Course pack «Second Language Acquisition 1»

AI and SLA

AY 2025-2026

Dr. Fabio Ciambella – [Link]@[Link]

Department of European, American and Intercultural Studies (SEAI)

Material for internal use only

Module A: SLA fundamentals
 First Language (L1)
• First Language
• Native Language
• Primary Language Synonyms
• Mother Tongue

• More than one L1 can be acquired in earl childhood =

multilingualism (bilingualism if languages are two. Cont.:
monolingualism). It can be simultanuous (multiple L1s
acquired at the same time) or sequential (L2 after L1)
• Cook distinguished between multilingual and monolingual
competence, or multicompetence vs monocompetence
 Second Language (L2)
• Second Language (L2, or Target Language, TL) – societally dominant language
needed for education and employment in countries that have other native
languages (e.g. East and West African countries)
• Foreign Language – a language that is not immediately used in a learner’s social
context
• Library Language – language used to learn through reading (especially when
learners are keen on reading novels, plays, newspapers, etc.
• Auxiliary Language – language used for political reasons or wider communicative
settings
• Language for Specific/Special Purposes (LSP) – language used for specific
occupational reasons
• Language for Academic Purposes (LAP) – language used in academic environments

Scholars generally talk about “Second Language” to indicate any other language
learnt/acquired after L1
 Second Language Acquisition (SLA)
• Informal L2 learning (naturalistic context) vs formal L2 learning (at
school). Mixtures are possible
• SLA is a field of study which emerged from Linguistics and
Psychology, in particular:
1) Applied Linguistics – linguistic competence, what a learner
knows, and linguistic performance, what a learner actually
produces
2) Psycholinguistics – mental/cognitive processes involved in
acquisition and how language is represented in our brain
3) Sociolinguistics – communicative competence and variability in
the learning path
4) Social psychology – group identity, social motivation, interaction
in larger social groups
 How learning a language happens
• 6 months: children can reproduce all the vowel sounds of their
mother tongue(s)
• < 3 y.o.: children can correctly produce all the distinctive
phonemes and phones of their L1, they are aware of the basic
discursive patterns (e.g. turn takings)
• < 5-6 y.o.: children control basic L1 grammar
• But how? Unitil the mid-20th century → stimulus-response
theory: children learn their L1(s) by imitation. It’s not sufficient,
because many of their utterances are original and can’t be
justified by imitation.
• We have to consider also the role of natural ability and social
experience
 Natural ability and social experience
• Natural ability = innate capacity: some language structures are «given» to
human beings by birth
• Many of these structures are common to all languages (other are
language-specific) and so all children begin acquiring their L1(s) at the
same stage whatever their native language(s) is/are
• Children acquire language gradually (child grammar). They need
additional time (rate of pregression), not additional stimuli (Piaget) and
the order of acquisition is often the same
• At the age of puberty the process of acquisition slows down (critical
period hypothesis)
• Social experience is important to acquire language-specific structures
• It is in the form of input (mainly by parents and older siblings in early
stages) and it can consist also in regional and social varieties
 L1 vs L2 learning

3 stages:
1) initial
2) intermediate
3) final
 Initial state

• Is L2 learning innate?
• L1 knowledge allows learners to understand how
languages work and to apply this knowledge to the
acquisition of an L2
• Real-world knowledge is another important factor
when acquiring an L2 (e.g., interactional functions)
which were not present when a child acquired his/her
L1
 Intermediate state
Processes
• While L1 development depends on maturity, L2 acquisition (learner language or
interlanguage – IL – at this stage) develops through transfer: cross-linguistic
influence between L1 and L2 (Corder 1967; Selinker 1972; MacLaughlin 1987)
• Transfer can be positive when L1 structures help developing L2 (e.g., Italian
trapassato prossimo and English past perfect) or negative (or interference) when
L1 structures are an obstacle for L2 learning (e.g., false friends, or the typical
«foreign accent»)
Necessary conditions
• In L1 development input and interaction are necessary conditions, while only input
is necessary in L2 acquisition
Facilitating conditions
• No instruction is needed to facilitate children’s L1 development, while in L2 there
are various facilitators: 1) Feedback (correction); 2) Aptitude (memory and analytic
abilities); 3) Reason (motivation); 4) Instruction (teaching)
 Final state

