Psycholinguistics
- A Study of Language and Brain in relation to psychology
Psycholinguistics is
a recent branch of linguistics developed in the sixties. It is the study of
interrelationship of psychological and linguistic behaviour. It uses linguistic
concepts to describe psychological processes connected with the acquisition and
use of language. As a distinct area of interest, psycholinguistics developed in
the early sixties, and in its early form covered acoustic phonology and
language pathology.
But now-a-days it has
been influenced deeply by the development of generative theory, and its most
important area of investigation has been language acquisition. It has raised
and has partly answered questions such as how do children acquire their mother
tongue? How do they grow up linguistically and learn to handle the registral
and stylistic varieties of their mother tongue effectively? How much of the
linguistic system that they ultimately command, are they born with and how much
do they discover on the basis of their exposure to that system?
In its early form,
psycholinguistics covered the psychological implications of an extremely broad
area, from acoustic phonetics to language pathology. Now-a-days, certain areas
of language and linguistic theory tend to be concentrated on by the
psycholinguist. Much of psycholinguistics has been influenced by generative
theory and the so-called mentalists. The most important area is the
investigation of the acquisition of language by children. In this respect there
have been many studies of both a theoretical and a descriptive kind. The need
for descriptive study areises due to the fact that until recently hardly
anything was known about the actual facts of language acquisition in children,
in particular about the order in which grammatical structures were acquired.
Even elementary questions as to when and how the child develops its ability to
ask question syntactically, or when it learn the inflectional system of its
language, remained unanswered. However, a great deal of work has been done
recently on the methodological and descriptive problems related to the
obtaining and analyzing information of this kind.
The theoretical
questions have focused on the issue of how we can account for the phenomenon of
language development in children at all. Normal children have mastered most of
the structures of their language by the age of five or six. The generative
approach argued against the earlier behaviorist assumptions that it was
possible to explain language development largely in terms of imitation and
selectives reinforcement. It asserted that it was impossible to explain the
rapidity or the complexity of language used by the people around them.
Psycholinguistics
therefore argue that imitation is not enough; it is not merely by mechanical
repetition that children acquire language. They also acquire it by natural
exposure. Both nature and nurture influence the acquisition of language in
children. Children learn first not items but systems. Every normal child comes
to develop this abstract knowledge of his mother tongue, even of a foreign
language, to some extent for himself; and the generative approach argues that
such a process is only explicable if one postulates that certain features of
this competence are present in the brain of the child right from the beginning.
‘In other words, what is being claimed is that the child’s brain contains
certain innate characteristics which ‘pre-structure’ it in the direction of
language learning. To enable these innate features to develop into adult
competence, the child must be exposed to human language, i.e., it must be
stimulated in proper to respond. But the basis on which it develops its
linguistic abilities is not describable in behaviourist terms’. (David Crystal,
Linguistics, p. 256)
The boundary between
psycholinguistics and linguistics is becoming increasingly blurred as the
result of recent developments in linguistics which aim at giving psychological
reality to the description of language. Chomsky regards linguistics as a
subfield of psychology more specially the cognitive psychology. His view of
linguistics, as outlined for instance, in his book Language and Mind, is that
the most important contribution linguistics can make, is to the study of the
human mind. The bonds between psychology and linguistics become more and more
strong by the extent to which language is influenced by and itself influences
such things as memory, motivation, attention, recall and perception.
Similarly
psycholinguistics and sociolinguistics are coming closer because of the
realization that merely grammatical competence is not enough; we have to aim at
communicative competence too. Whereas psycholinguistics is language and the
mind, sociolinguistics is language and community. In other words,
psycholinguistics can be said to deal with language and the individual, and
sociolinguistics with language and society.
Language
Acquisition
By the study of
language acquisition is meant the process whereby children achieve a fluent
control of their native language. Few people in the 1950s asked about the
processes by which language was acquired. It was assumed that children imitated
the adults around them and their speech gradually became more accurate as they
grow up. There seemed to be some mystery attached to this apparently
straight-forward process. Psycholinguistics have therefore attempted general
theories of language acquisition and language use. Some have argued that
learning is entirely the product of experience and that our environment affects
all of us in the same way. Others have suggested that everybody has an innate
language learning mechanism which determines learning or acquisitionof language
identically for each of us. These two schools are known as ‘empiricists’
(ehaviourists) and ‘rationalists’ (mentalists).
The empiricists say
that all knowledge is derived from experience. They are of the opinion that
children start out as clean slates. Learning a language is a process of getting
linguistic habits printed on these slates. Language acquisition is the result
of stimulus-response activities. Imitation, repetition, memorization, reward,
and reinforcement facilitate this process of language acquisition. The
behaviourists argue that learning is controlled by the conditions under which
it takes place and that, as long as individuals are subjected on the same
condition, they will learn in the same way. Variations in learning are caused
because of the difference in learning experience, difference in the past
experience of learning, difference in aptitudes, motivation, memory and age.
So, for them there is not a theory of language learning as such but merely the
application to language of general principles of learning.
From this follows
that in general there is no difference between the way one learns a language
and the way one learns to do anything else. So, according to the empiricists,
language is a result of stimulus and response. A child should therefore learn
to make a response in the first place, and then the response should be
reinforced in a variety of ways. Indeed strength of learning is measured in
terms of the number of times that a response has been made and reinforced. A
word that has been uttered thirty times is better learned than one which has
been said twenty times. So language learning process is basically a mechanical
process of a habit formation. Habits are strengthened by reinforcement.
Language is behaviour, a conditioned behaviour which can be learned only by
inducing the child to behave. Repetition plays a vital role in learning a
language. Hence the necessity of mechanical drills and exercises, imitation and
repetition.
The rationalists
contradict the empiricists at almost every point. Children learn a language,
not because they are subjected to a similar conditioning process, but because
they possess an inborn capacity which permits them to acquire a language as a
normal maturational process. This capacity is universal. The child has an
innate language acquiring device. He learns a language by exposure to it in
society and by unconsciously forming certain hypotheses about language, which
he goes on modifying till he comes to the adult model to which he is for the
most part exposed. So the child goes on constructing an innate grammar,
operating over generalized rules.
