Features of second language learning

Kia ora tatou.

Some weeks ago I quoted some of Patsy Lightbown’s work, in particular her list of features of second language learning. In this list she says, “Isolated explicit error correction is usually ineffective in changing language behaviour”.

This would appear to be counter intuitive and I am sure we have all attempted to correct our children’s errors, but I am equally sure we would agree with Lightbown regarding our lack of

success.

The key phrase in her comment is ‘isolated’. To me this isolation refers to picking of some particular error for close study when it doesn’t relate to any situation which is real at that time.

For instance if the teacher/parent chooses, out of the blue, to explain “much” and “many". Without an instant need for the correct use of the words the lesson is meaningless to most children.

Further to this is where the isolation refers to the correction being completely outside of the learner’s internal set of rules, what we refer to as their schema. I need to diverge a little here. The schema is the set of understandings and experiences we bring to making meaning of a word, a chunk of language, or a situation. So if we were to consider a schema for the concept of Mountain it might look like this:

Now if we had been brought up on a Pacific atoll that would all be meaningless as the highest point of land we have ever seen is likely to be only a few metres high. Similarly for a younger student a schema for Much might look like this:

Clearly at this stage in the student’s understanding of the language Much can do all the jobs you might suggest that Many can do so why would they change? Much can be used to talk about the size of something, eg. “ I’ve got this much money, this much time, this much further to go”, so it follows for this student that this much coins, this much minutes and this much kilometres is ok.

It is only when their schema grows to include the idea that much only applies to things which can’t be counted individually but can only be measured as quantities or groups that they will understand and apply the corrections.

So what are the implications of this for us as parents and teachers? Firstly make the corrections in context about real situations, and secondly explore with the learner their wider understanding of the word or chunk so that their schema is expanded. This can be done be drawing their attention to various uses of the words you are trying to correct. For instance you might say, “How many rain is there going to be?” and then go on to discuss why many is the wrong word and why. However don’t expect instant results.

As Lightbown says in her list, “Knowing a language rule does not mean one will be able to use it in communicative interaction”. Incidentally we appear as humans to be unable to pick up completely new schema for things, we can only add and adapt the ones we have. Which is why when we learn a new language we keep on going back to what we know about our first.

Nga mihi nui.

Chris