• Outcomes of L1 and L2 learning

• Outcome of L1 = native linguistic competence (basic
phonological and grammar competence, essential
vocabulary and interactional skills are acquired
completely at the age of 5-6, while vocabulary and
registers can continue developing also in adulthood)
• Outcome of L2 = near-native or native-like
competence, but also multilingual competence. When
a learner stops learning an L2 and still produces
utterances/sentences which a mother tongue person
wouldn’t, fossilization occurs
 The logical problem of language learning
• Given the complexity of any language (and especially of their syntax), it is
incredible how children acquire all the basic structures of their L1 even before
the age of full cognitive capacity: this is the logical problem of language
learning
• In the 1950s and 1960s, Noam Chomsky tried to answer this problem with the
notion of Universal Grammar (UG), supported by 3 arguments:
1) Poverty-of-the-stimulus argument: children can understand incomplete or
incorrect grammatical input. Input can be positive evidence (utterances that
children recognise as correct and try to reproduce) or negative evidence
(correction, which they seldom receive in L1, but often in L2)
2) Limits and principles can’t be learnt because children acquire their L1 before
being able to understand abstract principles (Jackendoff calls this argument
the «paradox of language acquisition»)
3) Universal patterns, common to all languages, can’t be explained by language-
specif input by parents or siblings
 SLA frameworks
Can be divided into linguistic, psychological and social
 1950s and before
• Linguistics: Structuralism (Bloomfield) → emphasis on
different levels of spoken performance by L2 learners
(phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics and lexicon)
• Psychology: Behaviourism (Skinner) → stimuli-responses-
reinforcement (S-R-R). This sequence is repeated, learnt and
it becomes a habit
• Social studies: Sociocultural theory (Vygotsky) → interaction
with other people is essential to learn any language
→ Audiolingual Methods = based on repetition and habit
formation (used until the 1980s)
[Link]
[Link]
 SLA linguistic frameworks (1960s onwards)
• 2 foci: internal and external
Internal focus (Chomsky)
• Behaviourism had its limits, according to Chomsky: it doesn’t explain the creativeness of language
ability → logical problem of language acquisition and innate capacity
• 1960s – Transformational-Generative Grammar: The earliest model of grammar to be proposed by
Chomsky. Rules determine which sentences are correct in a language. This model introduced
transformation rules, which change a sentence from its basic structure (deep structure) into the way
we actually say it (surface structure)
• 1980s – Principles and Parameters Model → The way sentences are formed in any language follows
general rules (which apply to all languages) and specific settings for each language → UG
• 1990s – Minimalist Program: a set of programmatic ideas for the creation of a theoretical framework
for syntax. It aims to eliminate from linguistic theory anything which is not ‘virtually necessary’
• 2000s – Linguistic interfaces: Language components such as lexicon and morphology are separate,
but there is the need for some interface in their processing

External focus (Prague School of Eastern Europe)

• 1970s – Functionalism: more emphasis on the information content of utterances; language is a means
of communication (communicative competence)
 SLA psychological frameworks (1960s onwards)
• 3 foci: language and the brain, learning processes, learner differences
Language and the brain
• 1960s – Neurolinguistics: Lenneberg’s Critical Period Hypothesis
Learning processes
• 1960s – computer-based Information Processing (IP) models of learning (cognitive
psychology): language learning involves complex skills and it is a step-by-step process
• 1980s – Connectionism: language is not learnt thanks to innate capacity and capacity of
abstraction, but thanks to a close connection between stimuli and responses, form and
meaning
• 1990s – Processability: extends IP concepts and applies them to language teaching as
well (teaching step-by-step processes helps step-by-step L2 acquisition)
• 2000s – Complexity theory: learning processes are not linear as thought before, so the
notion of causality is discussed and the context acquires greater importance
Learner differences
• 1970s: Humanistic models: emotional involvement, motivation and anxiety in learning,
biological differences between age and gender
[Link]
 SLA social frameworks (1960s onwards)
• 2 foci: microsocial and macrosocial
Microsocial focus
• 1960s-70s – 1) Variation theory and 2) Accomodation Theory: 1) Variation in different
language learning styles depends on the context. 2) Learners adjust (or accommodate) their
style of speech and nonverbal behaviour to one another
• 1990s – Interactionism: revival of Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory due to new translations and
re-interpretation of the scholar’s earlier works: new meaning can be produced through the
interactions of individuals
• 2000s – Computer-mediated Communication (CMC): systematically studying language
teaching and learning through computers. It emphasises teaching and learning processes in
virtual communities
Macrosocial focus
• 1960s – Ethnography of Communication: social and cultural knowledge are necessary to
acquire a foreign language. Learners are part of a sociopolitical group linked together
• 1970s-80s: Acculturation Theory (Berry) and Social Psychology: identity, status and values
influence L2 learners’ outcomes. Assimilation occurs when individuals adopt the cultural norms
of a dominant or host culture, over their original culture
 A focus on linguistics and SLA: early approaches
(Contrastive analysis)

