Gass & Selinker's SLA Chapter 13,14

13. THE LEXICON


13.1. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE LEXICON
The lexicon has been neglected in second language acquisition research. However, there are numerous reasons that the lexicon is the most important component for learners. Learners consider vocabulary errors the most serious and large corpora of errors consistently indicate that lexical errors are the most common among second language learners. Moreover, native speakers find lexical errors to be more disruptive than grammatical errors because lexical errors interfere with communication. Level explained that the lexicon is the driving force in sentence production. Also, he asserted lexical hypothesis: Lexicon is an essential mediator between conceptualization and grammatical and phonological encoding.
The lexicon is also important in comprehension, especially oral comprehension. Comprehension is undoubtedly of great importance to second language acquisition. Thus, comprehension of the input depends largely on lexical skills.

13.2. LEXICAL KNOWLEDGE
Learners appear to have differing degrees of knowledge of their second language lexicon. A first distinction about the lexicon is one between potential and real vocabulary. Potential vocabulary consists of words learners will recognize even though they have not yet seen them in the second language (common scientific and technology terms). Real vocabulary consists of words the learner is familiar with after exposure. Another distinction is between active vocabulary that which can be produced at will, and passive vocabulary, that which can be recognized. However, Teichroew proposed that vocabulary knowledge can best be represented as a continuum with the initial stage being recognition and the final being production. In her interview, production should not be viewed in a monolithic fashion. Laufer and Paribakht’s distinction is passive, controlled active, and free active. Passive knowledge involves understanding the most frequent meaning of a word, controlled active knowledge involves cued recall and free-active knowledge involves spontaneous use of the word. These three knowledge types developed at different rates. Passive vocabulary knowledge was the fastest, whereas active was the slowest. Bialystok and Sharwood Smith drew a different distinction, one between knowledge and control. Knowledge was defined as “the way in which the language system is represented in the mind of the learner” where as control was defined as “processing system for controlling that system during actual performance.” Tyler noted that pragmatic interferencing is required along with real-world knowledge. The point of this for SLA is that learners have to know more than just representation to be able to use a word and understand it in a way approximating native speakers.

13.3. LEXICAL INFORMATION

13.3.1. Word Associations
Meara investigated the lexical associations made by learners of French. Word association would appear to be a reasonable means of determining how subjects relate words. Meara found that learners tended to produce rather different associations from those made by native speakers of French. Native speakers primarily gave paradigmatic or systematic associations, based on semantic factors: Learners tended to give responses based on phonological similarity.

13.3.2. Incidental Vocabulary Learning
Incidental vocabulary learning is that learners are focus on comprehending meaning rather than on the explicit goal of learning new words. In other words, learning is a by-product of something else. In Paribakht and Wesche’s study, learners who read passages and then did vocabulary activities acquired productive knowledge as well as word recognition. In Hulstijn, Hollander, and Greidanus’s study, when there is access to external information, the formation of a form-meaning relationship is fostered upon repeated exposure. Gass proposed that incidental learning is most likely to occur when the words in the two languages are cognates, when there is significant exposure, and when related L2 words are known.

13.3.3. Incremental Vocabulary Learning
Learning the meaning and use of the word requires us to listen to how it is used in different contexts and perhaps even to consult a dictionary before being brave enough to attempt to use it ourselves. Thus, a first encounter with a word may draw a learner’s attention to that item. Subsequent encounters provide learners with opportunities to determine relevant semantic and syntactic information. The important point is that learning words is a recursive process and does not occur instantaneously.

13.3.4. Memory Metaphors
Knowledge requires an active approach, not a passive one. One does not simply reproduce it, one constructs it. Even in fossilized learners, then, second language lexical knowledge requires an activity approach. Finding meaning is not simply a matter of finding stored, fixed information. Rather, constructive processes are involved in finding meanings for words. Similarly, we demonstrate later that processes in using words, such as in production and in comprehension, have to be learned. Thus, we can talk of varying degrees of knowledge of the processes. Knowledge and control are both important, but their relationship is more intertwined then sequential.