Language acquisition
is species-specific and species-uniform. The ability to take up an understand
language is inherited genetically but the particular language that children
speak, is culturally and environmentally transmitted to them. Children all over
the world acquire their native tongue without tutoring. Whereas a child exposed
to an English speaking community begins to speak English fluently, the other
one exposed to a community of Urdu speakers, begins to use Urdu fluently. Only
human beings can acquire language. Language acquisition thus appears to be
different in kind from acquisition of other skills such as swimming, dancing,
or gymnastics. Native language acquisition is much less likely to be affected
by mental retardation than the acquisition of other intellectual activities.
Every normal human child learns one or more language unless he is brought up in
linguistic isolation, and learns the essentials of his language by a fairly
little age, say by six. To acquire fluency in a language a child has to be
exposed to people who speak that language. A language is not something we know
by instinct or inherit from our parents. It is the result of our exposure to a
certain linguistic community. It is part of that whole complex of learned and
shared behaviour that anthropologists call ‘culture’. By this we do not mean
that language is acquired ready-made. It is created anew by each child by
putting together bits and pieces of environmental raw material. The human child
does play an active role in this process, he actively strains, filters,
recognizes what he is exposed to. His imitations are not photographic
reproductions but artistic recreations. A child is a linguist in cradle He
acquires a language more easily than adults. He discovers the structure of his
native language to use that language; no one hands it to him in a ready-to-use
form.
Both schools have
said significant things, yet neither is perfect. The mentalists’ emphasis on
the rule-learning is over-enthusiastic, and the behaviourists’ rejection of
meaning entirely is unjust. Language acquisition seems to be a process both of
analogy and application, nature and nurture.
Language
Learning Theories
The Spectrum of
language learning theories was dominated by the behaviorists till fifties of
the last century when Chomsky appeared with the beam of ‘cognitive approach’
and Piaget with the ray of ‘Genetic Epistemology‘. Ideas of both the scholars
turned the mode of language learning. Chomsky emphasized the importance of ‘innate
cognitive abilities’ for language learning which were being neglected by the
behaviorists. Whereas Piaget highlighted the importance of cognitive
development in the learning process. The work of both the psychologists
introduced new horizons to explore. Particularly, on one side, Piaget’s work
patched the way of the language learning theories of cognitive process such as
Paivio’s ‘Dual Code theory’ and Anderson’s ‘Act theory’. And on the other side,
many Constructivists like Bruner, Vydotsky and Seymour Papert, influenced by
Piaget’s cognitive approach, tried to synthesis the behaviorist ‘environmental
stimulus’ and the Mentalist cognitive process in their theories. Moreover,
Bloom’s Cognitive Domain and Gardner’s MI theory provided classroom teacher to
assess and analyze the levels and problems of his students. In the following
all these important theories will be discussed under these heads:
1. The Behaviorists
2. The Mentalists
3. Cognitive Process
Theories
4. The
Constructivists
5. Cognitive Domain
6. Multiple
Intelligence Theory
In fact, all these
theories tend to describe the nature and the procedure of learning as they
observe it. Let’s start with ‘The Behaviorists’.
The
Behaviorist School
Behaviorist school
simply claims that language learning is the formation of a set of habits. The
roots of this claim can be found in the general theory of learning described by
the psychologist John B. Watson in 1923, and is known as behaviorism. He gave
the idea that knowledge is the product of interaction with the environment
through stimulus-response conditioning.
B F Skinner was the
psychologist who connected SRR with language learning. His book Verbal Behavior
(1957) laid out a vocabulary and theory for analysis of verbal behavior. How
Skinner inferred this theory is an interesting matter and is related to the
operant conditioning.
Operant Conditioning
Behavior:
Skinner presented his
concept of Operant Conditioning behavior in his book Schedules of
Reinforcement. This behavior implies that learner demonstrate the new behavior
first as a response to the system of reward or punishment and finally becomes
an automatic response which gradually can be developed into complex forms. In
this regard Skinner conducted an experiment on rat. He put the rat in a box containing
a bar. When unconsciously the rat pushed the bar, he received a pellet of food.
Skinner presented the bar as stimulus, the pushing of the bar as response and
the
pellet of food as
reinforcement. He made the process gradually complex by including
blinking-light and reinforcement on double pushing. He showed that through this
SRR bond, it had developed as a habit of rat that whenever he needed food he
pressed the bar. From this, Skinner conclude :
“The basic process
and relation which give verbal behavior its special characteristics are now
fairly understood… the results have surprisingly free of species restrictions.
Recent work has shown that the methods can be extended to human behavior
without serious modification.”
Skinner broadened the
theory to the vast majority of human learning including language learning,
points out Jean Aitchison. When language acquisition is taken into
consideration, the theory claims that both LI and L2 learners receive
linguistic input from speakers in their environment. And when language
learners’ responses are reinforced positively, they learn the language
relatively easily.
Influence of
Behaviorism:
Behaviorism
influenced a great number of learning theories in general and language learning
theories in specific. In general theories Guthrie’s Contiguity ,Hull’s Drive
Reduction Theory, Lava’s Situated learning theory mark great influence of
Behaviourism. In language learning theories Skinner’s Operant Conditioning
theory, Maltzman’s Originality theory follow the behaviourism. Moreover The
Bloomfieldian structuralist school of linguistics also accepted behaviorist
ideas.
