1. cognitive factors in learning: transfer, interference and overgeneralization

1 .COGNITIVE FACTORS IN LEARNING: TRANSFER, INTERFERENCE AND OVERGENERALIZATION

Cognition is the process of knowing, understanding and learning something. Simply, it is closely related to mind and perception. Therefore, cognitive factors in learning languages are divided into the following subtopics: transfer, interference and overgeneralization.

Cognition is the process of knowing, understanding and learning something. Simply, it is closely related to mind and perception. Therefore, cognitive factors in learning languages are divided into the following subtopics: transfer, interference and overgeneralization.

2.Age and age hypothesis in language acquisition.

It is commonly known that children with regular faculties and given normal circumstances easily master their native language (L1). Unfortunately, perfect language mastery is rarely the result of second language acquisition (henceforth SLA). One of the central questions that SLA has tried to answer since its establishment as an independent field of study within applied linguistics is why learners of a non-native language (L2) evince such a high degree of interindividual variation in their final attainment relative to the L2 components and skills they have acquired. In order to offer a satisfactory response to this key issue, SLA researchers have posited the existence of a set of individual factors of a very different nature, such as aptitude, motivation, attitude, personality, and intelligence, among others, that might explain such variation. However, one of the most obvious potential explanations for the lack of success of L2 learners compared to L1 learners is that the acquisition of a foreign language begins at a later age than that of the mother tongue does (cf. Larsen-Freeman / Long: 153). Thus, it has been prevalently assumed that age itself is a predictor of second language proficiency. The influence of age is actually assessed to be not only significant but even decisive on the degree of L2 competence and performance attained (cf. Abello-Contesse et al.: 7).

If age indeed is a factor which determines upon the success in SLA – is there an optimal age to start learning a foreign language? It is often claimed that children are superior to adults, that is, that the younger the learner of a foreign language, the more effective the learning process and the better the outcome obtained. This assumption often derives from a distinctive element in the study of the age factor, the so-called critical period hypothesis (henceforth CPH), predicting that if the acquisition of a foreign language starts between the age of 2 and 12-13 (i.e., puberty), the process will be straightforward and the product will be complete (which is usually claimed to be the case in the acquisition of the L1), while individuals who begin their learning after this point – a kind of biological border – will find the process considerably difficult and the final outcome will be incomplete. Even though the CPH constitutes a strong and recurrent research line within the SLA, at the same time it is a changing and controversial area in practice since it tends to generate antagonistic positions among the SLA researchers. Thus, there exist also studies which dispute the assumption that children are superior to adults in learning a foreign language and maintain the exact contrary. Likewise, the explanations for the critical period as well as their empirical foundations have been questioned by different researchers (e.g., Krashen; Long). Is there indeed evidence for a critical period in SLA? Are there really age-related differences between young children, older children, and adults? And does the age of onset constitute a source of personal variation that is powerful enough to account for the varying levels of achievement that learners eventually reach? Since educators are interested in knowing what the best time is to start their instructions and how far older students can progress, the age factor is not only of great significance for SLA theory but also for language teaching practice. An important question which arises in this context is whether there is sufficient conceptual and empirical reason to justify making educational decisions on the basis of SLA research concerning the age factor. As is generally known, in Germany educational authorities decided to reduce the onset age of the first foreign language from the fifth to the third grade of elementary education. There are other countries as well which introduced the so-called “early start in L2 learning”[1]. Does this reform, consisting primarily or exclusively in lowering the age of onset of L2 learning, conform to the results of the SLA studies on the age factor?

This paper focuses on research which has been carried out on maturational constraints for SLA and hereby tries to find answers to the here posed questions.

Error Analysis and Error Correction

For years language teachers have conducted error analysis for remedial purposes. More recently error analysis has assumed a developmental purpose, namely as a clue to the process of acquiring a second language. Causes of learner errors, such as interference from the first language, confusing aspects of the second language, or learners fostering their own errors, are discussed; and teacher responses appropriate for the error type are suggested. Factors influencing the teacher's decision as to whether and when to correct are examined, i.e., the available information about the error, the importance of correction, the ease of correction, and the characteristics of the students. Then the teacher's options as to specific treatment for correcting errors are considered. Finally, some reservations about error analysis are entertained.