• 1960s – Contrastive analysis (CA): comparison between L1 and L2 with the aim of
increasing efficiency in L2 teaching and testing. This comparison is superficial and
bottom-up, i.e., it compares the two languages one level at a time (phonology,
then morphology, and so on)
• CA was influenced by Structuralism and Behaviourism in the 1940s and ‘50s
• Robert Lado, Linguistics across Cultures (1957)
• Under the influence of behaviourism, CA followers believed that L2 acquisition
occurs when habits are formed in the S-R-R process and that transfer (either
positive or negative) contributed to L2 acquisition
• Problems and limitations: 1) comparisons were fruitful only when 2 languages were
typologically similar (Lado: Spanish and English), 2) CA didn’t answer the logical
problem of language learning, 3) CA analyses weren’t validated by learners’ actual
errors, 4) teaching materials were too language-specific
 Have a go with contrastive analysis
Mardi Gras is the final day of Carnival; it thus Il Mardi Gras è l'ultimo giorno di Carnevale.
falls on the day before the beginning of Lent on Cade quindi il giorno prima dell'inizio della
Ash Wednesday. Mardi Gras is French for "Fat Quaresima, ovvero il Mercoledì delle Ceneri.
Tuesday", referring to it being the last day of "Mardi Gras" è il francese per "Martedì Grasso",
consuming rich, fatty foods, most notably red in riferimento al fatto che sia l'ultimo giorno in
meat, in preparation for the Christian fasting cui si consumano cibi ricchi e grassi, in
season of Lent, during which such foods are particolare la carne rossa, in preparazione al
avoided. Related popular practices are periodo di digiuno cristiano della Quaresima,
associated with Carnival celebrations before the durante il quale tali alimenti vengono evitati. Le
fasting and religious obligations associated with pratiche popolari correlate sono associate ai
the penitential season of Lent. In countries such festeggiamenti del Carnevale prima degli
as the United Kingdom, Mardi Gras is more obblighi religiosi e di digiuno legati alla stagione
usually known as Pancake Day or (traditionally) penitenziale della Quaresima. In paesi come il
Shrove Tuesday, derived from the word shrive, Regno Unito, il Mardi Gras è più comunemente
meaning "to administer the sacrament of noto come Pancake Day o, tradizionalmente,
confession to; to absolve". Shrove Tuesday, termine derivato dalla parola
shrive, che significa "amministrare il sacramento
della confessione; assolvere".
London is an ancient name, attested in the first London ist ein alter Name, der bereits im ersten
century AD, usually in the Latinised form Londinium. Jahrhundert n. Chr. belegt ist, meist in der
Modern scientific analyses of the name must latinisierten Form Londinium. Moderne
account for the origins of the different forms found wissenschaftliche Analysen des Namens müssen die
in early sources: Latin (usually Londinium), Old Ursprünge der verschiedenen Formen
English (usually Lunden), and Welsh (usually berücksichtigen, die in frühen Quellen vorkommen:
Llundein), with reference to the known im Lateinischen (meist Londinium), im Altenglischen
developments over time of sounds in those different (meist Lunden) und im Walisischen (meist Llundein),
languages. It is agreed that the name came into wobei die bekannten lautlichen Entwicklungen dieser
these languages from Common Brythonic; recent Sprachen im Laufe der Zeit zu beachten sind.
work tends to reconstruct the lost Celtic form of the Es besteht Einigkeit darüber, dass der Name aus dem
name as *Londonjon or something similar. This was Gemeinbrythonischen in diese Sprachen
then adapted into Latin as Londinium and borrowed übernommen wurde; neuere Forschungen neigen
into Old English. Until 1889, the name "London" dazu, die verlorene keltische Urform des Namens als
applied officially only to the City of London, but since *Londonjon oder etwas Ähnliches zu rekonstruieren.
then it has also referred to the County of London and Diese Form wurde dann ins Lateinische als
to Greater London. Londinium angepasst und ins Altenglische
übernommen. Bis 1889 bezeichnete der Name
„London“ offiziell nur die City of London, doch
seither bezieht er sich auch auf das County of
London und auf Greater London.
London is an ancient name, attested in the first 런던(London)은 고대의 이름으로, 서기 1세기에
century AD, usually in the Latinised form Londinium. 이미 라틴어 형태인 Londinium 으로 기록되어
Modern scientific analyses of the name must 있습니다.
account for the origins of the different forms found 현대 학자들은 이 이름의 기원을 설명하기 위해
in early sources: Latin (usually Londinium), Old 초기 자료에 나타나는 다양한 형태들—
English (usually Lunden), 라틴어(일반적으로 Londinium), 고대
and Welsh (usually Llundein), with reference to the 영어(일반적으로 Lunden), 웨일스어(일반적으로
known developments over time of sounds in those Llundein)—를 비교하며, 각 언어에서 시간이
different languages. It is agreed that the name came 지나면서 일어난 음운 변화를 고려합니다.
into these languages from Common Brythonic; 일반적으로 이 이름은 공통 브리튼
recent work tends to reconstruct the lost Celtic form 켈트어(Common Brythonic) 에서 유래한 것으로
of the name as *Londonjon or something similar. This 여겨지며, 최근 연구에서는 그 잃어버린 켈트어
was then adapted into Latin as Londinium and 형태를 *Londonjon 또는 그와 유사한 형태로
borrowed into Old English. Until 1889, the name 복원하려는 경향이 있습니다.
"London" applied officially only to the City of 이 이름은 이후 라틴어로 Londinium 으로
London, but since then it has also referred to 변형되었고, 다시 고대 영어로 차용되었습니다.
the County of London and to Greater London. 1889년까지 “London”이라는 이름은 공식적으로
런던 시(City of London) 만을 가리켰으나, 그
이후로는 런던 주(County of London) 와 그레이터