Maltzman proposed
that Originality can be increased through instructions or practice to produce
uncommon responses. He distinguished originality from creativity. He claimed
latter refers to the consequences of original behavior. He is one of the few
behaviorists who attempt to deal with creative behaviour. He suggested three principles:
i) Present an
uncommon stimulus situation for which conventional responses may not be readily
available
ii) Suggest different
responses to the same situation
iii) Evoke uncommon
responses as textual responses
Since the
behaviorists claim that there is no need of innate or mental mechanism, they
see errors as wrong habits. During learning second language errors are taken
‘first language habits’ interfering with the learning of second language habits
thus strictly avoided. If there are similarities between the two languages, the
language learners will acquire the target structures easily. If there are
differences, acquisition will be more difficult. This approach is known as the
contrastive analysis hypothesis. According to the hypothesis, the differences
between languages can be used to reveal and predict all errors and the data
obtained can be used in second language teaching for promoting a better
learning environment
The well-know
application in the field of second language teaching is the Audio-lingual
Method. The theory sees the language learner with no built-in knowledge. The
theory and the resulting teaching methods failed to provide a sound basis for
language teaching methodology. This failure is due to the consideration of mere
external factors on the one hand and on the other hand the learned psychologist
‘misunderstood the nature of language’. This is what Chomsky pointed out in his
“A Review of B.F. Skinner’s Verbal Behavior”.
Chomsky’s Attack:
Chomsky, a linguist
and psychologist, criticized Skinner’s theory and argued that he misunderstood
the nature of language. He said that Skinner took language merely ‘stringing
words together’. The linguist pointed out that language makes use
‘structure-depended operation’. Through this he implies that language is
consist of double structure: Surface structure and Deep Structure. In order to
understand the utterance, the listener is to comprehend both the structures.
Another quality of
language that Skinner overlooked is creativity in human language. In this
regard Chomsky says:
The normal use of
language is a creative activity. The creative aspect of normal language is one
of the fundamental factors that distinguish human language from any known
system of animal communication”.
Chomsky’s point is
that humans have freedom to create novel, and new utterance that never used
before yet other can understand it. For example, the sentence “Mars told that
Pluto told him that he saw a Moon in the pocket of Sun which was crying for a
new pair of shoes for he wanted to go to the fun fair in girls high school at
Jupiter” is a novel and never-before-heard sentence but any fluent speaker of
English would be able to understand it. Thus, the behavior of rat, which is
simple and contains no creativity or novelty, is irrelevant to the human
language. In this regard he pointed out further lacks that are as following:
1. The conditions in
rat experiment are simple, well defined, and predictable but human language is
complex phenomenon and it is next to impossible to predetermine what a human is
going to say.
2. The rat was
repeatedly rewarded whereas children utters without any reward and even when
nobody is around.
3. If approval and
disapproval (reinforcement) worked in the way Skinner suggests, children should
grow up always telling truth but speaking ungrammatically, since mother always
approves ‘true statements of a child’ even though ungrammatical.
On theses sound basis
Nome Chomsky rejected “the verbal behavior” of Skinner and purposed his own
theory that is known as “The Mentalist Theory”
The Mentalist School
In contrast with the
Behaviorists, the Mentalists claim that language learning is a rule cognition
process.. They suggest that learning is connected with cognition, innovation
and innate ability. Noam Chomsky suggests that humans are born with an innate
knowledge of language. He presented his theory about the possibility of an
innate structure “Language Acquisition Device”.
Language Acquisition
Device:
Chomsky named the
‘innate structure’, ‘Language Acquisition Device’. What does this LAD do? In
his “The Problem of Knowledge and Freedom”, the theorist claims that it works
to relate the sounds and meanings. It does this with the help of “an
internalized set of rules”. That is to be said a ‘mental grammar’. He claimed that
the grammar expresses the speaker-hearer language know ledge. Its system can be
comprehended as a linguist analyses any ‘unknown linguistic situation’. He
receives sounds, makes hypothesizes, and sometimes for a time being abandoned
it until he compiled a set of rules accountable for all the possible structures
of language. So he claimed:
“there can be little
doubt that highly restrictive universal principle must exist [in mind]
determining the general framework of each human language”. {quoted in Aitchison’
The Articulate Mammal)
Moreover, Chomsky
first time made a distinction between language competence and language
performance. Competence is just the knowledge that speaker possesses of the
grammar of a language; performance is considered the ability to produce through
use of one’s competence.
Chomsky’s Influence:
Chomsky’s ideas about
language and mind shook the behaviorists’ theories about language learning.
Language learning remained no more mere a matter of ‘habit formation’.
Educationists, psychologist and linguists recognized this fact that language
learning involves various faculties such as memory, reasoning, critical
thinking and problem solving etc., so the theories which came after Chomsky’s
work, were mostly based on cognitive approach. The more important among them
are Cognitive Code Learning, Communicative approach, and The Bilingual Method.
In fact, Chomsky’s real achievement is that his work changed the focus of
learning methods and theories from outer environment or teacher to the learner’s
personality and mind. Where he marked such a great influence, some of his ideas
were criticized by psycholinguists even though they believed in ‘cognitive
abilities’.
Criticism on Chomsky:
Many research
analysts criticizes the Chomsky’s notion that ‘grammatical rules’ are given as
innate knowledge. For instance Slobin modifies the Chomsky’s theory in this way
that the rules are not innate but capacity to process the rules is innate.
Chomsky gives little
importance to the environment when he says in his” A Review of B.F. Skinner’s
Verbal Behavior” : “neither empirical evidence nor any known argument to
support any specific claim about the relative importance of feedback from the
environment. His this claim leads towards another extreme and even his design
of LAD itself demands a need of exposure for language learning.
These short comings
and lapses in ‘cognitive approach’ were patched by the work another great
psychologist, Piaget, who first time proposed theory of ‘cognitive
development’. Piaget’s influence can be seen chiefly in two streams: 1).
Theories of cognitive process 2). The Constructivists theories. Let’s discuss
these streams.
Cognitive Process
Theories
Piaget presented
general theoretical framework of “genetic epistemology“. The concept of cognitive
structure or development stages are central to his theory and he was primarily
interested in “how knowledge develops in human organisms”. These stage of
Cognitive developments, which he presented in his genetic epistemology, are as
following:
1. Sensorimotor
stage: children experience through their senses
2. Preoperational
stage: motor skills are acquired
3. Concrete
operational stage: children think logically about concrete events
4. Formal Operational
stage: abstract reasoning is developed here.
