Talk:Second-language acquisition

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment in Fall 2015. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Beccabouma.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:52, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment in Fall 2017. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: SugeneShin.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:52, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Introduction Citations

There are no cited references in the first section, is this something that should be remedied? CRHeck (talk) 15:50, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

No - the lead section is supposed to be a summary of the rest of the article, so the claims should all be backed up by sources located further down the page. WP:LEAD has the details if you're interested. :) — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 01:06, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

@Mr. Stradivarius: Ah okay that makes sense, thank you. :) CRHeck (talk) 16:40, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Expansion

I would like to expand upon the existing information in the Age section of this page.

Some specific information I would like to add is:

• Slightly more information on the Critical Period Hypothesis
• General differences between adult/older child learners and young children
• More detailed information on the differences between initial progress between older and younger learners
• Differences in first and second language proficiency- i.e. Can a second language be stronger than a first?
• The possible influences of Universal Grammar (UG) on age differences
• Nonbiological explanations for age differences.
• Delay or acceleration in language development (children)
• Language attrition related to age (or a new section focused on second-language attrition, if that is better)-- Would this be an appropriate section to add for SLA, since it is more about losing, rather than acquiring, a language? I would appreciate input for this.

Bibliography

• Kohnert, Kathryn (2008). "Primary language impairments in bilingual children and adults." In Altarriba, J.; Heredia, R. R.. An Introduction to Bilingualism: Principles and Processes. New York: Taylor & Francis Group. pp. 295-313. ISBN: 13:978-0-8058-5135-9
• Gass, Susan. & Glew, Margo. (2008). Second language acquisition and bilingualism. In Altarriba, J. & Heredia, R. R., An Introduction to Bilingualism: Principles and Processes. New York: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. pp.265-294. ISBN: 13:978-0-8058-5135-9
• Long, Michael. H. (2007). Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. pp.43-74. ISBN:0-8058-3580-6
• Pinter, Annamaria. (2011). Children learning second languages.Research and practice in applied linguistics. Basingstoke, UK: Palsgrave Macmillan: Centre for Applied Linguistics, University of Warwick, UK. ISBN: 978-1-4039-1185-8
• Schrauf, Robert, W. (2008). Bilingualism and aging. In Altarriba, J. & Heredia, R. R., An Introduction to Bilingualism: Principles and Processes. New York: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. pp. 105-127. ISBN: 13:978-0-8058-5135-9
• Nicoladis, Elena. (2008). Bilingualism and language cognitive development. In Altarriba, J. & Heredia, R. R., An Introduction to Bilingualism: Principles and Processes. New York: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. pp. 167-181. ISBN: 13:978-0-8058-5135-9
• Seliger, H. (1989). Deterioration and creativity in childhood bilingualism. In Hyltenstam, Kenneth & Obler, Loraine, K., Bilingualism Across the Lifespan: Aspects of Acquisition, Maturity, and Loss. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. pp. 173-184. ISBN0-521-35225-8.
• Sharwood Smith, Michael, A. Crosslinguistic influence in language loss. In Hyltenstam, Kenneth & Obler, Loraine, K., Bilingualism Across the Lifespan: Aspects of Acquisition, Maturity, and Loss. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. pp. 185-201. ISBN0-521-35225-8.

I would also like to add to the Sociocultural Factors section of this page.

Specific information I am interested in adding includes:

• The role of immersion (cultural and school) in acquisition
• The impact of learning two languages in different contexts
• The influence of cultural change or language assimilation in language attrition
• The influence of attitude, motivation, and personality on acquisition (would these be best categorized as sociocultural factors?)-- or perhaps I could expand upon the Affective Factors section?
• Acculturation