런던(Greater London) 을 포함하는 더 넓은 지역을
의미하게 되었습니다.
London is an ancient name, attested in the first Reondeon(London) eun godaeui ireumeuro, seogi
century AD, usually in the Latinised form Londinium. ilsegie imi latineo hyeongtae-in Londinium euro
Modern scientific analyses of the name must girokdoeeo itseumnida. Hyeondaehakjadeureun i
account for the origins of the different forms found ireum-ui giwoneul seolmyeonghagi wihae chogi
in early sources: Latin (usually Londinium), Old jaryoe natananeun daya-han hyeongtaedeul—latineo
English (usually Lunden), (ilbanjeogeuro Londinium), godae yeongeo
and Welsh (usually Llundein), with reference to the (ilbanjeogeuro Lunden), weilseueo (ilbanjeogeuro
known developments over time of sounds in those Llundein)—eul bigyohamyeo, gag eoneo-eseo sigani
different languages. It is agreed that the name came jinaemyeonseo ireonan eumun byeonhwareul
into these languages from Common Brythonic; goryehamnida. Ilbanjeogeuro i ireumeun gongtong
recent work tends to reconstruct the lost Celtic form beuriteun kelliteue(Common Brythonic) eseo
of the name as *Londonjon or something similar. This yuraehan geoseuro yeogyeojimyeo, choigeun
was then adapted into Latin as Londinium and yeongueseoneun geu ilheobeorin kelliteue
borrowed into Old English. Until 1889, the name hyeongtaereul *Londonjon ttoneun geuwa yusahan
"London" applied officially only to the City of hyeongtaero bokwonharyeoneun gyeonghyangi
London, but since then it has also referred to itseumnida. I ireumeun ihu latineoro Londinium euro
the County of London and to Greater London. byeonhyeongdoeeotgo, dasi godae yeongeoro
chayongdoeeotseumnida. 1889-nyeon kkaji
“London”iraneun ireumeun gongsikjeogeuro
Reondeon si(City of London) man-eul
garikyeotseuna, geu ihuoneun Reondeon ju(County
of London) wa Geureiteo Reondeon(Greater London)
eul pohamaneun deo neolbeun jiyogeul uimi hage
doeeotseumnida.
 A focus on linguistics and SLA: early approaches
(Error analysis) – 1
• 1970s – 1st approach that includes the internal focus on learners’ ability
to create with language and on their actual outcome, instead of on
idealised structures as in CA
• CA had some limits: 1) Predictions were often not verified by actual
performance, 2) CA focused on surface levels of analysis, 3) It did not take
into account the shift towards Mantalism/Nativism (Chomsky), and its
greater focus on innate capacities by learners, 4) SLA and teaching
became to be separated, so learning processes began to receive great
attention
• From Behaviourism to Mentalism/Nativism. Chomsky introduced the
distinction between linguistic competence (what learners actually know)
and linguistic performance (what they actually produce). In performance
they can make errors that do not show their competence properly
 A focus on linguistics and SLA: early approaches
(Error analysis) – 2
• 1st influencial work in the field of EA: Pit Corder’s «The significance of learners’ errors» (1967) – errors are not
something to be eliminated, they simply highlight at what point the learning process is. Learner language is a
transitional stage (transitional competence) between L1 and L2
• For Corder, analysing learners’ errors consists in a number of steps:
1) Collection of samples of learner language,
2) Identification of errors (=lack of knowledge in L2) and mistakes (=processing failure such as lapse in memory),
3) Description of errors according to language level of analysis (phonological, morphological, etc.), to general linguistic
level (auxiliary, passive, negative, etc.), to specific linguistic element (article, noun, etc.), and to comparison between
L1 and L2 (Omission, misinformation (one form in place of another) – the most common, misordering)
4) Explanation/disclosure: interlingual, due to transfer or interference, and intralingual, developmental errors due to
the learning process enacted,
5) Evaluation: How much serious are they? Do they prevent communication?,
• Ambiguity in classification: more than one possible classification,
• Lack of positive data: focusing on errors alone doesn’t tell anything about what a learner is actually learning,
• Potential for avoidance: lack of errors may be a sympthom of the fact that a learner is avoiding difficult structures,
• Influence of L2 curricula: errors can be attributed to previous stages of L2 acquisition, not necessarily to current
learning
 Have a go with error analysis
British accents have changed during the last few decades because of two
reasons: 1. English people attidudes towards "non-standard" accent have
changed; 2. some accents have deeply changed their phonetic character over
the same period of time. In the south of England are developed different
accents, such as the London area has devoleped the RP (Recived
pronunciation) was not present neither in north nor in west. RP is a
regionless accent and non-rhotic. This term is not only associated to
aristocracy and higher social classes of British society, but also to an ideal
supra-regional pronunciation. RP can be decribed as an educated accent,
taught in schools. It is connoted as a costitutional element of the privileged
speech community, and associoted to upper-class. The other accent spoken
in the lower class of London is cockney accent, the main future is the glottal
stop, and rhyming slang; another feature is the "h" dropping at the beginning
of words. In the middle ground can be found the Eastuary English with
standard grammar and usage.
 A focus on linguistics and SLA: early approaches
(Interlanguage)

