Similarities and differences between 1st and 2nd language acquisition

Similarities and differences between 1^st and 2^nd language acquisition

By/ Brwa R. Sharif
14/ April/ 2013

Introduction

Various theories are put forward to describe first language (L1) acquisition and second language (L2) acquisition. In order to understand the nature of L1 and L2 language acquisition, various aspects were examined, compared, and contrasted.
Interlanguages have some common characteristics with L1 acquisition, because both share similar developmental sequences. Some of the characteristics of L2 acquisition show similarities with L1 acquisition, whereas others show differences.
 
Similarities between First and Second Language Acquisition

Researchers have carried out numerous studies to understand the nature of first and second language acquisition. These studies have revealed that both first and second language learners follow a pattern of development, which is mainly followed despite exceptions. Rod Ellis (1984) covers the idea of developmental sequences in detail and outlines three developmental stages: the silent period, formulaic speech, and structural and semantic simplification.
 
a.     Developmental Sequences

1.     Silent Period:

Both first and second language learners pass through a similar initial stage, the silent period. Children acquiring their first language go through a period of listening to the language they are exposed to. During this period the child tries to discover what language is. In the case of second language acquisition, learners opt for a silent period when immediate production is not required from them. In general, however, many second language learners - especially classroom learners- are urged to speak. The fact that there is a silent period in both first and second language learners (when given the opportunity) is widely accepted.
However, there is disagreement on what contribution the silent period has in second language acquisition. While Krashen (1982) argues that it builds competence in the learner via listening, Gibbons (1985, cited in Ellis, 1994) argues that it is a stage of incomprehension.
 
2.      Speech Formulaic

Formulaic speech is defined as expressions which are learnt as unanalysable wholes and employed on particular occasions (Lyons, 1968, cited in Ellis, 1994). Krashen (1982) suggests that these expressions can have the form of routines (whole utterances learned as memorized chunks - e.g. I don't know.), patterns (partially unanalyzed utterances with one or more slots - e.g. Can I have a ____?), and Ellis (1994) suggests that these expressions can consist of entire scripts such as greetings.
 
3.      Structural and Semantic Simplification

The first and second language learners apply structural and semantic simplifications to their language. Structural simplifications take the form of omitting grammatical functors (e.g. articles, auxiliary verbs) and semantic simplifications take the form of omitting content words (e. g. nouns, verbs). There are two suggested reasons why such simplifications occur. The first reason is that learners may not have yet acquired the necessary linguistic forms. The second reason is that they are unable to access linguistic forms during production.
 
b.    Acquisition Order

Wells (1986b, in Ellis, 1994) proposes inter-learner variables affecting the order of acquisition as sex, intelligence, social background, rate of learning, and experience of linguistic interaction.
Furthermore, McLaughlin (1987) claims that evidence from research shows that the learner's first language has an effect on acquisitional sequences which either slows their development or modifies it. He adds that, considerable individual variation in how learners acquire a second language, such as different learning, performance, and communication strategies, obscure the acquisitional sequences for certain constructions.
Lightbown and Spada (2006) review studies which have proposed that the acquisition of question words (what, where, who, why, when, and how), show a great similarity in first and second language acquisition. Based on the morpheme studies in L2 acquisition, Krashen (1982) put forward the Natural Order Hypothesis which he developed to account for second language acquisition. He claimed that we acquire the rules of language in a predictable order. This acquisition order is not determined by simplicity or the order of rules taught in the class.
The above arguments show that there seems to exist an order of acquisition in both first and second language acquisition.

c.      Linguistic Universals and Markedness

The findings show that unmarked features are learned earlier and easier than marked rules in both the first and the second language while unmarked forms require more time and effort by the learner.

d.    Overgeneralization

In both first and second language acquisition, learners may overgeneralize vocabulary or rules, using them in contexts broader than those in which they should be used. For example a child may say ‘goed’ instead of saying ‘went’ for past of ‘go’, and same thing may happen in second language acquisition an adult may say ‘holded’ instead of ‘held’ for past of ‘hold’.