Piaget explored the
implications of his theory to all aspects of cognition, intelligence and moral
development. He proposed some principle that should be kept in view during the
learning process regardless of age and subject of learner. Practical implication
of the principles in language learning is found useful. For instance, to the
children in the Sensorimotor stage, till the age of seven, teachers should
provide a rich and stimulating environment with ample objects about which they
want to teach. If learner is to be taught word apple, he should be provided
with the object ‘apple’. The principles are as following
Principles:
1. Children will
provide different explanations of reality at different stages of cognitive
development.
2. Cognitive
development is facilitated by providing activities or situations that engage
learners and require adaptation (i.e., assimilation and accommodation).
3. Learning materials
and activities should involve the appropriate level of motor or mental
operations for a child of given age;
4. Avoid asking
students to perform tasks that are beyond their current cognitive capabilities.
5. Use teaching
methods that actively involve students and present challenges.
There are many
learning theories in general and various language learning theories in
particular that mark the influence of Piaget’ work. Theories related to
language are:
1. Dual Coding Theory
2. Architecture
Cognitive Theory
3. Social Development
Theory
4. Seymour Papert’s
Theory
Out of these four
theories later two are related to ‘constructivism’ so they will be dealt under
the headings of the constructivist whereas former two are related to cognitive
process so let’s have a brief introduction of these two theories.
Architecture
Cognitive Theory:
John Anderson along
with his research fellows proposed a theory for memory process named ACT. He
distinguishes three types of memory structures:
• declarative
• procedural
• working memory.
Declarative memory
takes the form of propositions, images, and sequences by direct associations.
Procedural memory or long-term memory represents information in the form of
productions; each production has a set of conditions and actions based on
declarative memory. Working memory is that part of long-term memory that is the
most highly activated. For language learning it suggests the fowling
principles:
1. Relate new
language items with previous knowledge
2. Minimize working
memory load.
3. Provide immediate
feedback on errors
Dual Coding Theory:
Piaivio is expounder
of the dual coding theory. It attempts to give equal weight to verbal and
non-verbal processing. Paivio emphasizes on the dual function of ‘cognition
process’ particularly with reference to language. He says:
“Human cognition is
unique in that way it has become specialized for dealing simultaneously with
language and with nonverbal objects and events. Any representational theory
must accommodate this dual functionality”.
The theory supposes
that there are two cognitive subsystems, one specialized for the representation
and processing of nonverbal objects such as imagery, pictures etc and the other
specialized for dealing with language. Theory of Paivio is supported by
researches conducting in the field of neurology especially in regard with
aphasia. These researches shows that left hemisphere of human mind is dedicated
to verbal function whereas right hemisphere is dedicated to visual function.
Thus, Dual Code Learning proposes a very significant principle in language
teaching:
“Learning can be
enhanced by presenting information in both visual and verbal form”.
The cognitive process
theorist’ gave their more emphasis on mental process for learning. They give
little importance to external events. This gap was filled by the constructivists.
The Constructivists
Constructivism is
recognized as a unique learning theory in itself. It however, may be associated
with cognitive psychology, because as a theory of learning, it focuses on a
learner’s ability to mentally construct meaning of his own environment and to
create his own learning. The term constructivism is linked to Cognitive and
Social Constructivism.
Constructivist theory
provides a general framework for instruction based upon the study of cognition.
Much of the theory is linked to child development research especially of Piaget
who first time emphasized that cognitive development is related as much with
external experience as with inner innate abilities. A major theme in the
theoretical framework of constructivists is that learning is an active process
in which learners construct new ideas or concepts based upon their experience.
J. Bruner, who
presented the constructivists theory in learning context, described that the
learner selects and transforms information, constructs hypotheses, and makes
decisions, relying on a cognitive structure to do so. Cognitive structure
provides meaning and organization to the experiences and allows the individual
to go beyond the information given.
Vygotsky, a Russian
psychologist, suggests that social interaction plays a vital role in cognitive
development at any stage .He says “Every function in the child’s cultural
development appears twice: first, on the social level, and later, on the
individual level:” His theory is a key component of Situated Learning Theory
and Anchored instruction. Lava, the expounder of Situated Learning Theory,
says:
“Learning, both
outside and inside school, advances through collaborative social interaction
and the social construction of knowledge”.
Ideas of Piaget,
Bruner and Vygotsky and Papert bring a balance in the approach of cognitive
psychologists. Seymour Papert says:
“Thus,
constructionism,… attaches special importance to the role of constructions in
the world as a support for those in the head, thereby becoming less of a purely
mentalist doctrine.”
Constractivists
desire students to become motivated learners, critical thinkers,
problem-solvers and metacognitionists.For this they propose:
1. Language learning
must be connected with the experiences and contexts that motivates learner.
2. Language items
must be structured so that it can be easily grasped by the student.
3. Learner should be
encouraged to explore language own their own through experience.
4. Interactive
learning should be encouraged instead of instruction based.
5. Learning should be
learner-centered rather than teacher centered.
6. Use of computer
technology is important for cognitive growth
While Piaget and
other Cognitive psychologist were giving there attentions to the ‘cognitive
process’ some other psychologists prescribed the importance of ‘learning
variables’ and some other of ‘learner’s variable’. Out of those, two names
gained more importance among educationists : Benjamin Bloom for his famous
‘Cognitive Domain’ that deals with learning variables and Howard Gardner for
his Multiple Intelligence Theory that describes ‘learners’ variables. Let’s
discuss both the theories one by one.
Cognitive Domain
Benjamin Bloom made a
valuable contribution to the classification of educational objectives through
his Taxonomy that is known as Bloom’s Taxonomy. He emphasized the importance of
different types of learning. He divided learning into three major domains:
• Cognitive: mental
skills
• Affective: growth
in feelings or emotional areas
• Psychomotor: manual
or physical skills
Although, all three
are important from teaching point of view, Cognitive Domain is more important
for language teaching. Due to its this importance, this domain will be
discussed in further details.
The cognitive domain
involves knowledge and the development of intellectual skills. This includes
the recall or recognition of specific facts, procedures, patterns, and concepts
that are related to mental abilities and skills. There are six major categories
starting from the simplest to the most complex according to Bloom. These are:
1. Knowledge 4.
Analysis
2. Comprehension 5.
Synthesis
3. Application 6.
Evaluation
Let’s try too
understand all these concepts in the context of language.