• Concept coined by Selinker (1969; 1972): Intermediate stage between L1

and L2
• It is an inner process influenced by the learner’s interaction with the
environment and by both L1 and the input received in L2
• It is actually recognised as a third way, independent from both L1 and L2
• It has the following characteristics:
1) Systematic: it has its own rules
2) Dynamic: It changes frequently
3) Variable: It changes according to the diffentent contexts and situations
4) Reduced: in form, because its grammar structures are less complex than
L2, and in function, because it covers smaller ranges of communicative
situations
 A focus on linguistics and SLA: early approaches
(Morpheme Order Studies)
• They derive from the notion of IL, because it
highlighted that there is a kind of natural order of
acquisition of grammar structures and it is more or less
the same for all the languages (Nativism)
• Brown (1973) and Dulay and Burt (1974) hypothesised
that there is a creative construction that leads learners
to acquire an L2 grammar following a natural order
• Evidence is given by the fact that the order of
morpheme acquisition is more or less the same in both
English as L1 and L2 →
A focus on linguistics and SLA: early approaches
(Morpheme Order Studies)
 A focus on linguistics and SLA: early approaches
(Monitor Model)
• Krashen (1978): he adopted the notion of LAD (Language Acquisition Device) by
Chomsky, that is a metaphore used by Chomsky to explain the linguistic innate
knowledge of children
• It consists in 5 different hypotheses:
1) Acquisition-learning: acquisition is subconscious and involves the LAD, learning is
conscious and happens at school
2) Monitor: what is learnt is available as a monitor to edit or change what has been
already produced
3) Natural order: things are acquired in a predictable order
4) Input: if it is comprehensible and in sufficient quantity, so the necessary grammar
to express the output is automatically given by the LAD (Krashen’s
comprehensible input theory)
5) Affective filter: the input can’t be processed if the affective filter is up, i.e.,
learners are inhibited
 A focus on linguistics and SLA: Universal Grammar
(Introduction)
Chomsky assumes that all human beings are born with an
innate capacity to learn languages, which is called
linguistic competence or language faculty and is
something different from the linguistic performance
(what children actually perform with language). This is
due to the fact that all languages share a common
grammar, known as Universal Grammar. This UG would
answer the logical problem of language learning, or the
poverty-of-the-stimuls argument (i.e., children’s
performance goes beyond what could be learnt only from
the input)
 A focus on linguistics and SLA: Universal Grammar
(Principles and Parameters)
• 1981: Chomsky reconceptualises UG as a set of principles because
it was not clear how UG actually worked. Some of these principles
contains parameters, i.e., limitations, restrictions in the choice of
linguistic tools
• Chomsky makes the example of phrases. Principle: in any language
in the world phrases have a head that gives the phrase its name
(noun phrase, verb phrase, etc.). Parameter: some languages,
such as English, are head-initial (e.g. in the car = prepositional
phrase, with the preposition at the beginning of the phrase), some
languages, such as Japanese, are head-final (e.g., kuruma-nil = lit.
‘car-in’, with the preposition at the end of the phrase), so this is
the only possible limitation/choice
 A focus on linguistics and SLA: Universal Grammar
(Linguistic Interfaces)
• It’s the most recent development of Chomsky’s
Generativism
• It essentially postulates the need for some interfaces
between different levels of linguistic analysis
• Syntax is at the core of interfaces and it can be
connected to phonology, morphology, lexicon and
pragmatics/discourse
• Generativists assume that interfaces can be
responsible for some delay in children’s L2 acquisition,
because of transfer
 A focus on linguistics and SLA: Functional Approaches
• Functionalism has an external focus. It originated at the beginning of the
20th century thanks to the Prague School of linguistics
• Functionalism differs from Structuralism and Generativism because it
emphasises the information content of utterances and it considers
language a means to communicate
• As opposed to Chomskian theories, Functional approaches stress:
1) The importance of competence and performance with no essential
difference between the two
2) SLA has to stress the importance of communication
3) The focus is on discourse, interaction and communication beyond
language
• There are 4 main functional approaches: 1) Systemic linguistics, 2)
Functional Typology, 3) Function-to-form Mapping and 4) Information
Organization
 A focus on linguistics and SLA: Functional Approaches
(Systemic Linguistics)
• 1950s by Halliday
• Language is an interrelated system of available choices to express meaning.
Languages can be understood only if inserted in contexts and under uses
depending on different circumstances
• Halliday hypothesises 7 different pragmatic functions of the language:
1) Instrumental or «I want» function: language is a means to obtain something
2) Regulatory or «Do as I tell you function»: regulate others’ behaviour
3) Interactional or «me and you» function
4) Personal or «here I come» function: language is a form of one’s identity
5) Heuristic or «Tell me why» function: language is a menas to learn about things
6) Imagination or «let’s pretend» function: language is a means through which one
can create his/her own world
7) Representational or «I’ve got something to tell you» function: expressing
propositions or communicating about something
 A focus on linguistics and SLA: Functional Approaches
(Functional Typology)
• Comparision of world languages: languages are categorised into types, with the
aim of studying differences and similarities, and determine which features are
shared by some/most of them
• Something occurring less frequently: marked (e.g. dual genre in some languages)
• Something orrurring more frequently: unmarked (e.g. morphological distinction of
tenses)
• Children acquire unmarked elements first
• Eckman 1977: Markedness Differential Hypothesis: unmarked features are the
easiest to be transfered from L1 to L2, but marked features in L2 are the harder to
learn. This means that ‘more peculiar’ languages (i.e., languages with more marked
features) are more difficult to learn, so not all languages have the same complexity
• Functional Typology is similar to Contrastive Analysis, but deeper: it concerns also
principles behind languages
 A focus on linguistics and SLA: Functional Approaches
(Function-to-Form Mapping)

