TESOL Quarterly, 24, 4

(1990)

The Least a Second Language

Acquisition Theory Needs to
Explain
Michael H. Long

SLA Research
o Is relatively new: most research in
SLA coming since about 1980
o Those that have performed this
research come from different fields
or disciplines
o So the focuses and viewpoints for
what is important have been varied:
psychologist VS anthropologist VS
Chomsky & UG etc
o So, what do we really know about
SLA?

Description & Explanation

o In tackling a problem like SLA, its
essential to describe the observed
phenomena because they lay out the
scope of the problem to be solved.
o Explanation is then in order to
explain the how or the why of the
data.
o Explanation can vary from field to
field, however: predict future events
(biochemists, psychologists, etc) or
host-hoc understanding (anthropo)

Overlap

Totally part A
o The frequency of no V constructions
declined as that of dont V
constructions increased.
o Subjects suppliance of plural s was
more target-like on the picture
description task than in the
narrative.
o Whether or not learners exhibited
adverb-fronting on the pretest
predicted their control of participle
separation after instruction.

Area B
o Accuracy was greater on tasks
performed after planning than
on tasks performed with no
planning.
o After equivalent periods of
exposure, child starters score
higher on proficiency tests than
learners who began as adults.

Area C total explanation

o SLA is just one aspect of
acculturation and the degree to
which a learner acculturates to the
TL group will control the degree to
which he acquires the second
language.
o Second language learning, like any
other complex cognitive skill,
involves the gradual integration of
subskills as controlled processes
initially predominate and then
become automatic.

Mechanisms
o Explain/account for change/learning
o In the SLA literature to this point (1990)
are poorly defined and supported
o Should probably also account for order of
acquisition of grammatical elements
(Atkinson 1982)
o Meisel et al. (1981) and Clahsen (1987) provide
a model for German L2 word order acquisition
that describes different stages and argues for
how SSLs achieve passing from stage to stage.
o This model at least attemps to explain data,
and not only describe it.

Some accepted SLA findings

o To really/fully understand explain
SLA, it is essential to know &
understand the facts.
o To explain anything, the important
facts must be considered and
accounted for (birds fly b/c they
eat flying insects)
o Sometimes, especially in SLA, it
may not be obvious what findings
are relevant and which arent.

Learners
o Differences in children rarely has
any connection to L1 acquisition
o In SLA, stages and patterns tend
to be consistent, but learning rate
and ultimate attainment vary a lot
o This variation seems to correlate
with many factors: age,
motivation, aptitude
o Developmental/maturational (age)
> affective factors (motivation)

Environments
o Again, little impact on children in L1
o Variation again for SLA: L1/L2 relation...
o Comprehensible input = essential
o Overt error correction can help in SLA
[focus on form] (not so important for L1)
o Attention to form is necessary when
L1/L2 comparison involves 21
relationships or when one is more
marked.
o Much of a language isnt learned
unconsciously.

Interlanguages
o Always exhibit systematicity and variability
at any point in development
o Systematicity: regular suppliance and
nonsuppliance of certain forms; persistence
of errors = rule governed
o Variability also seems to be systematically
related to task, interlocutor, linguistic
context, etc but some of it is free (I born /
I was born)
o Change on time follows predictable paths.
o Gradual and incremental; changes suggest
restructuring of interlanguage grammar.

Implications for SLA

o A theory is inadequate or incomplete if:
1) It says nothing about universals
2) It says nothing about environmental factors
3) It doesnt specify either different
mechanisms driving development in
learners of different starting ages, or
different access to the same mechanism
4) It purports to explain deveopment solely in
terms of affective factors
5) It holds all language learning to be
unconscious
6) It holds that native-like mastery of a SL can
result simply from exposure to
comprehensible examples of that language

o A theory is inadequate or
incomplete if:
7) It ignores the strong cognitive
contribution on the learners part
and is therefore purely
environmentalist
8) It assumes that change is a product
of the steady accumulation of
generalizations based upon the
learners perception of the
frequencies of forms

Conclusion
o A theory doesnt have to account
for every fact, but it must account
for at least some of the major
accepted findings within its scope
o An adequate SLA theory must also
specify one or more mechanisms to
explain interlanguage change.
o SLA is a multidimensional
phenomenon: many factors, both
individual and environmental.

Conclusion (cont)
o An SLA theory must speak to
these different variables and find
how they differ and how they
interact with each other.
(interactionist instead of
unidimensional)
o The intriguing combination of
universals and variability in adult
language learning [] is the least
an SLA theory needs to explain.