Knowledge mean
“recall data or information”. When a language student is instructed to identify
or label any linguistic item in the given statement, let’s suppose noun, in
fact, his knowledge is checked. All questions like: “narrate summery of any
event”, or “tell the name of places or characters”, are knowledge based
question. Multiple-choice tests, definitions, quotations and grammatical rules,
all falls in the category of knowledge.
Comprehension implies
understanding of knowledge and ideas. It can be demonstrated by the questions
of organization, translation or interpretation. All questions that instruct
like: “Translate paragraph into Urdu”, or “State main theme of story’, or
“Explain with the help of examples” are likely to test comprehension of
students.
Application denotes
“put the theory into practice”. For instance, learns are taught creative
writing, they have knowledge what creative writing is, and they can understand
any piece of writing, thus they have comprehension also. Application is a next
step when they are asked to write a narrative essay or argumentative essay. In
spoken context, they learn to handle any situation, let’s say giving
presentation. They have knowledge of presentation, but when they themselves
give a presentation they are applying there knowledge and comprehension.
Analysis is mean
“break and examine information into parts by identifying motives or causes”.
The tasks at this level that English language learners are give are: classify,
contrast, compare, categorize, sequence. For instance, “What are the basic
elements of Bacons prose? Read his essay and discuss.“ or “Why Elizabeth
refused Darcy’s proposal ?(Pride& Prejudice)”
Synthesis tends to
“put parts together to form a whole, with emphasis on creating a new meaning or
structure”. At this level students are to compile information together in a
different way by combining elements in a new pattern and by proposing
alternative solutions. For instance, question like “Can you invent another
character for the story?” “How would you change the story of Mill on the Floss to
create a different ending?”
Evaluation means
“make judgments about the value of ideas or materials.” Here students are to
give there own opinion. For instance “Which part of the novel Heart of Darkness
did you like best? Explain why you like it?” ‘Bacon is the Father of English
prose”, accept or refute the statement.”
Although the ranking
of levels according to difficulty is still controversial among psychologists,
yet classification of different types of learning is Bloom’s great contribution
to educational scenario. It helps teacher to easily recognize and classify the
weak areas of a student. As it helps in classification of learning, another
theory helps in classification of learner.
Multiple Intelligence
Theorem
MI theory helps in
classification of learner according to their different types of intelligence.
The theory of multiple intelligences was developed by Dr. Howard Gardner. It
suggests that the traditional notion of intelligence, based on I.Q. testing, is
far too limited. Instead, Dr. Gardner proposes eight different intelligences to
account for a broader range of human potential in children and adults. These
intelligences are:
• Linguistic
intelligence (“word smart”):
•
Logical-mathematical intelligence (“number/ reasoning smart”)
• Spatial intelligence
(“picture smart”)
• Bodily-Kinesthetic
intelligence (“body smart”)
• Musical
intelligence (“music smart”)
• Interpersonal
intelligence (“people smart”)
• Intrapersonal
intelligence (“self smart”)
• Naturalist
intelligence (“nature smart”)
In educational
psychology and practice it was a great development. Prior to him, people gave
importance only to logical or linguistic intelligence. For instance only those
people got esteem of public who were highly articulate or who were logical.
Particularly, in classroom teacher ignored all other types of intelligence and
emphasized on linguistic or logical interpretation. Drawback of this was that
student who were gifted with other types of intelligence were either ignored or
considered ‘dull’. The theory helps teacher to addressing maximum levels of
understandings. This theory has a broad scope in language learning process.
MI Theory in English
Language Learning:
Through different
kinds of activity almost every kind of intelligence can be addressed. If a
teacher is having difficulty reaching a student in the more traditional
linguistic or logical ways of instruction, the theory of multiple intelligences
suggests several other ways in which the material might be presented to
facilitate effective learning. Whatever teacher is teaching, he should see, how
can be connect it with words, numbers, pictures, music, self-reflection, any
physical experience, any social experience, or with natural world.
For instance, let’s
suppose lesson theme that is to be taught to second language learners at
beginner’s level is “Helpers.” The key vocabulary items are the names of
community helpers (firefighter, police officer, traffic warden, postman,
doctor, nurse), the names of vehicles they use and their places of work. The
target structure to be used is Present Simple, with third person singular.
A whole set of
activities can be designed for the purpose. Let’s say take a start with an educational
trip to the fire station, police station, city council and post office, around
the city. First of all this will give them a direct natural and interpersonal
experience of learning. Secondly, the students will produce an essay, “My
Personal Account of Trip”. This will address two more levels: verbal and
intrapersonal intelligence. Thirdly, they will prepare a picture album with
title “Our Helpers”. In album they will paste different pictures of doctor,
nurse, firefighters, postman etc, with their captions and with description in a
few words. For example under the photo of nurse description will be “A nurse
cares patients”. So this activity will address spatial intelligence as well as
linguistic one. Fourthly, to address musical intelligence, any light song about
‘Helpers’ can be produced. The whole class will sing the song. Fifthly, to
address mathematical intelligence, learner can be asked to list the ‘helpers’
they have met and give them number in words along with in digits. Sixthly,
learner will play roles of different helpers to address kinesthetic
intelligence. So in this way all eight intelligence can be addressed.
One great benefit of
these theories of style of learning and levels of intelligence is that these
gives learner more importance who actually is the most important part of
teaching/learning process. On the other hand these theories help teachers in
understanding their students and to easily identify their problems and mental
levels. Both the theories i.e., Bloom’s ‘Cognitive Domain’ and Gardner’s MI
theory have brought educational psychology out from clinics and research
centers into practice.
The Conclusion
There are two main
different streams of theories. One flows with the waves of behaviorist
psychologist whereas the other runs with the tides of cognitive scientists.
