2005 10

Oct
2005

28 5
CELEA JournalBim onthly
Vol No
28
5

LEARNING THEORIES AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING

Zheng Xiangui
Sichuan Higher Institute of Cuisine
Abstract
This article critically examines three m ost influential learning theories that underlie the instruction and
learning environ ments in second language learningSLL Evaluation follo ws the description of each theory

The point isto understand the im pacts of differenttheories on second language learning The paper arguesthat
an integrated approach hich co m bines the three theories needed
w
is
Key w ords
second language learning SLL behaviourism

cognitive learning theory

sociocultural theory

1
Introduction
Theories of second language learningSLL have draw n great attention as researchers in the field of
applied linguistics have atte m pted to substantiate the validity of different theoretical perspectives this
In
paper
three learning theories will be exa mined in the context of SLL
Obviously universal agree m ent exists on how learning occursHow psychologists have viewed the
no
principles of learning has changed significantly throughout the 20th century
In the middle of the 20th century
learning theory was do minated by the principles of behavioural
psychology
exe m plified by the w ork of B F Skinner 1938
1957
1974 w hich m aintains that

learning should be described as changes in the observable behaviour of a learner m ade as a function of
events in the environ m ent
In the 1970s behavioural paradig m began to be expanded by the ideas of cognitive psychology
the
w hich m aintains that a co m plete explanation of hu m an learning also requires recourse to non
observable
constructs
such as m e m ory and m otivation
Over the last 20 decades
sociocultural theory has challenged the cognitive approach hich holds
w
that hu m an develop m ent cannot be viewed separately fro m social context Develop m ent occurs as a result
of m eaning verbalinteractions between novices and experts in the environ m ent
No universal agree m ent exists in the field of SLL
eitherAm ong the various learning theories
the
three theories m entioned above have greatest influence on SLL Behaviourism focuses on the form ation
of second languageL2habits
cognitive focuses on a single hypothetical learner s internal inform ation
processing and transmission of L2 input and output
sociocultural theory atte m pts to capture the context
action

and m otives of second language events between individuals w ho are sim ultaneously social and
cognitive
I will in the following sections overview the basic ideas of the three theories and evaluate their
application in SLL
120

CELEA Journal 63

2Learning theories and their im pact on SLL

2 Behaviourism and SLL
1
2 Behaviourism
11
Behaviourism focuses only on objectively observable behaviours and discounts m ental activities
Behaviourism holds that alllearning hether verbal or non
verbal
w
takes place through the establish m ent
of habitsKra msch
Thorne 2002 It e m phasizes the role of environ m ent in learning and develop m ent

In behaviourism learner is viewed as passively adapting to their environ m entThe instruction focuses
the
on conditioning the learner s behaviour
B Skinner his book Verbal Behaviour in 1957
F
in
associates behaviourism in general psychology
with language learningSkinner
together with m any of his conte m poraries
interpret all learning is
considered to be the result of habit form ation through imitation
positive reinforce m ent and practice
Language learning
first or second considered to be habit form ation
is
The behaviouristic SLLapproach holds that speech habits are m ost efficiently established through the
production of correct responsesThus in practice only linguistically correct student responses could be
rewarded and hence reinforcedAs a consequence teacher should try to ask only questions that she
a
he
was sure the students could handle correctlyBehaviourism stresses repetition of the ite m under study
and relies on the conditioning process assu m es thatanalogy provides a better foundation for foreign
It
language learning than analysis Mueller 1971

113
Behaviourism is usually connected to Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis C A H According to

behaviourism contrast to a first language learner

in
the second language learner already has a set of

habits The L1 habits are na m ely assu m ed to be so well established and so appealing to use that they
constantly get in the way of the L2 habit form ation processLado
1957
assu m es that the transferred L1
habits either facilitate or inhibit the process of L2 habit form ation Where there are similarities between
the first and the second language the student will acquire easily but w here there are differences it w ould
be difficultAs a consequence a detailed co m parison contrastive analysisof the native and the target
language w ould suffice to reveal areas of differences and similarities These in turn w ould allow predicting
w here errors w ould and w here they w ould not occur Thus transfer was a key concept of CAH Sayehli
2001

