Description of Krashen's Theory of Second Language Acquisition
Description of Krashen's Theory of Second Language Acquisition
Description of Krashen's Theory of Second Language Acquisition
Krashen's theory of second language acquisition consists of five main hypotheses: the
Acquisition-Learning hypothesis,the Monitor hypothesis, the Natural Order hypothesis, the Input
The Acquisition-Learning distinction is the most fundamental of all the hypotheses in Krashen's
theory and the most widely known among linguists and language practitioners.
According to Krashen there are two independent systems of second language performance: 'the
acquired system' and 'the learned system'. The 'acquired system' or 'acquisition' is the product of
a subconscious process very similar to the process children undergo when they acquire their first
which speakers are concentrated not in the form of their utterances, but in the communicative
act.
The 'learned system' or 'learning' is the product of formal instruction and it comprises a
conscious process which results in conscious knowledge 'about' the language, for example
The Monitor hypothesis explains the relationship between acquisition and learning and defines
the influence of the latter on the former. The monitoring function is the practical result of the
learned grammar. According to Krashen, the acquisition system is the utterance initiator, while
the learning system performs the role of the 'monitor' or the 'editor'. The 'monitor' acts in a
planning, editing and correcting function when three specific conditions are met: that is, the
second language learner has sufficient time at his/her disposal, he/she focuses on form or thinks
The Natural Order hypothesis is based on research findings (Dulay & Burt, 1974; Fathman,
1975; Makino, 1980 cited in Krashen, 1987) which suggested that the acquisition of grammatical
structures follows a 'natural order' which is predictable. For a given language, some grammatical
structures tend to be acquired early while others late. This order seemed to be independent of the
learners' age, L1 background, conditions of exposure, and although the agreement between
individual acquirers was not always 100% in the studies, there were statistically significant
similarities that reinforced the existence of a Natural Order of language acquisition. Krashen
however points out that the implication of the natural order hypothesis is not that a language
program syllabus should be based on the order found in the studies. In fact, he rejects
The Input hypothesis is Krashen's attempt to explain how the learner acquires a second
language. In other words, this hypothesis is Krashen's explanation of how second language
acquisition takes place. So, the Input hypothesis is only concerned with 'acquisition', not
'learning'. According to this hypothesis, the learner improves and progresses along the 'natural
order' when he/she receives second language 'input' that is one step beyond his/her current stage
of linguistic competence. For example, if a learner is at a stage 'i', then acquisition takes place
when he/she is exposed to 'Comprehensible Input' that belongs to level 'i + 1'. Since not all of the
learners can be at the same level of linguistic competence at the same time, Krashen suggests
that natural communicative input is the key to designing a syllabus, ensuring in this way that
each learner will receive some 'i + 1' input that is appropriate for his/her current stage of
linguistic competence.
Finally, the fifth hypothesis, the Affective Filter hypothesis, embodies Krashen's view that a
number of 'affective variables' play a facilitative, but non-causal, role in second language
acquisition. These variables include: motivation, self-confidence and anxiety. Krashen claims
that learners with high motivation, self-confidence, a good self-image, and a low level of anxiety
are better equipped for success in second language acquisition. Low motivation, low self-esteem,
and debilitating anxiety can combine to 'raise' the affective filter and form a 'mental block' that
prevents comprehensible input from being used for acquisition. In other words, when the filter is
'up' it impedes language acquisition. On the other hand, positive affect is necessary, but not