This chapter overviews the theoretical part of the study. This part reviews the literature of pragmatics, communicative competence, and syntactic knowledge. It also provides empirical research about syntactic knowledge and how it relates to the current research The increasing significance of intercultural communications has pushed the researchers to focus on the pragmatic mechanisms to explore effective communication. A huge attention has been recently dedicated to cross-cultural pragmatics and intercultural
rather new area of research, the apportionment of nomenclatures and areas of study surrounding it happen to be indistinct and not accurately defined. It is often the case that scholars implement preceding inquiry of related fields that are adaptable to the new one, but sometimes this leads to overlapping and unclear concepts. Therefore, one of the first problems one has to deal with when doing research on Third Language Acquisition is that there is no clear definition of the term TLA. Furthermore, there
subjects and to explore how the present study is joined with the current leading views in the field. This section contain a summary of historical background of the First Language (L1) interference and then will discussed set of the different research which did scholars. 2.2 Theoretical Background In the past, according the behaviorist learning theory of language, the learner's errors were considered the result of the interference of the rules of the first language. According to the keshavarz (2003
a performance errors, that is failure to utilize a known system correctly, whereas, an ‘error’ is a deviation from the grammar of NSs, reflecting the Inter-language competence of the learner. The difference between these two can be described as; errors are result of ignorance whereas, mistakes are result of stress. In order to learn a language, it is important to understand the process. EA (error analysis) is part of this process. As Corder has
During childhood, language acquisition is a natural consequence of prolonged exposure to a language. A spoken language need not be formally taught to a child in order to be learned. (By contrast, written language must always be taught.) Any small child will acquire native fluency in any language if exposed to it on a consistent basis in a social setting. A child will naturally acquire native fluency in more than one language under these circumstances. In the overwhelming majority of individuals
First language acquisition (FLA) is defined as the acquisition of a single language in childhood, regardless of the number of languages in a child’s natural environment. Second language acquisition (SLA) is the language learned after the first language (L1) where the language is used widely in the speech community. According to Houmanfar, Hayes, and Herbst (2005), the first and second languages are interrelated and the history of the first language is a participatory factor in the acquisition of the
to the Hypothesis, for L2 acquisition to take place, the learner must be exposed to comprehensible input. In other words, Krashen answers the question about what mechanisms exist to allow learners to acquire a second language. He reaches a conclusion, stating that learners can achieve acquisition “by understanding messages, or by receiving comprehensible input.” Furthermore, the input must contain language structures which are at a higher level than the learner’s language is. Krashen calls this “i+1”
First and Second Language Development Related to the Concept of Bilingualism The concept of bilingualism refers to the state of a linguistic community in which two languages are in contact with the result that two codes can be used in the same interaction and that a number of individuals are bilingual (societal bilingualism).[1] As a first step I would like to describe the concept of bilingualism, first and second language acquisitions. The next thing is to discuss similarities between first and
become multilingual, for example, the acquisition of language or two languages is something that starts at home and refers to the first language or languages we learn, and acquiring a language ends when we reach puberty. According to multiple studies such as: Critical period hypothesis (CPH) claims that there is an optimal period for language acquisition, ending at puberty. And then there is what we call learning a language, which is about learning a second language during or after puberty. Clarifying
Danchev (1982) argues that translation/transfer is a natural phenomenon in second language acquisition, especially in beginning levels and that methodology should not necessarily be used against this. Teachers can support this natural phenomenon by using what Danchev calls “functional translation” (transferring meaning into L2, instead of word by word) to facilitate their comprehension by making a relation with their native language. As Jack C. Richards said, quoting Richard Schmidt (1990), who argues