Bibliography

• Bialystok, Ellen & Hakuta, Kenji. (1994). In other words: The science and psychology of second-language acquisition. New York, NY: BasicBooks. pp. 124-159. ISBN:0-456-07565-7
• Pinter, Annamaria. (2011). Children learning second languages.Research and practice in applied linguistics. Basingstoke, UK: Palsgrave Macmillan: Centre for Applied Linguistics, University of Warwick, UK. ISBN: 978-1-4039-1185-8
• Tokowicz, Natasha. (2015). Lexical processing and second language acquisition. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. pp. 57-74. ISBN: 978-0-415-87755-8
• Vega, Luis, A. (2008). Social psychological approaches to bilingualism. In Altarriba, J. & Heredia, R. R., An Introduction to Bilingualism: Principles and Processes. New York: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. pp.185-198. ISBN: 13:978-0-8058-5135-9

Thank you! Beccabouma (talk) 04:26, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

@Beccabouma: Yes, this sounds great! Please feel free to add all of that. :) If it gets too long then we might need to move some out to other articles - maybe Individual variation in second-language acquisition, maybe Critical period hypothesis, or maybe a new article like Age effects on second-language acquisition - but we definitely need more on age in this article, and however much you write it will find a home somewhere.

The same goes for information on sociocultural factors - the more, the better, and if we have too much we can work out how to deal with it later. Also, don't be afraid to switch sections around if you think it would make the article better organised. I based the current structure on Rod Ellis's 2008 book, but other textbooks do things in other ways, and what works for a textbook doesn't necessarily work for an encyclopaedia article. Be bold. :)

And yes, please do start a section on second-language attrition! Everything in SLA research is in this article's scope, so the fact that second-language attrition hasn't made it in yet is just an omission. You should have a look at the Second-language attrition article first, though. Seeing as we already have an article on the subject, the goal should be to summarize that article using summary style. However, at a glance it looks like it relies too much on primary sources (and thereby fails the "no original research" policy), so perhaps it will be easier to write a new summary here from scratch, and then expand the main article later. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 06:29, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice! Beccabouma (talk) 14:24, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

This is the majority of the expansion/editions for age that I was hoping to include:

Age

The issue of age was first addressed with the critical period hypothesis.[note 4] The strict version of this hypothesis states that there is a cut-off age at about 12, after which learners lose the ability to fully learn a language. However, the exact age marking the end of the critical period is debated, and ranges from age 6 to 13, with many arguing that it is around the onset of puberty [1]. This strict version has since been rejected for second-language acquisition, as some adult learners have been observed who reach native-like levels of pronunciation and general fluency. However, in general, adult learners of a second-language rarely achieve the native-like fluency that children display, despite often progressing faster in the initial stages. This has led to speculation that age is indirectly related to other, more central factors that affect language learning.

Children that acquire two languages from birth are called simultaneous bilinguals. In these cases, both languages are spoken to the children by their parents or caregivers and they grow up knowing the two languages. These children generally reach linguistic milestones at the same time as their monolingual peers [2]. Children who do not learn two languages from infancy, but learn one language from birth, and another at some point during childhood, are referred to as sequential bilinguals. It is often assumed that a sequential bilingual's first language will be his or her most proficient language. However, this is not always the case. Over time and experience, a child's second language may become his or her strongest. This is especially likely to happen if a child's first language is a minority language spoken at home, and the child's second language is the majority language learned at school or in the community before the age of five. Proficiency for both simultaneous and sequential bilinguals is dependent upon the child's opportunities to engage in meaningful conversations in a variety of contexts.

Often simultaneous bilinguals are more proficient in their languages than sequential bilinguals. One argument for this is that simultaneous bilinguals develop more distinct representations of their languages, especially with regards to phonological and semantic levels of processing [1]. This would cause learners to have more differentiation between the languages, leading them to be able to recognize the subtle differences between the languages that less proficient learners would struggle to recognize. Learning a language earlier in life would help develop these distinct representations of language, as the learner's first language would be less established. Conversely, learning a language later in life would lead to more similar semantic representations [1].