Former observes environmental stimulus as crucial factor but later declares
‘mental process’ as central feature. However, both the streams are combined at
the channel of the constructivists’ who, according to Dr. Joseph Anthony,
suggest “A Cognitive-Behavioral Approach”. In all this flood of theories, two
separate tides of Cognitive Domain and of MI theory make their distinction by
serving two purposes respectively : by categorization of he different kinds of
learning, and by identification of different types of learner. Due to these
developments, language learning process has remained no more subject to
theories or methods but now it gives its attention to the learner. It focuses
on learner, revolves around learner, thus it has become learner-centered.
Biological Evidence
for Innate Language Capacity
The qualitative
growth of language till now has been a unique hallmark of humans. Language
seems to arise according to an inlaid biological time clock. Children, all over
the world, normally start speaking almost at the same time: between their 18th
and 28th month. To provide an unaltering and a patent evidence about an innate
inlaid programming of language in humans is although a colossal task because
language is such a complex phenomenon, still it does not deter us from making a
hypothesis: language in humans is a preplanned innate program. A few factors
seem to recommend the presence of a biological set up in humans for innate
language capacity. These factors may stand as biological evidence for an innate
language acquisition. Let us examine them in detail.
It is usually
believed that when an animal has some innate behavior, it should give some
biological clues about it. Physiology is an authentic branch of biology so let
us first see if any kind of physiological adaptation of the organs of speech is
exclusive to humans. On examination, it seems as if partial adaptation is
there.
The organs of speech
are involved in planning, processing and producing speech. In humans, they show
certain differences from other species. These organs are the mouth, the tongue,
the teeth, the vocal cords, larynx, the lungs and the brain. Their structural
adaptations are as under:
Human lips are
thick-muscled and the shape of the mouth is quite plastic and variable, which
can be rapidly opened and shut. The human lips have a muscular system that is
more intricate than the primates. The mouth’s variable size is planned to be
rather small for supporting good articulation. In chimps and other animals, it is
quite large to support hunting but not speech. The human tongue is also
thick-muscled and not thin like chimps and birds, the shape that impedes
stressed speech. Thick tongue helps in articulating a number of sounds like /q/, /dз/, /tò /, /z/ and /j/. Thin
tongue cannot rest upon itself to produce these stressed sounds. Again, the
teeth are quite distinguishable from other species. They are precisely placed,
placed together and go like a barrier for the air stream coming out of the
lungs. Each set of teeth, the upper and lower, gets set into each other and is
not indented outwards. The indented shape of teeth in animals cannot support
firm articulation.
The examination of
human mouth cavity shows as if it is biologically designed to meet the needs of
speech production. But, of course, only this cannot stand as a quite approved
and ultimate evidence of an innate language capacity therefore we move on to
downward analysis.
The larynx is unlike
animals in its simple structure. It shows streamlining when compared to that of
the primates. Biologically, streamlining and simplification often indicates
specialization for some purpose. So this may be an adaptation to speech
production. In lungs, we witness a finely balanced respiratory system. Usually,
breathing is accelerated when a person pants and one may faint due to this
increased rate yet during speech production, people can go on talking without
any peculiar discomfort. The rate of inhalation while speaking is increased and
that of Exhalation is reduced. This adjustment is not learnt but natural. It
also stands as a biological adaptation for language.
Critchley quotes
Oliver Wendell Holmes praising the sophisticated adaptation for speech in
humans:
‘What a curious thing
speech is! The tongue is so serviceable a member (taking all sorts of shapes
just as it is wanted)––the teeth, the lips, the roof of the mouth, all ready to
help; and so heap up the sounds of the voice into the solid hits which we call
consonants, and make room for the curiously shaped breathings which we call
words.’
The brain is a very
crucial organ in processing speech. The human cortex or the gray matter is
quite thicker than other animals and it appears reasonable to suggest that a
high brain-body ratio is favorable for speech production, still the factor is
not always confirmed in every animal. A camel cannot produce speech like a
human even when it is more huge than human. Likewise a non-cephalic human and
chimp, having the same brain-body ratio, are different in language production.
The dwarf speaks while a chimp does not. This again shows that language is like
innate and exclusive to humans.
We shall have to
examine the brain’s working in detail to comprehend its function in language
processing. Many researches show that the hemispheres, the two halves of the
brain, function identically in animals while in humans a considerable
difference is seen in their functioning. Unlike animals, one of the hemispheres
shows a high function in language production. Mostly, it is the left
hemisphere. Moreover, the right hemisphere controls the left side of the body
and the left hemisphere, the right side. This was first discovered by Marc Dax
in 1836 that the paralysis of the right side of the body incurs speech loss
while the left-side paralysis does not affect speech. This discovery also
recommends that usually the left hemisphere controls not only the right side of
the body but speech as well. It indicates functional difference in both
hemispheres. This difference is also indicated by Barbiturate (Sodium amytal)
Test, Dichotic Listening Test and Electrodiagnosis. This brain asymmetry
develops gradually but even in fetus development, some neurologists found
traces of future left hemisphere dominance. It shows as if the physiology of
the brain is altered in humans to support language acquisition.
The breathing
adaptation, neuromuscular sequencing, comprehension and fine balance of
different processes during speech points toward another biological evidence.
The multiplicity of the integrative processes, which operates during speech
production, is usually not possible in many other processes. For example,
patting one’s head and rubbing one’s stomach cannot take place simultaneously.
But during speech production the coordination of different processes is so intense
we can feel language might be innately programmed to take place.
Different experiments
have shown that only human brain has been able to achieve ‘semanticity’ and
structural development of language. The animals that were given crash training
to speak could not come to the point of clear articulation and semantic usage
of language in spite of providing many years of language-enriched environment.
Here I shall give reference of certain experiments that were carried out on
different animals.
All these experiments
showed that these animals might differ in their capacity to learn language, as
chimps seem to be better than others at acquiring a limited amount of language.
In spite of their ability to learn to speak to a limited extent, they gave
biological evidence in favor of the human brain. They showed that only the
human brain possesses the unique capacity to process language up to a
sophisticated and intricate level. Chimps are not physiologically capable of
uttering speech sounds that humans can utter.
