Input Hypothesis and Long’s (1983, 1996) Interaction Hypothesis, ..
[Ball 73] which is bundled with one of the astrophysicsalternatives listed above which would imply that aggressivelycolonized systems look just like natural ones. It is natural enoughto suppose that some small fraction of places would be left as naturepreserves. One seems to need a special social theory, however, toexplain a "common zoo" hypothesis, that most all matter visible to ushas been set aside as nature preserve.
Interaction hypothesis - Wikipedia
Second, let's abandon the idea, which reappears in many presentationsof the Argument from the Unlearning Problem; that learners' hypotheses must be explicitly falsified in the data in order to be rejected. Let's suppose instead that learners proceed more like actual scientists do — provisionally abandoning theories due tolack of confirmation, making theoretical inferences to link data withtheories, employing statistical information, and making defeasible, probabilistic (rather than decisive, all-or-nothing) judgments as to the truth or falsity of their theories.
However, argued Chomsky, just as conditioning was too weak a learningstrategy to account for children's ability to acquire language, so too is the kind of inductive inference or hypothesis-testing that goes on in science. Successful scientific theory-building requires huge amounts of data, both to suggest plausible-seeming hypotheses and to weed out any false ones. But the data children haveaccess to during their years of language learning (the ‘primarylinguistic data’ or ‘pld’) are highly impoverished, in two important ways:
in comprehension or production of the target language
Similarly, if we are to find out what can facilitate the learning process, we need to gain a much better understanding of the kinds of interactions and social settings which promote learner development. , for example, argues that task-based methodologies (in which learners have to negotiate with one another in order to perform a meaning-focused activity) force learners to notice 'gaps' in their L2, a prerequisite for filling such gaps. , in her 'pushed output hypothesis', argues that it is when learners' own productions fail to meet their communicative goals that they are forced to revise their linguistic system.
Long contrasted this approach ..
We feel that this gives us a relatively conservative method of evaluating the hypothesis that a large amount of emotional learning can take place early in life. In examining how infant behavior develops in different cultures we will use the model proposed by Sigel (1985) Sigel (1985).
Stephen Krashen and Michael Long by on Prezi
Chomskyans respond in two main ways to findings like this. First, they argue, it is not enough to show that some children can be expected to hear sentences like Is the girl in the jumping castle Kayley's daughter? All children learn the correct rule, so the claim must be that all children are guaranteed to hear sentences of this form — and this claim is still implausible, data like those just discussed notwithstanding. In order to take this question further, it would be necessary to determine when in fact children master the relevant structures, and vanishingly little work has been done on this topic. Sampson 2002:82ff. found no well-formed auxiliary fronted questions (like Is the girl who is in the jumping castle Kayley's daughter?)in his sample of the British National Corpus. He notes that in addition to supporting Chomsky's claims about the poverty of the pld, such data simultaneously problematize his claims about children's knowledge of the auxiliary-fronting rule itself. Sampson found that speakers invariably made errors when apparently attemptingto produce complex auxiliary-fronted questions, and often emended their utterance to a tag form instead (e.g., The girl who's in the jumping castle is Kayley's daughter, isn't she?). Hespeculates that the construction is not idiomatic even in adult language, and that speakers learn to form and decode such questions much later in life, after encountering them in written English. If that were the case, then the lack of complex auxiliary fronted questions in the pld would be both unsurprising and unproblematic: young children don't hear the sentences, but nor do they learn the rule. To my knowledge, children's competence with the auxiliary fronting rule has not been addressed empirically.
23/10/2013 · Stephen Krashen and Michael Long By: ..
For all the poverty of the stimulus argument shows, the constraints in question might indeed be language-specific and innate, but with contents quite different from those proposed in current theories of UG. Or, the constraints might be innate, but not language-specific. For instance, as Tomasello 2003 argues, children's early linguistic theorizing appears to be constrained by their inborn abilities to share attention with others and to discern others' communicative intentions. On his view, a child's early linguistic hypotheses are based on the assumption that the person talking to him is attempting to convey information about the thing(s) that they are both currentlyattending to. (Another example of an innate but non-language specificconstraint on language learning derives from the structure of the mammalian auditory system; ‘categorical perception,’ and is relation to the acquisition of phonological knowledge is discussedbelow, §3.3.4.). Another alternative is that the constraints might be learned, that is, derived from past experiences. An example again comes from Tomasello (2003). He argues that entrenchment, or the frequency with which a linguistic element has been used with a certain communicative function, is an important constraint on the development of children's later syntacticknowledge. For instance, it has been shown experimentally that the more often a child hears an element used for a particular communicative purpose, the less likely she is to extend that element to new contexts. (See Tomasello 2003:179).