Although child learners more often acquire native-like proficiency, older child and adult learners often progress faster in the initial stages of learning. [3]. Older child and adult learners are quicker at acquiring the initial grammar knowledge than child learners, however, with enough time and exposure to the language, children surpass their older peers. Once surpassed, older learners often display clear language deficiencies compared to child learners. The exact language deficiencies that occur past a certain age are not unanimously agreed upon. Some believe that only pronunciation is affected, while others believe other abilities are affected as well. However, some differences that are generally agreed upon include older learners having a noticeable accent, a smaller vocabulary, and making several linguistic errors.

One explanation for this difference in proficiency between older learners and younger learners involves Universal Grammar. Universal Grammar is a debated theory that suggests that people have innate knowledge of universal linguistic principles that are present from birth [4]. These principles guide children as they learn a language, but its parameters vary from language to language [5]. The theory assumes that, while Universal Grammar remains into adulthood, the ability to reset the parameters set for each language is lost, making it more difficult to learn a new language proficiently [4] . Since adults have an already established native language, the language acquisition process is much different for them, than young learners. The rules and principles that guide the use of the learners' native language plays a role in the way the second language is developed [5]. Some nonbiological explanations for second-language acquisition age differences include variations in social and psychological factors, such as motivation; the learner's linguistic environment; and the level of exposure. Even with less advantageous nonbiological influences, many child learners will attain a greater level of proficiency than adult learners with more advantageous nonbiological influences [3]. ' Jump up ^ Loewen, S., and Reinders, H. (2001). ISBN: 978-0-230-23018-7 Jump up ^ Kohnert, K. (2008). Primary Language Impairments in Bilingual Children and Adults. ^ Jump up to: a b Long, M. H. (2007). Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. ^ Jump up to: a b Long, M. H. (2007). Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. ^ Jump up to: a b Gass, S. & Glew, M. (2008). Second language acquisition and bilingualism. In Altarriba, J. & Heredia, R. R., An Introduction to Bilingualism: Principles and Processes. New York: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. ISBN: 13:978-0-8058-5135-9

Thanks! Beccabouma (talk) 15:26, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

What I have added into the Sociocultural factors is bolded. If there are any suggestions as to changes I should make within it, or problems with what I have added, please let me know before I add it to the page. Thank you!

Sociocultural factors

From the early days of the discipline researchers have also acknowledged that social aspects play an important role.[54] There have been many different approaches to sociolinguistic study of second-language acquisition, and indeed, according to Rod Ellis, this plurality has meant that "sociolinguistic SLA is replete with a bewildering set of terms referring to the social aspects of L2 acquisition".[55] Common to each of these approaches, however, is a rejection of language as a purely psychological phenomenon; instead, sociolinguistic research views the social context in which language is learned as essential for a proper understanding of the acquisition process.[56]

Ellis identifies three types of social structure which can affect the acquisition of second languages: sociolinguistic setting, specific social factors, and situational factors.[57] Socialinguistic setting refers to the role of the second language in society, such as whether it is spoken by a majority or a minority of the population, whether its use is widespread or restricted to a few functional roles, or whether the society is predominantly bilingual or monolingual.[58] Ellis also includes the distinction of whether the second language is learned in a natural or an educational setting.[59] Specific social factors that can affect second-language acquisition include age, gender, social class, and ethnic identity, with ethnic identity being the one that has received most research attention.[60] Situational factors are those which vary between each social interaction. For example, a learner may use more polite language when talking to someone of higher social status, but more informal language when talking with friends.[61]

Immersion programs provide a sociolinguistic setting that facilitates second-language acquisition. Immersion programs are educational programs where children are instructed in an L2 language [1]. Although the language of instruction is the L2 language, the curriculum parallels that of non-immersion programs and clear support exists in the L1 language, as the teachers are all bilingual. The goal of these programs is to develop a high level of proficiency in both the L1 and L2 languages. Students in immersion programs have been shown to have greater levels of proficiency in their second language than students who receive second language education only as a subject in school [1]. This is especially true in terms of their receptive skills. Also, students who join immersion programs earlier generally have greater second-language proficiency than their peers who join later. However, students that join later have been shown to gain native-like proficiency. Although immersion students' receptive skills are especially strong, their productive skills may suffer if they spend the majority of their time listening to instruction only. Grammatical skills and the ability to have precise vocabulary are particular areas of struggle. It is argued that immersion is necessary, but not sufficient for the development of native-like proficiency in a second language [1]. Opportunities to engage in sustained conversation, and assignments that encourage syntactical, as well as semantic development will help develop the productive skills necessary for bilingual proficiency [1].

