General Theories on Foreign Language
Learning and Acquisition. Error
Treatment
(Very extended written exam answer — approx. 10 pages)
1. Introduction
Understanding how foreign languages are learned and acquired lies at the heart of foreign
language education. As educational systems grow increasingly multilingual and diverse,
teachers require a solid theoretical foundation to support their methodological decisions. The
field of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) offers a rich body of research examining the
cognitive, social and linguistic processes through which learners develop proficiency in a
new language. These theories—ranging from behaviourist to innatist, cognitive,
sociocultural, interactionist and communicative approaches—complement and challenge
each other, offering different perspectives on what it means to learn a language and how
instruction can best support that learning.
One of the most illustrative indicators of the evolution of SLA theories is the transformation in
the understanding of error. In early methodologies shaped by behaviourism, error was
considered something harmful that disrupted correct habit formation and therefore needed to
be avoided at all costs. Teachers were instructed to correct errors immediately and
rigorously. However, with the emergence of cognitive, generative and interactionist
approaches, error came to be seen as a natural and meaningful part of the learning process.
Today, error is understood not as a failure, but as a developmental manifestation of the
learner’s interlanguage, offering invaluable insights into their internal linguistic system and
guiding teachers in planning intervention.
This extended topic offers a comprehensive overview of major theories of SLA, highlighting
their contributions, limitations and pedagogical implications. It then explores the treatment of
error in substantial depth, examining its theoretical foundations, its role in interlanguage
development and its relevance for communicative pedagogy. The aim is to provide an
academically sound, detailed and coherent model answer suitable for an advanced written
exam such as the oposiciones.
2. General Theories on Language
Learning and Acquisition
2.1. Behaviourism
2.1.1. Key Principles
Behaviourism dominated psychology and language teaching through the mid-twentieth
century. Rooted in the work of Watson, Pavlov and B. F. Skinner, behaviourism
conceptualised learning as the formation of habits through repeated associations. Language
learning was understood as a process of imitation, repetition and reinforcement in which
learners mimic models provided by the teacher.
In this framework, the mind is considered a blank slate, and behaviour is shaped through
conditioning. Language is viewed as a set of observable behaviours rather than a mental
system. Therefore, learning does not involve internal cognitive operations, but rather the
acquisition of correct verbal habits. Errors are viewed as signs of faulty learning, potentially
dangerous because they may form persistent incorrect habits.
2.1.2. Pedagogical Implications
Behaviourism served as the foundation for the Audiolingual Method, which relied heavily on
drills, memorisation and pattern practice. Teachers presented dialogues as models for
students to imitate and conducted substitution drills to ensure that linguistic structures
became automatic.
In these lessons, accuracy was prioritised above all else. Learners engaged in highly
controlled practice and were rarely encouraged to produce spontaneous language. The
teacher assumed an authoritative role, continually supplying input and providing immediate
correction. Meaningful communication was secondary, as the goal was to build reliable
behavioural patterns.
Although this method produced short-term gains in accuracy, especially in controlled
contexts, it often failed to prepare learners for real-life use of the language, as they struggled
to transfer rehearsed patterns into spontaneous speech.
2.1.3. Criticisms
Noam Chomsky’s critique (1959) marked a turning point. He argued that behaviourism could
not explain the complexity and creativity of human language. Children, for example, produce
sentences they have never heard, suggesting that language acquisition involves an internal
generative process rather than simple imitation.
Other scholars also observed that learners often made systematic errors inconsistent with
the idea of random imperfect imitation. These errors suggested rule formation, not mere
habit formation. Therefore, behaviourism was deemed insufficient as a comprehensive
model of SLA.
Nevertheless, some behaviourist techniques—particularly pronunciation drills, controlled
practice, and work on automatization—remain pedagogically valuable when embedded
within more communicative approaches.
2.2. The Innatist Perspective
2.2.1. Chomsky and Universal Grammar
Innatist theories emerged as a direct response to the limitations of behaviourism. Chomsky
proposed that humans possess a biologically determined capacity for language in the form
of the Language Acquisition Device (LAD) and Universal Grammar (UG). UG consists of a
set of universal principles that govern the structure of all languages. The LAD enables
children to map linguistic input onto abstract grammatical categories.
This view emphasises that language acquisition is not merely environmental but involves
internal cognitive processes. Input acts as a trigger rather than a teacher; learners innately
“know” what kinds of grammars are possible and construct hypotheses accordingly. This
perspective shifted the focus from surface behaviour to underlying mental representations.
2.2.2. Innatism and Adult L2 Acquisition
The application of UG to second language acquisition has sparked considerable debate.
Some researchers argue that adult learners maintain full access to UG and can therefore
acquire L2 grammar in a similar way to children. Others contend that access is partial or
indirect, mediated by the first language. A more radical view suggests that adults rely mainly
on general cognitive learning strategies rather than on innate, language-specific
mechanisms.
Regardless of these debates, innatism played a crucial role in conceiving learners as active
constructors of grammar rather than passive imitators. It also laid the foundation for the
notion of interlanguage.