Behaviouristic leaning theory leads to the im ple m entation of audio

visual techniques and the practice
of oral skills in a controlled environ m entThis instructional approach e m phasizes the form ation of habits
through the practice m e m orization
and repetition of gra m m atical structures in isolation Mechanic
pattern drills are the result of this influence

2 Evaluation of behaviourism in SLL

12
Though so m e features of language
such as pronunciation and collocations m ay successfully be

acquired through repetition and m e m orization audio

the
lingual m ethod has co m e under severe criticism
as being overly m echanical and theoretically unjustified
Although CAH was very influential and inspired m any productive investigations soon beca m e
it
apparent that the CAH was not co m patible with the e m pirical and theoretical findings that e m erged
Em pirical proble ms with CAH
A Underpredicted
not all similarities guarantee a sim ple and error free acquisition Larsen
Free m an Long 1991 A review by Ellis1985 quoted in Mitchell Myles 1998 studies

of
scrutinizing the proportion of errors ascribed to L1
reports that only about 30 of errors
have been attributed to L1
B Overpredicted all contrasts between L1 and L2 lead to learning difficulties
not
Theoretical proble ms with CAH
Cho msky
1959argues that a speaker of a language can produce and understand an infinite
nu m ber of well form ed utterances

and thus language co m petence could not possibly be explained

by a m odel based on imitation and habit form ationAccording to Cho msky
The develop m ent of
121

Learning Theories and Second Language Learning

Zheng Xiangui

an individual s gra m m aticalsyste m was guided by innate cognitive structuresinstead of behavioural

reinforce m ent
In addition
CAH could not explain another type of errors develop m ental errorsDifferent fro m
transfer errors
develop m ental errors are learner internal and rule
basedAn exa m ple is an utterance like

he goedby an English L2 learner Mitchell Myles 1998 It can be analyzed as being the result of an

internalized rule add ed the verb to express past

to
Though CAH is questioned and criticized by m any researchers still has influence on SLL since
it
anyone w ho has tried to learn a second language will appreciate how the language w hich is already know n
influences the second languageTherefore should not be readily dismissed
it

2 Cognitive learning theory and SLL

2
2 Cognitive learning theory
21
The do minance of behaviourism began to wane in the 1970s and cognitive psychology began to
overtake it as the do minant paradig m of leaning psychology Cognitive psychology places e m phasis on
unobservable constructs
such as the mind m e m ory
attitudes m otivation
thinking
reflection
and
other presu m ed internal processes cognitive theories
changes in behaviour are observed only as
In
but
an indicator to w hatis going on in the learner s headThe learner is viewed as an active participantin the
knowledge acquisition process
Cognitivists do not believe thatlanguage is separate fro m other aspects of cognition They argue that
the hu m an mind is geared to the processing of all kinds of inform ation
and linguistic inform ation is just
one type
although highly co m plex On the basis of these principles
greater im portance is attached to
acquiring conscious control of the language patterns through study and analysis than through analogy
Greater im portance is given to understanding the language structure than to facility in using it Mueller
1971 According to this view

the best way to understand both L1 and L2 learning is through

understanding the processes used by the learner to learn new inform ation and skills Mitchell Myles
1998

Cognitivists are prim arily interested in the learner as an individual as opposed to the Socio
culturalistsand on the processes involved in learning a second language Cognitive learning theory views
SLL as the acquisition of a co m plex cognitive skill So m e of the sub
skills involved in the language
learning process are applying gra m m atical rules
choosing the appropriate vocabulary
following the
prag m atic conventions governing the use of a specific language McLaughlin 1987

