Active Learning - Theory and Practice 2022
DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.89737
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Usage-Based and Universal Grammar-Based Approaches to Second Language Acquisition

Abstract: The theoretical controversy that surrounds the acquisition of a second or foreign language is seemingly unending. Though there are dissensions in the literature, past studies had indicated that scholars tended to fall into two groups of schools of thought, the usage-based and the universal grammar-based approaches in second language acquisition. This paper reviews the literature of recently published findings in scholarly papers and contrasted the varied views of how second language can be acquired. Empirical … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A usage-based approach is thus aligned with CDST, where linguistic knowledge emerges as a network of interrelated and interacting components. In contrast, from a modular perspective, language abilities are thought to stem from an innate universal grammar, whereby different types of language knowledge rely on autonomous modules within the mind (Tan & Shojamanesh, 2019).
Figure 3. A network model of individual differences in native language ultimate attainment. Note : The nodes in this network are composite scores representing three measures of language proficiency and four individual differences.
…”
Section: Examplementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A usage-based approach is thus aligned with CDST, where linguistic knowledge emerges as a network of interrelated and interacting components. In contrast, from a modular perspective, language abilities are thought to stem from an innate universal grammar, whereby different types of language knowledge rely on autonomous modules within the mind (Tan & Shojamanesh, 2019).
Figure 3. A network model of individual differences in native language ultimate attainment. Note : The nodes in this network are composite scores representing three measures of language proficiency and four individual differences.
…”
Section: Examplementioning
confidence: 99%
“…A usage-based approach is thus aligned with CDST, where linguistic knowledge emerges as a network of interrelated and interacting components. In contrast, from a modular perspective, language abilities are thought to stem from an innate universal grammar, whereby different types of language knowledge rely on autonomous modules within the mind (Tan & Shojamanesh, 2019). Dąbrowska (2018) discusses the plausibility of these two theories in connection with analyses of a dataset of 90 native English speakers' performance on different linguistic and nonlinguistic tasks.…”
Section: Examplementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Experts in the area came to see that the terms 'acquire/acquisition' could to be devoted to 'first language acquisition'. However, Krashen (1985;2003;2004; and Klein (1988), Tan and Shojamanesh (2019) and many others used 'acquisition' even for a second language. Chomsky (1996:13) also investigated the sub-system of the brain in language acquisition as follows: Dulay, and Krashen (1982) claim that there is a methodical and subjective indication to support the view that children are better at language acquisition than adults.…”
Section: Language Acquisition and Language Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%