2.2.3. Interlanguage Theory (Selinker)
Selinker’s theory of interlanguage revolutionised SLA by proposing that learners develop an
intermediate linguistic system. This interlanguage is systematic, rule-governed and
constantly evolving. It incorporates elements from the first language, the second language
and unique rules created by the learner. Errors are therefore developmental indicators
revealing the internal logic of the interlanguage.
Selinker identified five central processes shaping interlanguage development:
● Transfer, where learners apply L1 structures to L2;
● Transfer of training, referring to instructional influences;
● Learning strategies, such as simplification;
● Communication strategies, such as circumlocution;
● Overgeneralisation of L2 rules.
One of Selinker’s most influential contributions is the concept of fossilisation, whereby
certain erroneous forms become permanently established despite exposure to correct
models or instruction. This underscores the importance of timely and effective feedback.
2.3. Krashen’s Monitor Model
Krashen’s theory consists of five hypotheses that, although controversial, significantly
shaped communicative methodologies.
His distinction between acquisition (subconscious, naturalistic, leading to fluency) and
learning (conscious rule knowledge) asserts that only acquired knowledge drives
spontaneous communication. The learned system acts solely as a “monitor” that edits output
under certain conditions, such as having sufficient time, focusing on form and knowing the
rule.
The Input Hypothesis posits that acquisition occurs when learners receive comprehensible
input slightly above their current level (i+1). The Natural Order Hypothesis states that
grammatical structures are acquired in a predictable sequence. The Affective Filter
Hypothesis highlights how emotional variables—anxiety, motivation and
self-confidence—impact acquisition.
Krashen’s ideas inspired methodologies that emphasised rich input, communicative tasks
and low-anxiety classroom environments. Nonetheless, his model has been criticised for
lacking empirical precision and for minimising the importance of output and interaction,
elements later research has shown to be fundamental.
2.4. Cognitive Approaches
Cognitive theories conceptualise language learning as a type of skill development involving
mental representations, memory, attention and proceduralisation. Unlike behaviourism,
cognitive approaches recognise the learner as an active processor of information.
Piaget argued that learning follows cognitive developmental stages and that learners
construct meaning by interacting with their environment. Ausubel emphasised meaningful
learning, asserting that new information must be integrated into existing cognitive structures
for durable learning to occur.
Anderson’s ACT model describes learning as progressing through three stages: declarative
knowledge (knowing rules), procedural knowledge (being able to apply them) and
automaticity (performing without conscious effort). McLaughlin highlighted the importance of
practice and the gradual shift from controlled to automatic processing.
Cognitive approaches support instruction that combines explicit explanation, scaffolded
practice, opportunities for noticing and meaningful communicative use of language.
2.5. Sociocultural Theory
Sociocultural theory, rooted in Vygotsky, highlights the central role of social interaction in
learning. Knowledge is co-constructed through dialogue, and language serves both
communicative and cognitive functions. The Zone of Proximal Development explains how
learners progress by engaging in tasks that they cannot perform independently but can
achieve with guidance. Scaffolding, internalisation and collaborative learning are central
concepts.
In SLA, sociocultural theory supports the use of peer interaction, cooperative tasks,
classroom discussions, mediation by the teacher and opportunities for learners to articulate
reasoning. Language development is seen as deeply intertwined with social participation.
2.6. Interactionist Approaches
Interactionist theories emphasise interaction as the engine of acquisition. Long’s Interaction
Hypothesis argues that negotiation of meaning—clarification requests, repetitions,
confirmation checks—modifies input and highlights problematic forms. Swain’s Output
Hypothesis complements this idea, asserting that producing language forces learners to test
hypotheses and notice gaps in their knowledge. Schmidt’s Noticing Hypothesis strengthens
this by arguing that learners must consciously notice linguistic forms to acquire them.
These theories justify communicative classrooms where learners interact, collaborate and
negotiate meaning rather than simply receive input passively.
2.7. Communicative and Post-Communicative
Approaches
Communicative methods, including CLT, TBLT and CLIL, focus on the development of
communicative competence as defined by Hymes, and later by Canale and Swain. This
competence involves not only linguistic accuracy but also sociolinguistic appropriateness,
discourse cohesion and strategic ability to manage communication.
These approaches prioritise authenticity, purposeful communication, learner autonomy and
meaningful tasks. Accuracy is not neglected but addressed through integrated,
context-sensitive interventions rather than mechanical drills.
3. Error Treatment
3.1. Introduction: The Changing Status of Error
The evolution of error treatment reflects broader shifts in SLA. Under behaviourism, errors
were undesirable deviations. Under cognitive and generative theories, they became
indicators of internal rule formation. Today, errors are regarded as developmental,
systematic and pedagogically informative. They signify where learners are in their
interlanguage and what hypotheses they are currently testing. Effective teaching involves
using errors diagnostically to guide instruction, not simply eliminating them.