2 Evaluation of cognitive learning theory in SLL

22
Cognitive approach regard language learning as the gradual auto mitization of skills through stages of
restructuring and linking new inform ation to old knowledge The differences between the various
cognitive m odels m ake it im possible to construct a co m prehensive cognitive theory of SLL Tw o
pro minent m odels of cognitivist theory in SLL are exa mined here
one is inform ation processing m odel

and the other is connectionism

McLaughlin s inform ation processing m odel McLaughlin 1990of SLLis as follows

Me m ory is a netw ork of nodesNew L2

inform ation te m porarily activates nodes in short term

m e m oryThis is controlled process
When nodes are repeatedly activated
they beco m e less a product of controlled processing and
m ore auto m atic When they are fully auto m atized
they are then stored in the long
term m e m ory

LTM w hich frees the short term m e m ory to tackle new m ore co m plex learning Once

acquired
auto m atized processes are difficult to change or delete this way
In
students can study
m ore of the language and achieves increasing degrees of m astery in the second language
McLaughlin 1987
1990

In this view
SLL is a continual process fro m controlled to auto m atic processes by repeated
activation of controlled processesAccording to this m odel
fossilization is then the auto mization
of a controlled process before that process is native Mitchell Myles 1998

like
122

CELEA Journal 63

Another m odelis connectionist m odelAccording to Mitchell and Myles

1998 connectionism sees

learning as establishing the strengths between the vast nu m ber of connectionsin the mind
and the mind
is seen like a co m puter w hich w ould consist of neural netw orks Mitchell Myles 1998

78 80
The m odel holds that m ental connections the linguistic syste m beco m e stronger each tim e the
in
learner is exposed to linguistic inputEventually the presence of one linguistic ele m ent will activate its
m atch
the m ore often tw o ele m ents are heard together
the m ore likely a learner will re m e m ber the m
Consequently repeated activation strengthenslinks or connections and studentslearn the second language
For exa m ple
thinking or hearinghow are you one m ay recall fine

thank you

So m e critics of connectionism eFodor Pylyshyn 1988

Pinker Prince 1988
g
contend thatitis
no m ore than a revival of behaviorism dressed up to look like neuroscience They also argue thatitis m ore
likely that inform ation is recalled because repetition m ade it beco m e auto m atic and go into long
term
m e m ory than just because of strong connections It is true that connectionist m odels share with
behaviorism a focus on the learning of stim ulus responseor

input output associationsThe differences

lie in the concern of connectionists with the internal representations that are constructed between the
inputs fro m and the outputs to the environ m ent and with the specific m ental processes that are involved in
the construction of these representationsRu m elhart McClelland 1986

Apart fro m the tw o m odels

the influence of cognitive approaches is seen quite strongly in the
teaching of reading and writing L2 Following develop m ents in first language reading and writing

research
second
language educators ca m e to see literacy as an individual psycholinguistic process

Second language writing instruction shifted its e m phasis fro m the mimicking of correct structure to the
develop m ent of a cognitive
proble m
solving approach
focused on heuristic exercises and collaborative
tasks organized in staged processes such as idea generation
drafting
and revising Kern Warschauer
2000

Limits of cognitive learning theory are as follows

Felix 1981 argues that the general cognitive skills are useless for language develop m ent The
only area that cognitive develop m ent is related to language develop m ent is vocabulary and
m eaning
since lexicalite ms and m eaning relations are m ost readily related to a conceptual base
The cognitive approach has undervalued the powerful principles of reinforce m ent

Although cognitivists speak of collaboration co m m unication and transfer long before

sociocultural theorists
they do not do a very good job of translating such principles into practice
in the learning environ m ents they created

2 Sociocultural theorySCT and SLL

3
2 Sociocultural theory
31
At about the sa m e tim e that cognitively
oriented perspectives on language acquisition were gaining
popularity
another psycho
educational perspective of individual develop m ent within social and cultural
contexts was applied to L2 research
sociocultural theory SCT based on the w ork of Lev Vygotsky

