VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 03:42:35 06/05/03 Thu
Author: Maria Isabel de Avila Martins
Subject: Krashen and Fractal Model

Krashen and Fractal model
5th. Class


It's widely known how complex the second language learning process is and how hard linguists have been trying to find out ways to reorganize theories about second language acquisition.
Stephen Krashen is one of the linguists who has made great contributions in that field so far. He came up with an acquisition model consisted of five hypothesis:

the Acquisition-learning hypothesis,
the Monitor hypothesis,
the Natural Order hypothesis,
the Input hypothesis,
the Affective filter.

He points out that second language classes must be filled with comprehensible input but he warns that the "outside world" can supply more input. He also says that students will learn only if they hear what they want to. There are obvious happenings that may change the "whole designed model", once people are different, things are not static and people's emotions change at every single minute. So, how can we set up models if we are dealing with a subject (people and language) that is not static?
Vera Menezes has studied these non-static situations and designed the Fractal model, which approached such a dynamic system people are inserted in. Acquiring a second language envolves varied contexts, cultural decisions (arbitrary and conventional) and does not occur to all individuals in the same way. The semiotic process and connections will be different to every single person. She compares the dynamic system to a kaleidoscope as something that has infinite possibilities of combination.
The Fractal model sees the learner as the most important part of the process and his creativity is what counts most. So it's important not to impose him a method but let him free to create, to think, to make his own decisions.
According to the Fractal model, the teacher's role consists of: promotiong interaction among speakers, encouraging them to use the language when the opportunity appears and letting them to decide which strategy works best for them.
In my opinion I should say that, after reading a lot of things about the second language acquisition process I would tend to agree to Vera Menezes when she says that "...it's not necessary to discard some of them, but to unite them all.". Each of the theories has the point and the reason for being so. It would be probably too pretentious from me to defining here how language is acquired, but through my own experience, I could point out some of the things that hit me most:

Firstly, the learner should be motivated and given subjects that most interest him (like Krashen says:"...he will learn if he hears what he wants to".). I also believe interaction and comprehensible input is pretty much linked to this stage.
Secondly, the process will be individual, meaning, one will assimilate different things from the other (subconscious process). At this point, it's important to point out the non-linear system showing that one can have a result now and it can be different next time(Lewin).
Furthermore, the students creativity is a very important part of the learning process and I consider that at the moment the learner is creating he is having his "crucial" moment at the so called "edge of chaos", cited by Vera Menezes. It's like "a click".
Finally, communicative opportunities should be provided constantly to fossilize what has been acquired so far (output).

There's one point though, I still question about that regards to the learner's freedom to use the strategy that best work for him, once it would compromise somehow his understanding of the meaning of the language in a certain context. Let's see the example below:

The student says: "I'm waiting for you here for hours!"

The production is correct and he could communicate quite well in a certain way. But it is known that the right form would be "I've been waiting for you here for hours!".
I'm afraid I'm not able to discuss how the process occurs and how it could be changed without frustrating the learner. I think this matter and many others, should be carefully discussed by linguists.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.