A learner's sense of connection to their in-group, as well as to the community of the target language emphasize the influence of the sociolinguistic setting, as well as social factors within the second-language acquisition process. Social Identity Theory argues that an important factor for second language acquisition is the learner's perceived identity in relation to the community of the language being learned, as well as how the community of the target language perceives the learner [2]. Whether or not a learner feels a sense of connection to the community or culture of the target language helps determine their social distance from the target culture. A smaller social distance is likely to encourage learners to acquire the second language, as their investment in the learning process is greater. Conversely, a greater social distance will discourage attempts to acquire the target language. However, negative views not only come from the learner, but the community of the target language might feel greater social distance to the learner, limiting the learner's ability to learn the language [2]. Whether or not bilingualism is valued by the culture or community of the learner is an important indicator for the motivation to learn a language [3].

There have been several models developed to explain social effects on language acquisition. Schumann's Acculturation Model proposes that learners' rate of development and ultimate level of language achievement is a function of the "social distance" and the "psychological distance" between learners and the second-language community. In Schumann's model the social factors are most important, but the degree to which learners are comfortable with learning the second language also plays a role.[62] Another sociolinguistic model is Gardner's socio-educational model, which was designed to explain classroom language acquisition.[63] The inter-group model proposes "ethnolinguistic vitality" as a key construct for second-language acquisition.[64] Language socialization is an approach with the premise that "linguistic and cultural knowledge are constructed through each other",[65] and saw increased attention after the year 2000.[66] Finally, Norton's theory of social identity is an attempt to codify the relationship between power, identity, and language acquisition.[67]

Attrition

Attrition is the loss of proficiency in a language caused by a lack of exposure to or use of a language [1]. It is a natural part of the language experience as it exists within a dynamic environment[2]. As the environment changes, the language adapts. One way in which it does this is by using L1 as a tool to navigate the periods of change associated with acquisition and attrition. A learner's L2 is not suddenly lost with disuse, but its communicative functions are slowly replaced by those of the L1[2]. Similar to second-language acquisition, second-language attrition occurs in stages. However, according to the regression hypothesis, the stages of attrition occur in reverse order of acquisition. With acquisition, receptive skills develop first, and then productive skills, and with attrition, productive skills are lost first, and then receptive skills[2].

Age, proficiency level, and social factors play a role in the way attrition occurs[2] Most often younger children are quicker than adults to lose their L2 when it is left unused. However if a child has established a high level of proficiency, it may take him or her several years to lose the language. Proficiency level seems to play the largest role in the extent of attrition. For very proficient individuals, there is a period of time where very little, if any, attrition is observed. For some, residual learning might even occur, which is the apparent improvement within the L2[2]. Within the first five years of language disuse, the total percentage of language knowledge lost will be less for a proficient individual than for someone less proficient. A cognitive psychological explanation for this suggests that a higher level of proficiency involves the use of schemas, or mental representations for linguistic structures. Schemas involve deeper mental processes for mental retrieval that are resistant to attrition. As a result, information that is tied to this system is less likely to experience less extreme attrition than information that is not[2]. Finally, social factors may play an indirect role in attrition. In particular, motivation and attitude influence the process. Higher levels of motivation, and a positive attitude toward the language and the corresponding community may lessen attrition. This is likely due to the higher level of competence achieved in L2 when the learner is motivated and has a positive attitude[2]. '

