List of common misconceptions about language learning

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Language learning is subject to several misconceptions. It is common for people to rely on their own intuitions about language learning, though they would not do so with other technical subjects such as physics (a phenomenon known as folk linguistics).[1] However, these intuitions are often contradicted by scientific research.[2]

Childhood language acquisition

Children learn their first language effortlessly

Learning a first language is not rapid for children. Children spend years learning their

mother tongue, and the process continues well into their school years. At seven years old, for example, many children have difficulties creating passive-voice sentences.[3]

A study on child L1 learners and adult L2 learners of Spanish showed that children do not acquire their first language any quicker than adults do their second language; conversely, the study suggests that the experience of older learners helps them acquire a better handle on the language in question.[4]

Second-language acquisition

Younger learners learn languages more easily than older learners

It is often assumed that young children learn languages more easily than adolescents and adults.[2][5] However, the reverse is true; older learners are faster. For example, a study of 17,000 British students showed that those who started learning French aged 11 performed better than those who started learning it aged 8.[6] The only exception to this rule is in pronunciation. Young children invariably learn to speak their second language with native-like pronunciation, whereas learners who start learning a language at an older age only rarely reach a native-like level.[5] The pronunciation seems to be anchored in the speaker from an early age and therefore difficult to change.[7]

Intelligent people are better at learning languages

General intelligence is actually quite a poor indicator of language-learning ability. Motivation, tolerance for ambiguity, and self-esteem are all better indicators of language-learning success.[8]

Immersion is the best way to learn a language

The ability for learners to develop their language skills depends to a large extent on the type of language input that they receive. For input to be effective for second-language acquisition, it must be comprehensible. Merely being immersed in a second-language environment is no guarantee of receiving comprehensible input. For example, learners living in a country where their second language is spoken may be lucky enough to interact with native speakers who can alter their speech to make it comprehensible; but equally, many learners will not have that same luck, and may not understand the vast majority of the input that they receive.[9]

In addition, adult learners living in a foreign country may not have very high linguistic demands placed on them, for example if they are a low-level employee at a company. Without the incentive to develop high-level skills in their second language, learners may undergo language fossilisation, or a plateau in their language level.[9]

Classroom instruction can be useful in both providing appropriate input for second-language learners, and for helping them overcome problems of fossilisation.[9]

Research on bilingual education programs such as Structured English Immersion classes showed that students in these classes acquire skills equivalent to those of children in English-only programs.[10] Those results suggest that a full immersion is not necessarily more advantageous than a partial immersion.

Grammar study is detrimental to second-language acquisition

The study of grammar is helpful for second-language learners, and a lack of grammar knowledge can slow down the language-learning process. On the other hand, relying on grammar instruction as the primary means of learning the language is also detrimental. A balance between these two extremes is necessary for optimal language learning.[11]

Every child learns a second language in the same way

Not all learning methods are successful for all children. A more sociable student learns to speak the second language quicker so that they can be like their peers, without worrying about potential mistakes and the limits of their language resources. The shyer student learns by listening and observing what is going on around them. Research shows that both types of students succeed better depending on the context; the socially active student excels in group works, while the "active listener" excels in teacher-oriented activities.[12] Such different types of learners suggest the inexistence of a universally efficient learning strategy, what is also suggested through experiments involving young L1 learners and adult L2 learners of the same language.[4]

Children's behavior in the classroom also varies across cultures; a child accustomed to learning with peers will pay more attention to their classmates than to the teacher.[12]

Social class differences also come into play: children from technologically advanced urban backgrounds are more exposed to academic language than children from rural and technologically less advanced backgrounds.[12]

Bilingual education

Learning a second language hinders the development of the first language

Learners can learn two or more languages without their first language development being adversely affected. There is no such thing as a "fixed amount of space" for languages in the brain. In reality, learners' first languages and their additional languages become part of an integrated system.[13]

Once a child can speak a language, the language-learning process is complete

Learning to speak a language

academic language. This kind of language is particularly important in school in the later grades. One study of 1,200 Canadian schoolchildren indicated that it may take between five and seven years longer to master academic language than to master conversational language.[2]

See also

References

  1. ^ Dicker 2003, p. 85: "People would never pontificate about a physics issue, because they would acknowledge that you need to consult an expert. But they wouldn't hesitate to pontificate about language."
  2. ^ a b c McLaughlin 1992.
  3. ^ Dicker 2003, pp. 86–87.
  4. ^ a b Cain, Weber-Olsen & Smith 1987.
  5. ^ a b Dicker 2003, pp. 88–92.
  6. ^ McLaughlin 1992, p. 5.
  7. ^ McLaughlin 1992, p. 6.
  8. ^ Johnson 2008, p. 64.
  9. ^ a b c Dicker 2003, pp. 92–97.
  10. ^ McLaughlin 1992, p. 7.
  11. ^ Johnson 2008, p. 67.
  12. ^ a b c McLaughlin 1992, p. 9.
  13. ^ Matthews 2006, p. 16.

Bibliography

  • Cain, Jacquelin; Weber-Olsen, Marcia; Smith, Rosslyn (1987). "Acquisition strategies in a first and second language: are they the same ?". Journal of Child Language. 14 (2). Cambridge University Press: 333–352.
    S2CID 35643678
    . Retrieved 20 June 2022.
  • Dicker, Susan J. (2003). "Common Misconceptions About Language Learning". Languages in America: A Pluralist View. Multilingual Matters. pp. 82–114.
    ISBN 978-1-85359-651-3
    . Retrieved 2 September 2015.
  • Johnson, David (2008). How Myths about Language Affect Education: What Every Teacher Should Know. University of Michigan Press.
    ISBN 978-0-472-03287-7
    . Retrieved 2 September 2015.
  • Matthews, Michael S. (2006). Working with Gifted English Language Learners. Prufrock Press.
    ISBN 978-1-59363-195-6
    . Retrieved 2 September 2015.
  • McLaughlin, Barry (1992). "Myths and Misconceptions About Second Language Learning: What Every Teacher Needs to Unlearn" (PDF). Educational Practice Report. 5. Santa Cruz: University of California. Archived from the original (PDF) on 17 September 2012. Retrieved 2 September 2015.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_common_misconceptions_about_language_learning&oldid=1184467606"