13.4. LEXICAL SKILLS

13.4.1. Production
Production processes and strategies may have a strong effect on what learners produce. Lexical information is crucial in the sentence-production strategies of competent native speakers. But, it seems paradoxical that little evidence of this is found in the early stages of second language acquisition. Both of the studies by Klein and Perdue and by Ard and Gass suggested that in early stages, learners tend to ignore specific lexical information and rely on other information, namely syntax, semantics, or pragmatics. It can be concluded that the nature of sentence-production processes contributes to learner difficulties in lexical use. Levelt argued that formulation processes are primarily lexically driven. Levelt argued that formulation processes are primarily lexically driven. The cover term that Levelt used for is conceptualizing and the name for the processing system that does this is the Conceptualizer. The Conceptualizer determines the notions that will be expressed in the actual verbal message. The preverbal plan, the output of the Conceptualizer, must be converted into actual words. The processing system that does this is called the Formulator. Levelt argued that there is no reason to believe that speakers of different languages think differently or view the world differently. Rather, the Conceptualizer must present different information to be coded in different languages. He suggested that in language acquisition there needs to be feedback between the Formulator and the Conceptualizer. Let us consider second language acquisition. In Levelt’s terms, learners realize that they have to acquire a new Conceptualizer. The Formulator is a different matter. Whether or not they are consciously aware that they have to plan differently in producing sentences in a second language, the natural tendency would seem to be rely on the Formulator developed in acquiring the first language.

13.4.2. Perception
Speakers of different languages tend to use different strategies in word perception. Cutler found that English speakers use a strategy of focusing on strong syllables in word recognition where as French or Spanish do not. Word perception is generally the primary problem in understanding ongoing speech. If the words are not perceived correctly, then the listener is unlikely to be able to determine the meaning of the discourse. Being able to understand enough words in real time to follow a conversation is a difficult task in a second language. Especially, participants in a conversation cannot retain everything in memory. They often attend only to limited features in the conversation. However, unfortunately, not enough is know about how lexical perceptions affect discourse by nonnative speakers.

13.4.3. Word Formation
Knowledge of the lexicon also involves knowing how to combine elements to create novel lexical items. Another factor that should be pointed out for English word formation is that many of the complicated words in English are taken from Latin and Greek.

13.4.4. Word Combinations, Collocations, and Phraseology
An important factor about these combinations is that they are not totally free. In fact, there are strong statistical constraints on possible co-occurrences. These word combinations pose special problems for learners. It has been suggested that they best way to learn the lexicon is to be familiar with a wide range of text. Relatively little attention has been paid to these problems in second language acquisition. Learners are often forced to be innovative in their word combinations. The result is that learners are lkely to be misunderstood. When we hear something unusual we assume that the speaker had a good reason to say things in this unusual manner. The problem for the learner is to lear how not to be innovative and stick to the standard combinations.






14. An Integrated View of Second Language Acquisition

14.1. AN INTEGRATION OF SUBAREAS
All of approaches to acquisition are crucial in dealing with a part of what happens in learning a second language, however, none of them alone is able to account for the total picture. There are five stages in this process: (a) apperceived input, (b) comprehended input, (c) intake, (d) integration, and (e) output.

14.1.1. Apperceived Input
Apperception is the process of understanding by which newly observed qualities of an object are related to past experiences. Apperception is an internal cognitive act, identifying a linguistic form as being related to some prior knowledge. It is a priming device that prepares the input for further analysis. What is apperceived then interacts with a parsing mechanism that attempts to segment the stream of speech into meaningful units for the learner. These categories are not intended to be necessarily independent. They are not necessary conditions, but rather serve to increase the possibility of a greater amount of input becoming available for further use.