Affective factors

The learner's attitude to the learning process has also been identified as being critically important to second-language acquisition. Anxiety in language-learning situations has been almost unanimously shown to be detrimental to successful learning. Anxiety interferes with the mental processing of language because the demands of anxiety-related thoughts create competition for mental resources. This results in less available storage and energy for tasks required for language processing. Not only this, but anxiety is also usually accompanied by self-deprecating thoughts and fear of failure, which can be detrimental for an individual's ability to learn a new language. Learning a new language provides a unique situation which may even produce a specific type of anxiety, called language anxiety, that affects the quality of acquisition. Also, anxiety may be detrimental for SLA because it can influence a learner's ability to attend to, concentrate on, and encode language information. It may affect speed and accuracy of learning. Further, the apprehension created as a result of anxiety inhibits the learner's ability to retrieve and produce the correct information.

A related factor, personality, has also received attention. There has been discussion about the effects of extravert and introvert personalities. Extraverted qualities may help learners seek out opportunities and people to assist with L2 learning, whereas introverts may find it more difficult to seek out such opportunities for interaction. However, it has also been suggested that, while extraverts might experience greater fluency, introverts are are likely to make fewer linguistic errors. Further, while extraversion might be beneficial through its encouragement of learning autonomously, it may also present challenges as learners may find reflective and time-management skills to be difficult. However, one study has found that there were no significant differences between extraverts and introverts on the way they achieve success in a second language.^[75]

Other personality factors, such as conscientiousness, agreeableness, and openness influence self-regulation, which helps L2 learners engage, process meaning, and adapt their thoughts, feelings, and actions to benefit the acquisition process. SLA research has shown conscientiousness to be associated with time-management skills, metacognition, analytic learning, and persistence; agreeableness to effort; and openness to elaborative learning, intelligence, and metacognition. Both genetics and the learner's environment impact the personality of the learner, either facilitating or hindering an individual's ability to learn.

Social attitudes such as gender roles and community views toward language learning have also proven critical. Language learning can be severely hampered by cultural attitudes, with a frequently cited example being the difficulty of Navajo children in learning English^[75].

Motivation of the individual learner is also of vital importance to the success of language learning. Motivation is influenced by goal salience, valence, and self-efficacy. In this context, goal salience is the importance of the L2 learner's goal, as well as how often the goal is pursued; valence is the value the L2 learner places on SLA, determined by desire to learn and attitudes about learning the L2; and self-efficacy is the learner's own belief that he or she is capable of achieving the linguistic goal. Studies have consistently shown that intrinsic motivation, or a genuine interest in the language itself, is more effective over the long term than extrinsic motivation, as in learning a language for a reward such as high grades or praise^[75]. However, motivation is dynamic and, as a L2 learner's fluency develops, their extrinsic motivation may evolve to become more intrinsic. Learner motivation can develop through contact with the L2 community and culture, as learners often desire to communicate and identify with individuals in the L2 community. Further, a supportive learning environment facilitates motivation through the increase in self-confidence and autonomy. Learners in a supportive environment are more often willing to take on challenging tasks, thus encouraging L2 development.

Beccabouma (talk) 04:27, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Beccabouma These changes look really great and I think it's time to go live. Please add them to the main article. This will also draw the attention of other editors, though I see you already are receiving the help of Mr. Stradivarius which is great. Marentette (talk) 23:30, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

