Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The threshold hypothesis is a hypothesis concerning second language acquisition set forth in a study by Cummins (1976), [1] which stated that a minimum threshold in language proficiency must be passed before a second-language speaker can reap any benefits from language.
James Cummins (July 3, 1949- ) is a professor at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto where he works on language development and literacy development of learners of English as an additional language. In 1979 Cummins coined the acronyms BICS and CALP to refer to processes that help a teacher to qualify a ...
BICS refers primarily to context-bound, face-to-face communication, like the language first learned by toddlers and preschoolers, which is used in everyday social interaction. [citation needed] This term is often credited to Jim Cummins' research related to language acquisition and learning. [3]
The Bottleneck Hypothesis [23] suggests that certain linguistic features in second-language acquisition (SLA) act as a bottleneck, limiting the progression of learners in acquiring the full grammatical system of the target language. According to this hypothesis, functional morphology is the most challenging aspect for adult L2 learners to acquire.
The acquisition–learning hypothesis claims that there is a strict separation between acquisition and learning; Krashen saw acquisition as a purely subconscious process and learning as a conscious process, and claimed that improvement in language ability was only dependent upon acquisition and never on learning.
Herdina and Jessner in their Dynamic Model of Multilingualism (DMM) (2002) were the first scholars to use dynamic system, as well as complex system approaches to model third (and xth) language acquisition and development in a holistic systems framework. In 1997 Larsen-Freeman used the terms chaos and complexity in her seminal article. [3]
The strong-interface position views language learning much the same as any other kind of learning. In this view, all kinds of learning follow the same sequence, from declarative knowledge (explicit knowledge about the thing to be learned), to procedural knowledge (knowledge of how the thing is done), and finally to automatization of this procedural knowledge.
Although Swain does not claim that comprehensible output is solely responsible for all or even most language acquisition, she does claim that, under some conditions, CO facilitates second language learning in ways that differ from and enhance input due to the mental processes connected with the production of language. [2]