Let us touch upon
another very important factor, which might stand as biological evidence on the
innate capacity of language in humans. Biologically, if any behavior shows
following features, it is supposed to be innate:
• The behavior
emerges before it is necessary
• The emergence of
the behavior is involuntary. No conscious decision is made for its emergence
• The above said
emergence of the behavior is not triggered by external events
• There is a
‘critical period’ for the acquisition of this behavior
• Direct teaching and
intense practice has very little effect
• The behavior
progresses through certain ‘milestones’. We can say that it is sequenced.
Let us see whether
language shows these features or not:
With reference to the
above said points, we see that language also emerges before it is necessary.
Even when their parents still fend for them, babies start speaking. It is
called ‘law of anticinatory maturation’. Without any inborn mechanism speech
might develop in babies when their parents left them to fend for themselves. It
would emerge at different times in different cultures but we can see that the
emergence of speech takes place almost at the same time in all the babies.
Secondly, a child
does not decide consciously, ‘Tomorrow I shall start speaking.’ Starting
uttering words is quite unconscious. This is quite different from the decision
of jumping from a high place, which has to be consciously decided. So language
shows the second characteristic of an innate behavior as well.
Thirdly, children
start to talk even when their external environment remains unchanged. They
remain in the same house and the same place. Here, it must not be mingled with
the fact that rich linguistic environment helps the child toward a far better
progress. It is because any biologically programmed behavior does not develop
in impoverished or unnatural surroundings.
Fourthly, all the
analyses of language acquisition show that there is a certain time period in
which the acquisition is on the peak, after which it slows down. We shall not
go into the reasons of its slowing down. The same critical period is said to be
working in children getting even two mother tongues at the same time equally
effectively. The end of this critical period works in adults who do not prove
to be very good at learning a second language.
Fifthly, many
experiments show that direct teaching and giving forced practice only hinders
the way of a child towards good learning performance. The language takes its natural
course towards its development. It indicates that language is naturally
programmed. And if it is naturally programmed, it is innate.
Sixthly, language
acquisition is a sequenced behavior. A baby has to pass through certain
milestones till he gets the language fully. At first, it starts crying, then
cooing that remains for about 6 weeks. Then babbling starts and lasts for 6
months. After 2 months, intonation patterns arise, which lasts for about 2
months. 1-Word utterances are followed by 2-words utterances and last till the
child is of 18 months. At the age of 5 years, children start producing rare and
complex structures. And it is at 10 years of age that mature speech begins.
Though this is an approximate age-schedule but the order of the events is the
same.
The physiological and
behavioral factors discussed above show to a very great extent that language is
biologically programmed behavior and so it is innate. Lenneberg says:
‘There is in fact, no
evidence that any conscious and systematic teaching of language takes place,
just as there is no special training /or ‘stance or gait ‘.
Factors Affecting
Foreign Language Learning
Plenty of observation
has made it clear that FL learning is different from mother tongue acquisition.
Although one can learn two mother tongues equally well simultaneously, FL does
not seem to follow the same mode of learning. There must be then a number of
factors that affect this learning and an overview might help us in getting an
insight into what we can do to overcome these factors. We shall analyze the
following in this regard:
• Aptitude
• Motivation
• Needs
• Age
• Personality
• Learning strategies
• Influence of mother
tongue
Aptitude
Let us first see how
aptitude affects the FL learning:
As teachers, we must
have seen many a times that a few students in every session seem fairly better
at language acquisition than the other ones. We assign to them a quality that
they possess a good language learning potential, which differs from individual
to individual. It follows that people are not identical in their capability to
learn a foreign language. This language learning potential is actually the
language aptitude’. It is the same element that can determine the success or
failure of a FL learner. Whether their aptitude is a product of the innate
abilities or previous learning experience does not matter. Neither influence,
we suppose, is reversible so every person has a permanent and stable level up
to which he can learn a foreign language. Here, it should be remembered that
aptitude is a factor more concerned with FL learning. It is because mother
tongue seems to develop through one’s innate abilities.
To measure this
aptitude, researches have developed two important language tests. This measure
can give us a piece of information doubt the future performance of a learner,
beforehand. It seems reasonable to expect that any test that succeed in
providing such a prediction would point towards the psychological components a
language learning ability.
There are two
existing language tests, both developed in the united states:
1. Modren Language
Aptitude Test (MLA] ) developed by Caroll and Sapon.
2. Language Aptitude
Battery (LAB) developed by Pimsleur
Now we can get an
idea out of what has been said above that language aptitude is an important
factor that can have serious effects on FL learning. A learner, who possesses
an active and good aptitude, would naturally show diligent learning while a
learner with a less active aptitude is expected to find hurdles in his way
through language learning. That is why language aptitude tests are given a lot
of significance before starting FL teaching.
We would definitely
like to see how the tests work. Let us have an overview:
The MLAT in the
beginning had 25 variables to determine language aptitude. The 20 variables, on
seeing that they did not offer a good prediction, were dropped and 5 of them
selected to develop MLAT. This test works through the following factors:
• Learning artificial
numbering
• Working on a
phonetic script
• Vocabulary test
containing not illogical but strangely spelt words
• Identifying similar
grammatical words in different sentences
• The ease of
learning based on the pairs of words in English and Kurdish
After MLAT,
Pimsleur’s LAB was again a good predictor of success and failure in FL leaning.
LAB works through the following factors:
• Vocabulary in the
mother tongue
• Construction of new
analogous sentences
• Ability to
discriminate sounds of new language
• Testing
sound––symbol relationship
• Measuring pupil’s
declared interest in language learning on a scale of 1–5
An analysis of LAB
tells us that the first four factors are purely linguistic and the last one is
non-linguistic but can show an important degree of language learning aptitude.
The difference between MLAT and LAB is that the earlier of the two contains
only linguistic sub-tests whereas the second one probes into a non-linguistic
measure as well. It makes LAB a better predictor than MLAT. A general analysis
of the Grade Point Average is also taken into account these days. Thus,
language aptitude becomes a very significant factor that affects performance of
foreign language learners.