In the age section, I would like more refs for the claims about proficiency in seq learners, as well as the final sentence about proficiency comparing the two. Marentette (talk) 23:37, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Marentette I will work on that section some more. Thank you! I have also add some more of what I have done to my talk page and I have tried to give you access to my sandbox if you didn't already have it. I hope it worked!Beccabouma (talk) 23:57, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Beccabouma A few other things to consider as you add these to the article. You refer to some concepts, such as schemas, that may have pages in Wikipedia. Do link any first refs to such pages. Second, it won't be easy, but Wiki likes images. Can you think of any ways to incorporate examples, images, diagrams on this page. Finally, once you have put the changes in main space,you may want to archive this part of the talk page - or delete the proposed changes from the talk page (though I'm not sure about the etiquette of that). I can track which changes you made in other ways and Wiki says be bold,just make the changes. So we don't normally clutter talk pages with a record of the changes. Marentette (talk) 13:29, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Beccabouma and CRHeck. This is looking good. A few further things to consider with the goal in mind of getting this page to B-Class. First, make sure any changes you made are reflected in the lead. These are the summary paragraphs at the top of the article before the contents list. This section is very important for skimmers. Ideally the contents of the lead reflect the entire article. Second, you may want to examine the specific grading scheme used by WikiProject Linguistics. Look at the detailed requirements for B-class. I think the article now meets many of these criterion. Can you push it further on any of them? Is there anything extraneous or redundant you could remove? Any parts that you could clarify? Good work here. Marentette (talk) 23:17, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Suggestions

This wiki article is very well written! But, you may want to consider including or editing the following:

Under intro

May want to add citations in, I know that they may be cited later on in the article but it should still be cited.

In the 4th paragraph you may want to link cognitive approach, sociocultural approaches, individual factors, and affective factors. I note that these are described in greater detail later on the page however the link should appear the first time someone sees it for clarification if they need it.

Instead of saying "Differences between adult and child learners are also topics of interest" could be rephrase to "Another topic of interest to SLA research is the difference between adult and child learners".

Under Interlanguage

For clarification you can link semantic errors.

I don't have access to the source so I am just wondering if in the overgeneralization section did you get the German children from the citation indicated (17) or is it a new citation?

Under linguistic factors

For clarification you should link linguistic.

I know at the beginning it tells us what L2 acquisitions is but from what I have read it never tells us about L1 you should specify what this is (use brackets or whatever) so that people who do not make the connection can understand that it is the persons first language.

Individual variation

Under age

There might be an error in the edit by the critical period hypothesis, note 4 should be blue and linked but is not.

The sentence "However, in general, adult learners of a second-language rarely achieve the native-like fluency that children display, despite often progressing faster in the initial stages." should have a citation.

For clarification you could link simultaneous bilinguals, monolingual, sequential bilinguals.

In the middle and end of the 3rd paragraph there is red template:Tokowicz is this an error in editing or should this be removed? Also this section should have citations I'm assuming you got the information from another source (if the Tokowicz is the source ignore this comment).

In the 4th paragraph you can link positive reinforcement for clarification. At the end of the 4th paragraph the sentence " Some believe that only pronunciation is affected, while others believe other abilities are affected as well" who believes this? You might want to put in a citation here.

Under strategies

I'm not sure if you used a definition or made them up yourself but if you did use a source you might want to put in a citation.

I hope this was useful! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rae.uofa (talk • contribs) 17:03, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Motivation

I felt that there was a lack of explaining motivation more in detail in the "socioculture" section of this wiki. Gardener's social-educational sheds lights on how much motivation can play a key role in SLA in a social context. Gardener's model is referred to as "operational" in that it focus on the acting driving forces like integrativeness and attitudes that move motivation. There is a natural effort by a L2 learner to learn the language, motivation influences this willingness. There is a separate wiki that discusses motivation as a factor for SLA, but it wasn't in here before, which would really give insight to a reader who want's to learn more about Gardener's model. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ppacheco23 (talk • contribs) 02:15, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

No citation

As mention before by other editors this article has some citation issues.The paragraph below contains no citations, it also mentions "Research", but does not specify what research? Also some of the links in this article are not supported by scholarly books and articles. These links reflect more a personal opinion. The content is interesting however if someone wants to look for more information there is no reference to back it up.