• Grammaticalisation: Children acquire some grammatical functions

starting by the context, then they recognise the word or lexeme,
and finally the grammatical marker (e.g. the inflection ‘-ed’ in
English)
• Givon 1979: some learners prefer focusing on the context
(pragmatic mode), others prefer focusing immediately on the
grammatical markers (syntactic mode)
 A focus on linguistics and SLA: Functional Approaches
(Information Organisation)
• It focuses on utterance structure (i.e., they way learners put the words together). So, it studies
the interlanguage (or learner varieties, Klein and Perdue 1993) to understand which stages it
follows and how these stages interact together
• The European Science Fundation project (ESF) by Klein and Perdue discovered 3
developmental stages of the interlanguage:
1) NUO (Nominal Utterance Organisation): Learners start by naming object unconnectingly
2) IUO (Infinite Utterance Organisation): Verbs are added, but with no grammatical morphemes
3) FUO (Finite Utterance Organisation): morphemes are added to verbs: grammaticalisation
• These stages are possible thanks to 3 organising principles:
1) Phrasal constraint: some phrases occur with restricted patterns/combinations (e.g., VP are
usually preceded by NP)
2) Semantic constraint: Some words occupy determined positions within sentences (e.g., in
English articles precede nouns)
3) Pragmatic constraint: Speakers consider what has been said before and what is new
information. Generally what is already known, i.e., the topic, is put first, and new info after,
i.e., the focus
 Approaches and methodologies in SLA:
Grammar Translation Model

• Language pedagogy has stressed various methods to learn a foreign

language:

1. Grammar Translation Model:

Students learn by translating to and from L2. Instructors encourage the
learner to memorize grammar rules and vocabulary lists. Little or no focus on
speaking and listening. Teachers conduct classes in the student’s native
language. This method’s two primary goals are to progress the learner’s
reading ability to understand literature in the second language and promote
the learner’s overall intellectual development. Grammar drills are a common
approach. Another popular activity are translation exercises that emphasize
the form of the writing instead of the content.
 Approaches and methodologies in SLA:
Audio-lingual method

