Second Language

SUBJECT ASSIGNMENT:
SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
My Reflection of Krashen and Swain`s theories, looking for a way to relate them.
Since 1960, the way in which learners acquired the Second Language has been a topic of interest of some linguistics, teachers and researchers, due to its importance for the development of the teaching-learning process. One of the issues that have been analyzed isthe fact concerned with the output and input in language acquisition. There is no doubt that the best learning condition for students is to provide the effective input and stretch their ability by output. The aim of this essay is to reflect whether it is possible to reconcile swan`s and Krashen`s views, in spite of the fact that both theories take very strong opposites positions about forcingstudents to speak or not, both theories look for the same target: to make the learner internalize and develop skills in a second language, get a cognitive maturity that let him engage in problem solving, and deductions and complex memory tasks. Likewise, this essay will clear up The concepts of output and input and their roles in acquisition and learning, which theorists and hypothesissupport krashen and Swain`s theory? Besides, this essay will reflect about how to reconcile these theories to reach the learning process through negotiation of meaning and interaction.
. The Input can be defined as the language information or data the learner is exposed and has access to Ellis(1985:127) for example, internet, music, games, the teacher, texts, books, or any useful source ,in my viewshould be according to learners’ interests .Output is the language that the learner produces. Traditionally it was seen as a way to practice existing knowledge or to elicit new knowledge, not a way to gain knowledge.
krashen and Swain, among many scholars, developed two important theories about this topic even though they seemed to be opposite. There is a common objective in the learningprocess and because of this fact one must ask oneself whether these two theories may be reconciled to work together in order to have success in the learning process and whether it is possible to demonstrate this assertion is not just a theory.
Krashen proposes five hypothesis (1981, 1982, 1985) in his input hypothesis. He states that comprehensible input should be beyond the current level of thelearner’s competence. This means that the learners need to access the material that is according to his level, krashes also declared in the learning hypothesis the acquisitions occur subconsciously as a result of participating in natural communication where the focus is on meaning. In contrast, learning occurs as a result of the conscious study of the formal properties of language and that’s why hestates that “language is acquired by understanding what we heard and read” in others words, when learners internalized all the material that they receive according to their level they start to develop their skills with all those forms were exposed to them at some time or another and they introduce new words and expressions. When Krashen states “Forcing students to speak English will not improvetheir ability to speak English.” (Korea Times, 2009) he means that acquisition requires meaningful interaction in the target language and natural communication in which speakers are concerned not with the form of their utterances, but with the message they are conveying and understanding . According to Krashen all these process follow an order (The natural order hypothesis) , the language isedited by means of an internal monitor(The monitor hypothesis) and there is a filter that controls how much input the learner comes in contact with and the way that it is transformed. In intake, the learners with high motivation and self confidence have low filters and obtain a great amount of input. On the other hand, learners with low motivation and little self confidence have high...