14.1.2. Comprehended input
There are two differences between the notion of comprehended input and that of comprehensible input. The comprehended input is learner- controlled, who is or is not doing the work to understand. This distinction is crucial in the eventual relationship to intake, because it is the learner who ultimately controls that intake. What are differences between apperceived and comprehended input? Apperception is conceptualized as a priming device. In comprehending, however, the task facing the learner is to analyze the input in order to determine what to specific meaning. There is another necessary separation of components – that of comprehended input from intake. This separation is important because not all input that is comprehended become intake.

14.1.3. Intake
Intake refers to the mental activity that mediates between input and grammars. Features that are part of universal knowledge and/ or present in the native language are most likely to be candidates for a deeper analysis and hence candidates for intake. Where incoming information is matched up against prior knowledge and where, in general, processing takes place against the backdrop of the existing internalized grammatical rules. Some of the major processes that take place in the intake component are hypothesis formation, hypothesis testing, and hypothesis rejection, hypothesis modification, and hypothesis confirmation.

14.1.4. Integration
There are essentially four possibilities for dealing with input: hypothesis confirmation rejection, apparent nonuse, storage and nonuse. In integration there are different levels of analysis and reanalysis from storage into grammar, and within the grammar itself, as part of integration. Evidence for integrated knowledge can be seen in one of two ways. First, there can be changes in the rule system that surface in the output. Second, there may be changes in the underlying system although there is no output change. Within a second language context, we can think of reanalysis in two ways. First a reanalysis of the underlying system may affect the potential for output. Reanalysis allows for the potential creation of novel forms. Second, on a syntactic level, prefabricated patterns may be analyzed with little output change.

14.1.5. Output
Learner’s output is often equated with their grammar. Output is not identical to one’s grammar. Learners produce different linguistic forms that have varying amounts of accuracy depending on the context and the task performed. Not only is confidence in one’s ability a determining factor in output, but we can also consider how strongly represented the knowledge is. There appear to be limitations on the translation of knowledge into output. The output component represents more than product of language knowledge; it is an active part of the entire learning process.














Comments


내가 어휘의 중요성을 이야기 할 때 자주 사용하는 방법이 있다. 제일 처음 한글말로 “영희, 사과, 먹다” 라는 단어를 쓰고 우리말로 연결 지어 문장으로 만들어 보라고 이야기 한다. 100이명 100다 “영희가 사과를 먹는다” 라고 이야기를 한다. 어느 누구도 “영희를 사과가 먹는다” 라는가 “영희와 먹다는 사과” 라고 대답하지 않는다. 이렇게 조사인 “가, 를” 을 적당한 위치에 넣을 수 있는 것은 영희가 사람이름이고 사과가 먹는 물건이라는 그 뜻을 알고 있기 때문이다. 영어도 마찬가지라고 생각한다. 단어 뜻을 알아야 독해도 물론 가능하겠지만 작문까지도 가능하며 적당한 위치에 적당하게 단어를 놓을 수가 있다. 그리고 특히 수능을 준비하는 학생들에게는 일종의 요령이지만 반드시 정확한 해석을 하는 게 아니더라도 단어를 다 알고 있으면 대충 무슨 소리를 하는지 알고 답을 근접하게 맞힐 수 있다고 강조하며 단어를 많이 외우게 시킨다. 사실 난 단어가 영어에서 가장 중요한 부분이라고 생각하며 단어를 알면 그 외의 여러 부분들을 학습하는 것이 수월해진다고 생각한다. 그러나 영어를 제 2외국어로 학습하는 입장에서 단어 뜻만을 무조건 외우는 단계를 지나서 Pragmatic한 부분이 반드시 고려되어야 한다고 생각한다. 우리말과 영어는 자체적으로 언어도 틀릴 뿐만 아니라 문화 자체도 틀리기 때문에 그런 실질적인 부분을 고려하지 않고 단어를 사용한다면 영어를 모국어로 사용하는 사람들과 오해를 불러일으킬 수도 있는 일이다. 어휘는 정말 중요한 부분이지만 뜻만을 학습하고 가르치는 것이 아니라 실제 문맥 속에서 그리고 실제 상황 속에서 어떻게 쓰이는지가 함께 고려되어야 할 것 이다.