2. Audiolingual Method:
It encourages students to develop habits that support
language learning. Students learn primarily through
pattern drills, particularly dialogues, which the teacher
uses to help students practice and memorize the
language. It starts with listening and speaking, followed by
reading and writing, meaning that it emphasizes hearing
and speaking the language before experiencing its written
form.
 Approaches and methodologies in SLA:
Communicative approach
3. Communicative Language Teaching (where no direct grammar teaching is
considered):
Most popular today. Interaction and communication are elicited to teach a
second language effectively. Students participate in everyday situations they
are likely to encounter in the target language. For example, learners may
practice introductory conversations, offering suggestions, making invitations,
complaining, or expressing time or location. Teachers focus on being
facilitators rather than straightforward instructors. Doing so helps students
achieve CLT’s primary goal, learning to communicate in the target language
instead of emphasizing the mastery of grammar. Role-play, interviews,
debate, iMUN, group work, and opinion sharing are popular activities
practiced in communicative language teaching, along with games like
scavenger hunts and information gap exercises that promote interaction
among students.
 Approaches and methodologies in SLA:
Affective humanistic approach
4. Affective humanistic approach:
Learner-involvement, it is more student-centered. A key performance in this
approach is to create opportunities for learners to feel a sense of
achievement. Teaching from simple to difficult is an apt way to achieve this
end (i + 1). Another way in which foreign language teachers can implement
the humanistic approach is to provide students with second chances which
will enable them to achieve and therefore feel a sense of achievement.
Scaffolding is another method of teaching that can significantly reduce the
feeling of helplessness that foreign language learners tend to feel. This
means that the facilitator is required to provide adequate support (such as
ensuring that new learning is hinged on prerequisites; allowing learners to
make connections between their mother tongue and their target language as
required).
 Have a go with the four main approaches

• Topic: present simple vs present continuous

• Comprehensible input (Krashen):
[Verse 1] [Chorus]
I'm sittin' here in the boring room I wonder how, I wonder why
It's just another rainy Sunday afternoon Yesterday, you told me 'bout the blue, blue sky
I'm wastin' my time, I got nothin' to do And all that I can see is just a yellow lemon
I'm hangin' around, I'm waitin' for you tree
But nothing ever happens I'm turnin' my head up and down
And I wonder I'm turnin', turnin', turnin', turnin', turnin'
around
[Verse 2] And all that I can see is just another lemon tree
I'm drivin' around in my car
I'm drivin' too fast, I'm drivin' too far
I'd like to change my point of view
I feel so lonely, I'm waitin' for you
But nothing ever happens
And I wonder
 A focus on psychology and SLA: Learning processes

• Generally speaking, language activity is stored in the left emiphere of the

brain: lateralization of the left emisphere (Broca’s area: ability to speak;
Wernicke’s area: audio input). Younger brains are more plastic, so
children can learn languages easilier and faster. After a certain age,
language is diffucult to learn (Critical Period Hypothesis)
• 3 psychological frameworks focus on learning processes and SLA:
1) Information Processing (IP): learning is learning. Languages are learnt as
any other knowledge through abstract principles
2) Connectionism: learning is learning, but it consideres that learning
processes are associations of mental networks
3) Complexity Theory (CT): processes of change in a variety of different
domains (social and contextual factors, role of variability)
 A focus on psychology and SLA:
Information Processing (IP)
• Mental processes involved in language learning and use. They are:
1) Input: learners are exposed to the input, but can’t process it unless they notice it, i.e., pay attention
to it (noticing hypothesis). Then it becomes intake
2) Central processing: from control to automatization, from declarations to procedures, restructuring
of knowledge
3) Ouput: production
• 3 approaches based on IP:
1) Multidimensional model, developed by the ZISA project in Germany, based on Clahsen 1984: highly
complex structures take longer to be acquired. Structures are acquired in a developmental sequence
which reflects how learners overcome limitations and difficulties, and no stage can be reached if the
previous has not been accomplished
2) Processability Theory (Pienemann): similar to multidimensional model, but it focuses on grammar
exclusively
3) Competition Model (MacWhinney): a functional approach which involves connections between
internal and external functions. Words are recognised by their auditory features, then meaning
intervenes (semantics) and words are inserted in sentences. There are cues in the input that allow
learners to associate words or strings of words with functions. E.g., in the sentence «SLA is
wonderful», the position of the noun SLA is the cue that makes learners understand it is the subject
of the sentence
 Structure of a (good) lesson plan

• Topic:
• Class & curriculum:
• Level (according to the new CEFR 2020): A1-C2
• Linguistic objectives: Choose (a) suitable linguistic structure(s)
to be acquired during the lesson plan, according to your Ss’
level and the linguistic peculiarities of the text you choose
• Pre-requisites:
• Timing:
• (Comprehensible and noticed) Input:
• Scaffolding:
• (Pushed/Creative) output:
 A focus on psychology and SLA: Connectionism (1980s)

• It focuses on the association between stimuli and responses

• Learning happens when the strength of associations
changes/develops
• The best known connectionist approach to SLA is the PDP (Parallel
Distributed Processing): learning processes happen in a network
of nodes or units in the brain and are connected by pathways
(connection stregths or patterns of activations). Learners extract
regularities in the patterns they are exposed to
 A focus on psychology and SLA: Complexity Theory (CT)

• Larsen and Freeman 1997 and ff.