Motivation
Motivation, like
aptitude, is a factor much concerned with second language learning. The reason
of not associating it to first language acquisition is that L1 acquisition is
thought to be a maturational process, in which motivation and aptitude seem to
have no place. The psychology of first language gives a few points about
motivation in second language learning as well. The two Soviet psychologists,
Luria and Vygotsky describe the psychology very explicitly in an acceptable
way:
It is through speech
that a child learns to organize his perception and to regulate his behavior and
mental activities. Faced with problems and needs, the child will in his early
years merely look for outside assistance and language will have the function of
obtaining this assistance for him. Then will come a stage in which the child
spends a lot of time talking to himself or to anyone who cares to listen in his
first efforts to find solutions to his needs himself. Finally, the external
speech is internalized, so that the child’s behavior is no longer simply a
response to external stimuli but has come under the control of his thought processes.
It is the environment that is controlled by the child rather than the other way
round.
The parallel between
the above said situation and that of learning an alternate language does not
abound. In learning L2, a learner does not need the second language for
regulating his manners or behavior. His modes of’ behavior are already set in
the culture of his L1. He is not ‘forced mentally’ to acquire a language but
possesses only a desire of learning L2. He may be motivated to influence the
outer environment according to his needs. The greater the motivation, the
greater the success. This is where the only means available to exercise control
over events and people outside himself, is the foreign language. If to satisfy
his needs, to influence the actions and thoughts of others to pursue his
occupation and his recreation, it is necessary to use a foreign language, then
he will learn the foreign language more rapidly and effectively. These
circumstances will normally arise if the learner is living in the country where
a foreign language is as important functionally as the learner’s L1 in his own
country. So the learner would be highly motivated to learn the alternate
language. If immigrants find themselves, even in the foreign land, in a
situation where most of their needs can be met in their mother tongue, they
would be less motivated to learn L2. Motivation can be of two kinds:
• INTEGRATIVE
MOTIVATION
• INSTRUMENTAL
MOTIVATION
The reason of
learning may be numberless. People are motivated for different reasons. Those
who want to learn a language to achieve some other goal are called instrumental
learners. Some of the like reasons are mentioned below:
1. To pass an exam
that is important.
2. To utilize the
language at one’s job place.
3. To go for a
holiday to the area of 1,2.
4. To get the
entertainment that is being continuously induced.
5. Under the
instruction of school.
Such a learner uses
the language as an instrument to get his target.
In integrative
motivation, language is itself an end into it. We considered them better
motivated than the instrumental learners because research has shown that
integrative learners are the most successful. The reasons of integrative
motivation may be such like:
1. That one wants to
know about how the native speakers of the foreign language live or what kind of
culture they own.
2. That one is
expected to live in the country concerned.
3. That one wants to
be conversant with the native speakers.
Age
Age factor is
different from aptitude and motivation. Age is inverse-proportional to language
learning capability therefore it is a variable and unlike aptitude and
motivation, which are more or less permanent. It plays a very important role in
L1 acquisition as well. After the passage of the ‘critical period’, it becomes
hard to acquire a language fully well. In learning L2m age factor is extremely
functional as a barrier because the set of behavior is already adjusted
according to one’s culture. Researches have shown that children are all the
better able to acquire L1 and L2 than adults. Let us go into its detail:
Many sources have
shown if children are exposed to two mother tongues, they become ambilingual;
they can use both languages and each without being distinguishable from the
native speakers. On the other hand, adult immigrants, who have acquired their
first language cannot remove traces of L1 in their communication. This points
toward age factor working as a barrier behind it. The capacity to master a new
language is gradually reduced along with increasing age. Many adult learners
remain at the primary level of their speech in second language.
Evidence of a
boundary between child and adult learner, is also provided by neurophysiology.
Penfield and Roberts have argued on the basis of their study of speech
mechanisms that the neurological evidence is in favor of language instruction
beginning at an early age. ‘I he brain’s motor skills are associated with the
left hemisphere and if it is damaged only children can transfer the motor
skills to the other hemisphere. They also argue that the brain has a certain
sort of plasticity at a young age, which is lost when one becomes an adult.
That is why the articulatory skills cannot be perfectly acquired at a later
age. These ideas are expressed by these neurophysiologists in Speech and brain
Mehanisms.
It is also observed
that children can adopt a new sound system better than adults. That’s why it is
now preferred to start teaching a foreign language at the primary level.
Inhibition also plays the part of obstruction in adults acquiring a new
pronunciation. Children usually enjoy imitation and repetition, which is needed
in this process. They are less self-conscious and ethnocentric.
Though these factors
are to a great extent operant, still exceptions can be found. If adults face a
difficulty in getting a new language, they are also better off to tackle the
troubles that arise on way. It takes us to another realm of a factor that might
be functional in acquiring a foreign language.
Personality
Personality of a
learner is also significant in learning a foreign language. An introvert
learner is usually very self-conscious and due to this inhibition, he cannot
take the desired advantage of teacher’s instructions. Imitation is much needed
in learning a language, which may not be well met by an introvert. A confident
learner talks about his problems openly and gets them solved. Still, we should
remember that research labels this factor as less functional in language learning.
Learning
Strategies
Good and active
learners are those who are apt to adopt different learning strategies. He
should be ready to change his active knowledge into passive one. For example,
he should try to use a newly gained item into sentences and look for
opportunities in which he can be conversant in the target language. Switching
on to the programs in the target language also helps. Successful learners do
not feel shy at making mistakes as they are predictors of how the learning is
going.
Influence
of Mother Tongue
Mother tongue, for an
adult, impedes the way to a thorough teaming of a foreign language. It is
because his mind is already caught in the mazes of the first language so L1
interferes with the operation of a new language. The previous grammatical
system and pronunciation affects the new one. Often, many adults cannot speak
and hear new sounds. They seem to filter out the new sounds from their hearing
because they have been using the systems of the previous language for a long
time and so they become accustomed of it.
Let us now see how
much functional these factors arc in our local environment. English is a
significant foreign language in our locality. In Pakistan, it is mostly used
among people who wish to go for higher education or immigration. In other
situations, it is usually not given the attention it needs. “That is why the
factors of less aptitude and age can be seen to lay the worse effects.
No comments:
Post a Comment