1978
1986 Internalization

inner speech
active theory
and the zone of proxim al develop m ent

ZPD constitute the core concepts of SCT particular ediation plays a central roleLantolf
and in
m
2000 Vogotsky m aintained that higher psychological functions originate in interaction between
1
individuals
interpsychologicallevel

before they are transferred within the individual intrapsychological

level And is through the internalization of this m ediation that individuals experience cognitive

it
growth and higher
order intellectual abilities
SCT holds that language is not just a private in the headaffair rather a socially constructed

but
pheno m enonLanguage learning is not only a cognitive task but m ore of a social activity w here the
process is participating in a knowledge
building co m m unity co m m unity of practice a co m m unity of
a
or
second language learnersKern Warschauer 2000

To fully understand how SCTrelates to L2 willlook at so m e funda m ental concepts of Vygotsky s

we
theories
The central concept for SCTis the m ediation of hu m an behaviour with tools and sign syste ms Atool
123

Learning Theories and Second Language Learning

Zheng Xiangui

could be as sim ple as a textbook or visual m aterials Donato McCormick 1994 or w hat Kozulin

1990
calls the m ost im portant of tools sy m bolic language Such tools allow us to regulate our environ m ent

Lantolf 1994 Externalsocialspeech wasinternalized through m ediation Vygotsky 1978 In this

418

way
SCTlink society to mind through m ediation Language as a tool of the mind bridges the individual
understanding of our selves and particular contexts and situations within the w orld Driscoll
2000also
states
social processes
and m ental processes can be understood only if we understand the tools and signs
that m ediate the m 2000

241 Aljaafreh and Lantolf 1994 claim that m ediation needs to be

contingentThis m eans teachers need to balance the giving and withholding of guidance and assistance in
accordance with students progression through a task
Regulation
scaffolding
and the Zone of Proxim al Develop m ent are the three general principles of
SCT
Regulation
In SCT
there are tw o kinds of regulation
self regulation and other
regulationThe first indicates
the capacity for independent proble m solving The second indicates a person w ho needs help in solving
proble msThe second is m ediated through language
Scaffolding
The concept of scaffolding originates with the w ork of Wood et al 1976 and it serves as a

m etaphor for the novice aster interaction in a proble m

solving task According to Wood et al

scaffolding involves the expert taking control of those portions of a task that are beyond the learner s
current level of co m petence
thus allowing the leaner to focus on the ele m ents within his or her range of
ability Wood et al

1976
90
The Zone of Proxim al Develop ment ZPD
The site w here the language is shared and internalized through m ediation is thezone of proxim al
develop m entdefined by Vygotsky as follows
It is the distance between the actual develop m entallevel as determined by independent proble m
solving and the level of potential develop m ent as determined through proble m solving under
adult guidance or in collaboration with m ore capable peersVygotsky 1978
86

Once the learner has appropriated the knowledge of how to solve a particular proble m the
develop m ental level of the child grows to enco m pass that knowledge and the level of potential
develop m ent m oves ahead
and the ZPD shiftsThis m ay sound a bit behaviouristic it really doesn t
but
involve habit form ation as m uch as learning through socially interactive proble m solving In w orking

within the ZPD is not the successful co m pletion of the task that is of im portance
it

but the higher

cognitive process that e m erges as a result of the interaction Lantolf Appel 1994

10
Private speech
Private speech is w hen you talk to yourself You use it in the ZPD as a kind of m ediator When
control of a task m oves to the stage of self
regulation
rather than other regulation we no longer talk

out loud to ourselves

In sociocultural approach
the individual learner is no longer viewed as a receptacle for
knowledge
nor as an individual acquirer w ho seeks and seizes new knowledge through individual
effortRather learner is an active participant in teaching and learning learner and teacher are
the
the
participants in sociocultural activity
Socioculturallinguists see language acquisition in social terms For the m learning is a m atter of
L2
proble m solving in a m aster apprentice relationship Language learning m eans joining a second culture

and is seen as a process of group socialization here language is a tool for teaching group traits
values
w
and beliefs Fro m this perspective
language instruction was viewed not just in terms of providing
co m prehensible input
but rather as helping students enter into the kinds of authentic social discourse
124