Research on how exactly learners acquire a new language spans a number of different areas. Cognitive approaches to SLA research deal with the processes in the brain that underpin language acquisition, for example how paying attention to language affects the ability to learn it, or how language acquisition is related to short-term and long-term memory. Sociocultural approaches reject the notion that SLA is a purely psychological phenomenon, and attempt to explain it in a social context. Some key social factors that influence SLA are the level of immersion, connection to the L2 community, and gender. Linguistic approaches consider language separately from other kinds of knowledge, and attempt to use findings from the wider study of linguistics to explain SLA.There is also a considerable body of research about how SLA can be affected by individual factors such as age, learning strategies, and affective factors. Bellim18 (talk) 03:35, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Bellim18. :) Normally you would be right that material like this needs citations. However, this particular passage is in the lead section, and per Wikipedia's style guide on citations for the lead section, citations are optional for material in the lead that is already cited in the body of the article. If you don't find citations for any of the material in that passage further down in the article, feel free to remove it from the lead, or to find a citation for it and add it to the article body. Also, for material that does have citations further down, you can add that citation to the lead as well if you think it would be clearer. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 05:06, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Also, you are quite right that the statements cited to non-scholarly sources are problematic. They should either be redrafted to cite proper academic sources, or removed. Please do go ahead and start work on them - be bold! — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 05:12, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Sequence of acquisition edits

Words like "remarkable" and "some" are too personal/opinionated. Be careful with the reuse of words as well. Below are edits I've made to this paragraph.

Although there were similarities in the order in which all learners learned second-language grammar, there were also differences among individuals and learners with different first languages. It is difficult to tell when grammatical structures have been learned, as learners may use structures correctly in some situations but not in others.

--SugeneShin (talk) 17:15, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Merge from: 5 stages of second language acquisition

Propose: That the content from 5 stages of second language acquisition be merged into this article as there is insufficient content in the article and only one reference such that it does not justify a stand-alone article. Please provide feedback. With thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 05:03, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

• Support, but with a caveat. The one reference cited there is a self-published piece, a YouTube video. The video in turn cites Vygotsky for the notion of developmental stages. I don't remember (though it has been a long time) if these specific stages come from Vygotsky. I would prefer additional sourcing. In principle, though, I support merging or redirecting '5 stages...' to 'Second-language acquisition'. Cnilep (talk) 07:14, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
• I've gone ahead with the redirect. If others want to appropriately source and merge some of the information, they are more than welcome. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 16:20, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Second-language acquisition. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721173927/http://psyling.psy.cmu.edu/papers/years/1987/CMbiling.pdf to http://psyling.psy.cmu.edu/papers/years/1987/CMbiling.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:56, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposals: Additions & Edits

Hi all, I would like to add the following sections and expand on existing ones:

• under Language difficulty: introducing the Bottleneck Hypothesis (Roumyana Slabakova)
• under Learner language: add a subheading for theories of learnability and teachability
• under Interlanguage: more examples of interlanguage research, citing Virginia Yip's Interlanguage and Learnability
• under Language transfer: information on surface overlap, language dominance and cross-linguistic influence in word order (Sharon Unsworth)
• under Linguistic factors: specific language impairment and Cumulative Effects hypothesis (Johanne Paradis) and elaboration on Universal Grammar using Lydia White's UG & SLA textbook

In terms of structure, I would suggest these minor edits for page layout purposes.

9	Factors and approaches to SAL
9.1	Cognitive factors
9.2	Sociocultural factors (merge sociocultural factors and approaches, or create 9.2.1 for approaches)
9.3	Linguistic factors

— Preceding unsigned comment added by AliciaJM123 (talk • contribs) 10:10, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

@AliciaJM123: Thank you for your edits Alicia! It's great to see someone adding quality content to the article. One thing I would watch out for is the article size - it is already a bit on the long side, so some of the subsections should probably be split into sub-articles to bring the overall length down. While I'm only semi-active on Wikipedia these days, let me know if you have any questions about editing and I'll be more than happy to answer. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 03:45, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Second-language acquisition

Second-language acquisition is different than second-language learning a new language. Language acquisition is the process by which someone learns and acquires a language academically while learning concerns either formal or informal way.