from the language norm any more but were regarded as examples of learners’ active testing of hypotheses.

In the 1960s and 1970s with Noam Chomsky, a new research paradigm emerged, stressing the innate properties of the human mind that shape language learning, which provided a mentalist theory of language learning. With his innateness hypothesis, Chomsky (1965) claimed that humans possess a faculty for learning languages referred to as Language Acquisition Device (LAD), which is equipped with Universal Grammar (UG), i.e., principles and parameters underlying all grammars of all languages. Drawing directly from these mentalist views of L1 acquisition, researchers then claimed that the learner does not move from L1 to L2 in an incomplete language system, but that there exists a learner language system called interlanguage (Selinker 1972), which is a dynamic system independent of L1 and L2 with rules of its own.

A question which has frequently been considered by second language researchers is whether we still have access to the LAD postulated by Chomsky in L2 acquisition. Basically, four possibilities have been proposed: the “no-access position” argues that L2 learners acquire the L2 grammar without any reference to UG but through other faculties of the human mind, whereas the “complete access position” claims that L2 learners learn in exactly the same ways as L1 learners. In the “partial access position,” then, L2 learners have access to UG through what they know of the L1, starting with L1 parameter settings rather than with the initial neutral state, while in the “dual access position,” L2 learners have continued access to UG, but also have access to a general problem-solving module, with both systems competing in L2 acquisition (see Ellis 2008).

Since the 1980s, our understanding of the many facets of second language learning has been greatly enriched by perspectives from related disciplines. Two theories which have become particularly popular recently here are connectionism (viewing SLL from a neuropsychological perspective) and Vygotskyan learning theory (operating within a sociocultural framework; for details and a survey of SLL theories see Mitchell and Myles 2004).

Connectionism, which is cognitively oriented, is not a particularly new approach, but progress in computer technology has increased its popularity since most studies involve hypothesis testing via computer simulation. Like other cognitive theories, it sees second language learning/knowledge as similar to other types of learning/knowledge (in contrast to a linguistic theory, which claims that linguistic knowledge is unique). Here, the brain is conceived as consisting of neural networks, with (language) learning occurring on the basis of associations, by which links between information nodes become strengthened or weakened. Thus, connectionism differs from other theories insofar as it does not believe that language acquisition involves rule learning, but postulates associative processes instead.

Vygotskyan sociocultural theory (a general theory of learning associated with Lev S. Vygotsky (1896–1934) applied to SLL by James Lantolf), like connectionism, claims that language learning and general learning are subject to identical mechanisms. In contrast to cognitive approaches, however, it argues that social interaction plays a fundamental role in the development of cognition. While sociocultural theory rests on a variety of theoretical principles, its core construct is that of mediation, i.e., that mental activity in general and learning in particular is a process which is mediated through mental tools (e.g., language) and through social interaction; the theory thus rejects the conventional distinction between social and psychological components of cognition.

Shifting the focus from SLL theories to the language learner and learning results, a characteristic phenomenon frequently observed is that an L2 is rarely acquired to a degree that is comparable to native-speaker proficiency in the L1, and that the results achieved vary widely; in most cases the process of learning will stop at some point, and learner language will fossilize at a stage when it still contains certain features which do not correspond to the target language. One goal of SLL research is to identify the external and internal factors determining why language learners acquire language in the way they do and why different proficiency levels are attained by different L2 learners.

Several external and internal factors appear to come into play here:

  • The social context forms a decisive external factor. Even in first language acquisition, social factors concerned with the relation of child and caretaker will play a role. In second language learning, the social context will have even more importance because it is increasingly complex. On the one hand, it will play a role in influencing the attitude of the language learner toward the second language, while on the other hand, it will also determine the social provision of learning situations and opportunities.

  • Motivation represents an internal factor which may be influenced by the social context, since the initial motivation to learn the L2 will be created by the attitude of the learner toward the language and/or the community. Two main types of motivation commonly distinguished here are integrative motivation (i.e., language learning due to a desire to integrate with the L2 community) and instrumental motivation (i.e., language learning in order to receive a good grade, no particular interest in communication). In addition to this general motivation to learn, motivation can also arise from success in the learning process, and can thus be both a cause and the result of success.

  • Personal characteristics of the language learner will also have an influence on the learning process and outcome. Age will play a role, insofar as adults appear to be less likely to achieve native-like pronunciation in the target language. Another potential influencing factor is the learner’s general personality, which manifests itself in factors like the degree of anxiety he/she exhibits. The particular learning style and the learning strategies the learner favors and develops will also be an influence in this context. Finally, apart from age and personality, learners will also vary with regard to their language aptitude, i.e., their natural disposition for learning an L2.

  • The amount and characteristics of the learning opportunities form another external influencing factor which is crucial for the acquisition process. Whatever the language learner brings to the task in terms of aptitude, motivation, etc., the outcome of language learning depends to a large extent on the amount and kind of exposure to the target language. Here we can firstly differentiate learning opportunities in terms of time of exposure to the language, and secondly distinguish between different kinds of learning, i.e., formal instruction vs. natural acquisition. Both of these variables will influence the route and rate of second language learning.

Important Scientific Research and Open Questions

Since the initial stages, SLL research has developed into an independent and interdisciplinary field, with investigations becoming increasingly diverse and sophisticated. Competing theories of second language learning exhibit substantial differences since researchers approach the question how second languages are learned from a wide range of perspectives and research backgrounds, such as linguistics, psychology, or education. Apart from differences related to the scientific field of origin, theories differ for instance in the type of learning they cover (e.g., naturalistic vs. instructed acquisition), in research approach (e.g., inductive vs. deductive reasoning), or in the theory’s core elements (e.g., the role attributed to influencing factors). Although all theories have in common that they aim at explaining how second language learning works, the field of SLL is still struggling with the multitude of competing explanations (Mitchell and Myles 2004).

Another open question in this context concerns the relation between research on second language learning on the one hand and language teaching on the other. To this end, researchers are still debating in what way and to what degree second language learning research actually impacts on second language teaching. While early SLL research was frequently pedagogically motivated, much of the current research is no longer directly concerned with language teaching issues. Nevertheless, we can assume that research results are at least indirectly relevant to language pedagogy, since second language learning is the process that language teaching aims at facilitating. Various parallel methods exist for teaching a foreign language, reaching from the early grammar translation and audio-lingual method to the communicative approach, which are usually conceptualized on the basis of a specific view of what language is, how it is learned, and what conditions facilitate learning. Nevertheless, the problem of a gap between SLL research and language pedagogy due to the former’s interest in technical knowledge, in contrast to the latter’s concern with practical knowledge, is frequently addressed in the literature, and attempts are made to bridge this gap (Ellis 1997).

Cross-References

Behaviorism and Behaviorist Learning Theories

Beliefs About Language Learning

Bilingualism and Learning

Connectionist Theories of Learning

Language Acquisition and Development

Learner Characteristics

Motivation and Learning: Modern Theories

Personality and Learning

Psycholinguistics and Learning

Sociocultural Research on Learning