2. The five central hypothesis
2
The acquisition
learning
hypothesis
The affective The natural
filter order
hypothesis hypothesis
The input The monitor
hypothesis hypothesis
3. 1. The acquisition learning hypothesis
3
The process of internalizing new L2 knowledge, to
storing this knowledge, and to use it in actual
performance.
4. The acquisition learning distinctions
4
“Acquisition” occurs subconsciously as a result of
participating in natural communication focused on
meaning.
“Learning” occurs as a result of conscious study of
the formal properties of the language.
“Acquired” is for automatic processing, and for
initiating comprehension and production of
utterances.
“Learnt” is only for controlled processing and only
by the Monitor.
5. 2. The natural order hypothesis
5
Learners may follow a more or less invariant order in
the acquisition of formal grammatical features; it
means that grammatical structures are acquired in a
predictable order.
6. 3. The monitor hypothesis
6
Is the device that learners use to edit their language
performance.
Learnt knowledge by acting upon and modifying
utterances generated from acquiring knowledge.
Monitoring has limited function in language
performance.
7. 3. The monitor hypothesis
7
Three conditions for its use:
a. There must be sufficient time.
b. The focus must be on form and not meaning.
c. The user must know the rule.
8. 4. The input hypothesis
8
Acquisition take place as a result of the learner
having understood input that is a little beyond the
current level of his competence.
Input is comprehensible to the learner will
automatically be at the right level.
9. 5. The affective filter hypothesis
9
The filter controls how much input the learner comes
into contact with, and how much input is converted
into intake.
Is affective because the factors which determine its
strength have to do with the learner’s motivation,
self-confidence, or anxiety state.
10. Causative variables taken into account in the
monitor model
10
Aptitude
Role of the
Age
L1
Factors
Routines
Individual
and
differences
patterns
11. I. Aptitude
11
The learner’s aptitude predicts how well he will
perform on grammar-type tests that provide the
right conditions for the operation of the Monitor.
12. II. Role of the L1
12
The use of the L1 as a performance strategy.
Learner falls back on his L1 when he lacks a rule in
the L2.
He initiates an utterance using his L1 and then
substitutes L2 lexical items.
13. III. Routines and patterns
13
The formulas play a performance role only by
helping the learner to outperform his competence.
Acquisition catches up with the routines and
patterns; that is, the structural knowledge contained
in the formulas is developed separately.
14. IV. Individual differences
14
There is a variation in the rate and the extent of
acquisition as a result of the amount of
comprehensible input received, and the strength of
the affective filter.
Three types of monitor users:
1. Over-users.
2. Under-users.
3. Optimal-users.
15. V. Age
15
It affects the amount of comprehensible input that is
obtained; younger learners may get more than older
learners.
16. Evaluation+ Critism
16
Acquisition
The
learning Variability
monitor
distinction
17. Acquisition learning distinction
17
Methodological: The acquisition-learning
hypothesis is not acceptable, because it cannot be
tasted in empirical investigation.
When learnt knowledge is automatized through
practice it becomes acquired.
The monitor model is still a black box theory.
18. The monitor
18
The only evidence for monitoring is trying to apply
explicit rules.
Critical faculty enables us to become critically aware
of what we have created and hence allows us to
control it.
Monitoring is limited to syntax, but in fact learners
and users have the ability to edit their pronunciation,
lexis, and, perhaps most important all, their
discourse.
19. Variability
19
It proposes that the learner’s knowledge of the L2,
which is reflected in variable performance, is best
characterized in terms of two separate competences
acquisition and learning.
The kinds of performance that results from focusing
on form and meaning are best treated as aspects of a
single but variable competence which contains
alternative rules for realizing the same meaning, in
much the same way as does the native speaker’s
competence.