• In SLA it is called Dynamic Systems Theory/Complex Systems
Theory/Chaos Theory
• It derives from natural sciences and describes the changes in such
complex systems as languages
• Contrary to any other theory, it denies the existence of innate
faculties, LAD and UG
• Languages are learnt step by step thanks to the interconnection
between different levels (phonology, morphology, etc.)
 A focus on psychology and SLA: Differences in Learners

• Learning differences may be determined by:

1) Age
2) Sex (e.g., women excel in verbal fluency and their brain is less asymmetrical than men’s, so
women’s speech tends to be more organised)
3) Aptitude: phonemic coding ability (some learners have a great ease in understanding sounds
of a language); inductive language learning ability (some understand rules by looking at
examples of real, native-like production); grammatical sensitivity (some are particularly keen
on grammar rules); associative memory capacity (some can create mental association
between concepts and words to learn a language)
4) Motivation
5) Cognitive style = the favourite way of processing new information (e.g., field depedent, FD vs
field independent, FI = particularistic vs global learners; deductive vs inductive learners)
6) Personality
7) Learning strategies: 1. Metacognitive (=regulate language learning by planning and
monitoring); 2. Cognitive (= direct analysis or synthesis of material); 3. Social/affective
(=interaction with others)
 A focus on sociology and SLA:
Communicative Competence

• It is basically what a speaker needs to know (linguistically and

socially) to communicate successfully
• Besides knowing the levels of linguistic analysis of a language
(phonetics/phonology, morphology, etc.) it implies knowing when
to speak or not, what to say to whom and how, having the social
and cultural knowledge of the country/countries where that
language is spoken
• Communicative competence depends on micro- and macrosocial
factors
 A focus on sociology and SLA: Microsocial factors
• L2 variation: how the context influences different levels of L2 acquisition (variable features). L2
variation depends on the linguistic context (intrinsic elements of a language), psychological
context (in terms of attention paid when speaking and level of automatisation) and
microsocial context (e.g., formality, public speech vs intimate speech, etc.). Accomodation
Theory: speakers accomodate their pronunciation, grammar and sentence structure according
to whom they are talking to
• Input and interaction: The input must be comprehensibile (Krashen), otherwise it does not
become intake. The input, in sociology, must be quantitatively and qualitatively adequate.
Sometimes, to do so, native speakers adopt the so-called foreign talk (modiefied variety of
speech to be understood by non-native speakers). Interaction works if there is negotiation of
meaning, which prevents or repair breakdown in communication. One possible strategy is
feedback from native speakers that can show correct forms (direct or indirect correction; e.g.,
request for clarification, rising intonation, paraphrase, etc.)
• Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory (S-C): interaction is not only a facilitator, but a causative force
in L2 acquisition. Learning occurs when learners transform innate mental activities into higher-
order skills through symbolic mediation. The level where symbolic mediation happens is the
Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), an area where learners can actually learn if well assisted
through scaffolding (Bruner 1985).
 A focus on sociology and SLA:
Macrosocial factors
• They are studied by the Ethnography of Communication and by Social
Psychology
• They are:
1) Global and national status of L1 and L2 (political identification and
cohesion)
2) Boundaries and identities (to become part of a given culture, a speaker
must learn the language spoken by that culture: Acculturation Model by
Schumann, 1978)
3) Institutional forces and constraints (e.g., Rakuten)
4) Social categories
5) Circumstances of learning (formal vs informal, naturalistic vs instructed.
E.g., foreign people who learn a dialect of a language, instead of the
standard variety)
 Acquisition of communicative competence (1)
• Linguistic + pragmatic competence (knowledge of the levels of
linguistic analysis + ability to use language appropriately)
• 2 different types of communicative competence needed by L2
learners: academic (mainly used to understand a specific field of
studies or work-related situations, e.g., ESP) and interpersonal
(general f2f contact with other people)
• This competence is reached through four skills or areas (reading,
writing, listening and speaking), classified according to two
parameters: receptive vs productive dimension and written vs oral
mode Written Oral
Receptive Reading Listening
Productive Writing Speaking
 Acquisition of communicative competence (2)
• Each skill or area requires knowledge of:
1) Vocabulary (lexis or lexicon)
2) Grammar (morphology and syntax)
3) Phonology (the most affected by the
Critical Period Hypothesis: after puberty,
learners can’t achieve native-like
pronunciation)
4) Non-verbal structures (gestures, eye
contact, etc.)
5) Discourse (textual cohesion, genres,
(im)politeness, etc.)
• Acquisition of knowledge, skills and
competences can follow two processes:
bottom-up and top-down
 To summarize: The pyramid of language acquisition

Level 3: Competence
Competence
Communicative competence (linguistic + pragmatic)

Level 2: Skills Skills

Reading, writing, listening and speaking

Level 1: Knowledge
Vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, Knowledge
discourse, extra-linguistic factors