Language is not learned by groups

View PDF

Volume 39, Issue 1, January–April 2018, Pages 161-167

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2017.12.012Get rights and content

I agree entirely with Carlos, we can never reach the fluency of our first language when learning a foreign language simply because with the latter we lack the natural linguistic environment that makes the acquisition of a language occurs spontaneously and effortlessly. In my country, English is a foreign language and pupils meet it only in class for two/three to four hours per week which is a very limited time compared to the amount of time we spend to acquire L1.

Interesting. I do nothing but offer my students the chance to use the language that they presently have in their repertoire. I make them use the language in class to communicated in a variety of scenarios and forms. Grammar, New Vocab and Pronunciation I do on the fly.

I do wonder about the general level of proficiency and knowledge of so many ESL ‘teachers’ I encounter. I also wonder about the particularly American fad for pieces of paper. Again I’ve encountered people ‘teachers’ supposedly qualified to MA and PhD level who had poor communication skills, poor teaching skills and on one occasion did not seem to have any other language but English.

As a fluent second language speaker I try to see things from the learner’s point of view: what do they need, what might interest them and what are challenges for the. Moreover I always go into classes and initially find out what things in the language students find the most challenging and for efficiency what they really need to progress as language learners.

I think that one of the big problems is that English is now sold as a brand rather than a real skill which takes time to acquire (as most language does). Too often English is the means to a monetary end for people who set up shop as schools in order to make a lot of money. Teachers are exploited and all the owner cares about is selling the product regardless of whether students learn or not. Consequently so many teacher hires are people with little or no language teaching awareness or skills.

Language takes time and patience and thought to learn – those are things which are now in short supply in our very impatient and status concious world.

Hello Everyone,

What an interesting debate! I see some of you being in favor of teaching grammar and other expressing their disagreement of teaching it and focus more on conversation. I am an English teacher.I’ve been teaching for more than twenty five years, and I’m always looking for that “magic formula” to be able to get my students into speaking English fluently.

So, I wish I cound find that “magic formula”, and that is the reason that has taken me into this interesting site. I am trying to prepare a one-hour talk on Learning In and Outside of the class, and thought immediately on talking about the Learning and Acquiring Theory, so I my plan is to have the audience (English teachers and some Students of English) experience doing two-three communicative activities right there; Role Play, Interview and a group discussion on a controversial topic (I still haven’t thought which one), and then get the audience to tell me the advantages of using such activities in the class, and then show them two-three sites where they can go in to continue their practice so that they can “acquire” more language. Classroom time, it’s not enough”. I like to apply the 20-80 (20%presentation of rules, etc and 80% of practice”) Somebody mentioned the
student motivation and a “sympathetic” teacher…I agree with that? Any comments? Great debate, and a good practice for those of us who are not-native teachers and love teaching! Thank you for reading.

The article is so relevant I appreciate it. It’s true that in learning a second language you must have knowledge about your first language! Really appreciate it!

It is usually said it is better to acquire a language than to learn it. we all acquire our mother tongue but why do some students speak it better than others?
Why do some students who learned the language perform better than others who acquired it?

I learned French by being sent to a boarding school in France at the age of 10. I acquired the language through the need to communicate. Snippets that did things (phrases) and then pattern matching by noticing where the snippets overlapped each other (words). Getting to grips with what a sentence felt like, replacing words with the ones I needed, straight forward correction by my peer group who were happy just to say it the right way when I got it wrong.

with what I have read here, I should say I am able to gain something, but sir please I am still confused about this statement, language learning and acquisition in relation to age. Does this mean the two are not related?

with relative to the above I can safely say a clear distinguishing line has been drawn between the two and has helped me a as a second language learner to note and embrace the difference with regard to the procession of my second language study

this helps a lot .thanks!

Thank you so much. It helped me for my assignment.

Thank you very much. This has helped me in building my knowledge to another level.

I enjoyed your article. I agree that acquisition is something most at home language courses are missing. That’s why it’s so much easier to become fluent in our native tongue than a second language. We practice both acquisition and learning by growing up in a home with a specific language and going to school to learn the rules of the language.

I think an adult learner using a CD based program should try to find others who speak the language they’re learning and practice communicating with them. Though it might be hard to find speakers of more obscure languages.

Hello everyone!
In Pakistan everyone learns maximum 3 to 4 languages. In Punjab when a child is growing up he speaks Punjabi language but when he grows up and goes to school he/she speaks Urdu language for conversation, Arabic for learning and understanding for Religion and English for work and interviews. So, a Pakistani person learns second languages easily and speaks fluently… Interesting.

This is true. As a teacher of English I have realised that learners learn language best if they practice it. In the classroom situation, pupils when they first start school they only know their Mother tongue and now the teacher has the duty to train the learners in the official language. It really works well because learners will use the mostly used language. The most active language will dominate in acquiring it.

I’m referencing this website but I need the date of when this article was written?

Funny how education theory has so limited real testing, and is a lot of anecdotal speculations. Babies do learn quickly using listening and speaking. Deaf kids have a much much harder time acquiring language. These are facts. Trying to teach with reading and writing for a baby is clearly very difficult. Adults trying to acquire a second language are often considered less able than babies kids but so what?. Adults have thousands of important issues going around in their minds whereas babies are like a clean slate so of course a baby acquires faster. Just because adults acquire less slowly than babies doesn’t mean learning grammar rules can improve speed of acquisition.

I alway think of my student who refused to simply read books and watch some basic fun videos and made himself tired doing 2 hours grammar every day coming into class, looking out the window saying “ now it rains” instead of it is raining. He forgot that present tense is not for the present. So instead of doing proper reading and listening and getting accustomed to English he convinces himself he needs more tortuous grammar. No pain no gain. Utter nonsense. You can’t convince some people even by pointing out counter successes as many people think they know what is best for themselves. Oh well it keeps us in work.

Thanks so much it helped my brother in making his assignment.