e.      Input

Krashen (1982) argues that the input a first language learner receives is simple and comprehensible at the beginning and is getting slightly more complicated. With this argument, he supports his next argument that input should be slightly above the level of the language learner. Only in doing so can the second language learner move forward. He argues that the second language learner should be exposed to the target language as much as possible and that the lack of comprehensible input will cause the language learner to be held up in his development (Ellis, 1994; McLaughlin, 1987).
The Interactionist Approach to first language acquisition holds that one to one interaction gives the child access to language which is adjusted to his or her level of comprehension, therefore, interaction is seen as crucial and impersonal sources of language (such as TV and radio) are seen as insufficient. Consequently, verbal interaction is seen to be crucial for language leaning since it helps to make the facts of the second language salient to the learner. Similarly, intersectional modifications which take place in the conversations between native and non-native speakers are seen as necessary to make input comprehensible for the second language learner (Lightbown & Spada, 2006; Ellis, 1994).
 
f.      Behavioristic Views of Language Acquisition

The similarity between L1 and L2 acquisition is seen in the Behavioristic Approach originally which tries to explain learning in general. The famous psychologist Pavlov tried to explain learning in terms of conditioning and habit formation. Following Pavlov, B. F. Skinner tried to explain language learning in terms of operant conditioning. This view sees language as a behavior to be taught. A small part of the foreign language acts as a stimulus to which the learner responds (e.g. by repetition). When the learner is 100 % successful, the teacher reinforces by praise or approval.
Consequently, the likelihood of the behavior is increased. However, if the learner responds inappropriately then the behavior is punished and the likelihood of this behavior to occur is decreased (Brown, 1994). In other words, children imitate a piece of language they hear and if they receive positive reinforcement they continue to imitate and practice that piece of language which then turns into a 'habit' (Williams & Burden, 1997).
However, L1 and L2 learners form and repeat sentences they have not heard of before. Therefore, this approach fails to account for the creative language use of L1 and L2 learners.
 
g.     Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)

We can say that zone of proximal development is shared in first and second language acquisition; for example, when children come across a problem they cannot solve themselves they turn to others for help. Thus, collaboration with another person is important for a child to learn. Otherwise, development would not be possible. Learning collaboratively with others precedes and shapes development. A good example for this process is said to be the development of literacy (Gallaway & Richards, 1994; Lantolf & Thorne, 2007).
Vygotsky (1982, cited in Daniels, 1996) asserts that through using language children take part in the intellectual life of the community. In order to negotiate meaning, collaboration between the child and the members of the community is required. Considering language education, instruction creates the zone of proximal development, stimulating a series of inner developmental processes (Daniels, 1996; Lantolf & Thorne, 2007). According to the ZPD, assistant performance and collaboration are crucial for learning and development. The teacher’s assistance and students’ collaboration with their teacher and their peers is inevitable for L2 development. The teacher’s most important classroom work “is to provide for the social interaction within the community of learners such that the learners may move from what they know to what they don’t yet know” (Hawkins, 2001, p. 375).
 
 
Differences of first and second language acquisition

On the surface one would look at child first language acquisition and adult second language acquisition and see similarities. In each case the learner first learns how to make basic sounds, then words, phrases and sentences; and as this learning continues the sentences become more and more complex. However, when one looks at the outcomes of these two types of acquisition, the differences are dramatic. The child's ability to communicate in the target language far surpasses that of the adult. In this paper differences in these two processes that most always produce such different outcomes will be explored.
 
a.     Input

The first area of difference between first (L1) and second (L2) language learning is input – specifically the quality and quantity of input. It is the idea of the "connectionist model that implies... (that the) language learning process depends on the input frequency and regularity". It is here where one finds the greatest difference between L1 and L2 acquisition. The quantity of exposure to a target language a child gets is immense compared to the amount an adult receives. A child hears the language all day every day, whereas an adult learner may only hear the target language in the classroom – which could be as little as three hours a week. Even if one looks at an adult in a total submersion situation the quantity is still less because the amount of one on one interaction that a child gets for example with a parent or other caregiver is still much greater than the adult is receiving.
 