3.2. Theoretical Foundations for Understanding Error
Corder’s 1967 work marked a turning point by arguing that errors are central to learning
rather than accidental. They reveal how the learner’s interlanguage is structured and what
hypotheses they are entertaining. His distinction between errors (competence-related) and
mistakes (performance-related) remains crucial for determining pedagogical response.
Interlanguage theory supports this view by emphasising that learner language is systematic
and rule-governed. From this perspective, errors emerge from identifiable processes such as
transfer, overgeneralisation, simplification and communication strategies.
Interactionist and sociocultural theories further enrich this understanding by showing that
errors often occur in communicative contexts where learners negotiate meaning, request
assistance or seek clarification. These opportunities for interaction can trigger noticing,
scaffolded support and reformulation, each of which enhances learning.
3.3. Classification of Errors
Errors can originate from various sources.
● Interlingual errors emerge when learners transfer structures from the first language.
● Intralingual errors arise from processes such as overgeneralisation (e.g., applying
-ed to irregular verbs).
● Developmental errors correspond to universal acquisition stages.
● Communication-strategy errors occur when learners lack structures and create
temporary approximations.
● Fossilised errors represent entrenched interlanguage features resistant to change.
Errors also appear at multiple linguistic levels: phonological, morphological, syntactic, lexical,
semantic and pragmatic. Pragmatic errors, such as inappropriate politeness strategies or
misuse of discourse markers, can hinder communicative success even when syntax is
correct.
3.4. Pedagogical Functions of Error
Errors contribute directly to learning in several ways. Cognitively, they show the learner’s
internal hypotheses and provide evidence of developmental progress. Diagnostically, they
help teachers identify what needs emphasis or further revision. Communicatively, errors
provoke negotiation of meaning, which enhances input salience and fosters noticing.
Affectively, the teacher’s handling of error influences learners’ confidence and willingness to
participate; supportive correction helps maintain motivation and reduces anxiety.
3.5. Corrective Feedback
Corrective feedback comprises various teacher responses to error. Explicit correction
provides the correct form outright, while recasts reformulate the learner’s utterance more
subtly. Clarification requests prompt learners to modify their output when meaning is unclear.
Metalinguistic comments draw attention to the nature of the error without giving the solution.
Elicitation encourages learners to self-correct by pausing or prompting. Repetition of the
erroneous segment highlights the problem through intonation or emphasis. In
fluency-oriented activities, delayed correction allows learners to maintain communicative
flow.
Research suggests that feedback which pushes learners to actively reformulate tends to
enhance learning more deeply. However, the effectiveness of each technique depends on
the learner’s level, personality, task type and the surrounding environment.
3.6. Error Treatment in Communicative Pedagogy
Communicative pedagogy requires a balanced approach to error. Constant correction may
inhibit fluency and cause anxiety; conversely, insufficient correction may lead to fossilisation.
Teachers must use professional judgement to determine whether an activity prioritises
fluency or accuracy. During fluency-based tasks, correction tends to be postponed until the
end; during accuracy-focused activities, immediate and explicit feedback may be
appropriate.
Long’s concept of Focus on Form is particularly relevant, advocating brief and timely
attention to linguistic forms that arise incidentally during communication. Form-Focused
Instruction supports this combination of attention to meaning and form, ensuring that
grammar is learned through communicatively meaningful contexts.
3.7. Variables Affecting Error Treatment
Error treatment is influenced by multiple variables. Learner characteristics include
proficiency, age, motivation, anxiety, learning style and cultural background. Teacher
variables include beliefs about learning, experience, expectations and familiarity with SLA
research. Contextual factors include class size, instructional objectives, available time,
institutional policies and assessment norms. Because of these variables, error treatment
demands flexible, adaptive and learner-sensitive decision making.
3.8. Contemporary Perspective
Contemporary SLA encourages teachers to view errors as natural and constructive. The aim
of error treatment is not perfection but development. Teachers should adopt feedback
strategies that build learner autonomy, confidence and awareness. They should also
encourage self-correction and peer correction, integrate errors into meaningful
communication, and provide targeted intervention for fossilised structures. Ultimately, error
treatment must foster communicative effectiveness, not inhibit interaction.
4. Conclusion
The evolution of SLA theory demonstrates how understanding of language learning has
expanded from behaviourist models of habit formation to cognitive, sociocultural and
interactionist perspectives that recognise the active, creative and socially mediated nature of
language acquisition. Within this broad theoretical landscape, the treatment of error has
shifted from strict elimination to informed, supportive and developmentally-oriented
intervention. Errors are now understood as essential indicators of interlanguage
development, guiding teachers in fostering communicative competence.
Effective error treatment requires pedagogical sensitivity, theoretical knowledge and
balanced judgement. Teachers must integrate cognitive, interactional and affective
considerations to create environments where learners feel confident to take risks, make
mistakes and grow linguistically. In this way, errors become stepping stones rather than
obstacles, and learners progress toward more accurate, fluent and meaningful use of the
target language.