Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Krashen called this level of input "i+1", where "i" is the learner's interlanguage and "+1" is the next stage of language acquisition. The acquisition–learning hypothesis claims that there is a strict separation between acquisition and learning; Krashen saw acquisition as a purely subconscious process and learning as a conscious process, and ...
Krashen outlined five hypotheses in his model: The acquisition-learning hypothesis. This states that there is a strict separation between conscious learning of language and subconscious acquisition of language, and that only acquisition can lead to fluent language use. [10] The monitor hypothesis.
Krashen also posits a distinction between “acquisition” and “learning.” [4] According to Krashen, L2 acquisition is a subconscious process of incidentally “picking up” a language, as children do when becoming proficient in their first languages. Language learning, on the other hand, is studying, consciously and intentionally, the ...
Wolfgang Butzkamm [8] proposes to extend Krashen's notion of comprehension. Both in natural language acquisition as well as in foreign language classrooms, in order for the learner to make progress, understanding must occur on two levels, a situational or functional and a formal or structural level.
The no interface hypothesis, closely associated with Krashen's distinction between learning and acquisition, argues that implicit and explicit knowledge are fundamentally distinct systems. According to this perspective, explicit knowledge cannot be transformed into implicit knowledge.
The strong-interface position views language learning much the same as any other kind of learning. In this view, all kinds of learning follow the same sequence, from declarative knowledge (explicit knowledge about the thing to be learned), to procedural knowledge (knowledge of how the thing is done), and finally to automatization of this procedural knowledge.
The term acquisition was originally used to emphasize the non-conscious nature of the learning process, [note 1] but in recent years learning and acquisition have become largely synonymous. SLA can incorporate heritage language learning, [2] but it does not usually incorporate bilingualism. Most SLA researchers see bilingualism as being the ...
The comprehension approach is most strongly associated with the linguists Harris Winitz, Stephen Krashen, [2] Tracy D. Terrell and James J. Asher.The comprehension-based methodology most commonly found in classrooms is Asher's Total Physical Response approach; [3] Krashen and Terrell's Natural Approach [4] has not been widely applied.