 
b.    Age

The next great and obvious difference between L1 and L2 learning is age. A large part of this train of thought is the idea of a "critical period, or the "time after which successful language learning cannot take place". This time is usually aligned with puberty. This change is significant, "because virtually every learner undergoes significant physical, cognitive, and emotional changes during puberty.
There are three main physical changes one undergoes in regards to language acquisition. The first is the presence of muscular plasticity. A child's plasticity goes away at about the age of five. After this age it is very hard for a learner to fully master pronunciation of a second language. The second change is one's memorization capabilities. It is fairly well known that as a person grows older their ability to hold large amount of information reaches its peak fairly early in life, and then begins to decrease. This is seen most dominantly with very old individuals. The third physical change that occurs is more related to neurology.
"As a child matures into adulthood, the left hemisphere (which controls the analytical and intellectual functions) becomes more dominant than the right side (which controls the emotional functions)."
The one advantage adults seem to have over children is their cognitive ability. Adults are better able to benefit from learning about structure and grammar. Unfortunately this slight advantage in ability does not help adult second language acquisition in general. In fact this ability almost hinders them in that they analyze too much. Specifically, they cannot leave behind what they know about their first language, which leads to a tendency to overanalyze and to second guess what they are learning.
The final area that puberty changes is within the emotional, or affective, realm. Motivation is much affected by emotional change. A child's motivation is simple. In order to communicate and to be a part of family and society the child must master the target language. This motivation is quite weighty, especially when compared to the motivation that adults have, or rather, must find. Adult motivations usually fall into one of two categories: "integrative motivation (which encourages a learner to acquire the new language in order to become closer to and/or identify themselves with the speakers of the target language) or instrumental motivation (which encourages a learner to acquire proficiency for such practical purposes as becoming a translator, doing further research, and aiming for promotion in their career)". Either one of these types of motivation must be prevalent for successful acquisition to take place.
 
c.      Egocentricity

The final change that takes place, and changes language learning has to do with egocentricity. Children are naturally egocentric. While learning their language they are not afraid to make mistakes, and in general, they do not feel abashed when they are corrected. Also, their thoughts usually do not surpass their language ability. Adults, on the other hand usually suffer form a fairly large amount of language learning anxiety. Adults often "feel frustrated or threatened in the struggle of learning a different language". Mistakes are seen more as failures then as opportunities for growth. "The adult learner may also feel greatly frustrated, for being only able to express their highly complex ideas at a discourse level of an elementary school pupil". These new emotions leave an adult learner in a slightly helpless position, unable to regain the egocentricity of their childhood, which is just on more hindrance in a line of many.
 
 
d.    Experience with another language

In the process of learning a second language, a learner experiences something different from his mother tongue. The first language has no experience with another language, while the learner of the second language has already learnt one language in his child hood. In the second language, he finds different vocabulary; grammar structures and so on are totally different from his mother tongue.
 
e.      Process of learning

Learning of the first language is a natural process. A person learns his mother tongue in a natural way. There is the strongest social compulsion for the child, to pick up his mother tongue. For the second language learner, the compulsion may not be strong and the class rooms activities helping him to learn may be artificial graded and selected items are exposed.
 
f.      Time limit

In first language acquisition one has a choice of time that means the learner decided his time that when to learn. Nobody can force him because it happens in society whereas second language learner has to keep in the mind in the mind the time of teacher. And he is forced by his teachers to learn. So, first language learner learns by his own language learner has to keep in mind the time given by the expert.
In first language acquisition, children spend several years listening to language, babbling, and using telegraphic speech before they can form sentences. In second language acquisition in older learners, learning is more rapid and people are able to form sentences within a shorter period of time.
 
 
 

References

Ipek, H. (2009). Comparing and Contrasting First and Second Language Acquisition: Implications for Language Teachers. English Language Teaching, 2(2), 155-163.
solanki, H. (2006, December 1). similarities & differences between L1&L2. Retrieved April 13, 2013, from l1orl2hiren.blogspot.com: http://l1orl2hiren.blogspot.com/
Tucker, M. (2003, December 2). First and Second Language Acquisition. Retrieved April 13, 2013, from serendip.brynmawr.edu: http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/biology/b103/f03/web2/mtucker.html
Vanegas, C. (2009). Similarities and Differences between First and Second Language Acquisition. Retrieved April 13, 2013, from Multilingualism: http://multilingualism.pbworks.com/w/page/21913433/Similarities%20and%20Differences%20between%20First%20and%20Second%20Language%20Acquisition