1. LEARNING AND ACQUISITION OF ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE
COMPARATIVE ESSAY:
KRASHEN’S MONITOR MODEL
AND
CHOMSKY’S UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR
Students: Ma. De los Angeles Betancur,
Cynthia Troncoso.
Concepción, April, 10, 2014.

2. COMPARATIVE ESSAY:
KRASHEN’S MONITOR MODEL AND CHOMSKY’S UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR
The most intricate of these structures (referring to cognitive
structures) is language. In studying language we can discover
many basic properties of this cognitive structure, its organization,
and also the genetic predispositions that provide the foundation for
its development. So in this respect, linguistics, first of all, tries to
characterize a major feature of human cognitive organization. And
second, I think it may provide a suggestive model for the study of
other cognitive systems. And the collection of these systems is one
aspect of human nature (Chomsky, interview, 1984).
Language Acquisition (LA) is one of the wide branches of linguistics -in its
application area- which has gradually increased throughout the time; giving as a result
plenty of theories that make an effort to find the real answer about the way people around
the world learn and acquire languages. It is important to remark that there are two fields
dividing this large issue, being one the concept of mother tongue or First language (L1),
that refers to our native language, which is acquired during early childhood with very little
effort; and the other, the concept of Second language (L2), that implies an additional
language that needs conscious effort to be developed. In this case is more relevant to us the
concept of Second Language Acquisition, because it is directly related to our future labor
performance as trainers on English as a foreign language. According to this brief overview,
in the following essay it is going to be compared and contrasted two relevant theories of
Second Language Acquisition, which are Krashen’s Monitor Model (MM) and Chomsky’s
Universal Grammar (UG). Principally, it is going to be based on aspects such as the
definition of LA, impact of input in the process of LA, and perspectives of filters that hold
up the correct attainment of acquisition of a second language.
Setting a context, according to Krashen (2003), his theory of Monitor Model joins
five different hypothesis brought up by the author, which are related to the acquisition of a
language, that are: a) Comprehension hypothesis (also known as comprehensible input),

3. where acquisition is achieved as a consequence of the understanding of the input (I+1). It
means that the input we need to “wake up” or to keep the focus of the learners’ attention
must be one level up over their own knowledge to keep developing their knowledge. b)
Affective filter is an imaginary barrier that does not allow the acquisition even when the
input is present. It deals with the mood of the learner and what has emotional impact on it.
c) Natural order hypothesis is what denotes that language acquisition works in the same
way in L1 or L2, in a predictable order. d) Acquired knowledge hypothesis declares that
language acquisition occurs as a subconscious process through natural interaction. And
finally, e) The monitoring hypothesis, that stands for the device that a learner of a language
uses to edit his/her own language performance, this monitoring works as a self-evaluation
process that helps the learner to provide feedback to himself and correct linguistic problems
to avoid ‘fossilization’, which is the problem of repeating constantly a mistake without
noticing it is wrong. In contrast, Universal Grammar refers to a linguistic theory that
challenged the previous behaviorist theories regarding to LA/SLA and which stands for a
“system of principles and parameters that are the prerequisites for acquisition of language,
and to which every language necessarily conforms” (Chomsky, interview, 1984).
Regarding to Cook (2013) and based on Chomsky’s model, the principles are concerned to
how words perform in each language and the meaning they gain in context; the parameters
describe syntax as a universal fact. This system was born as a part of the innatist
perspective established by Chomsky (as cited in Cook, 2013), and describes the language as
a biological function developed at the same time we grow up. Furthermore, the author
states that every human mind is genetically programmed to acquire a language throughout
the use of a device belonging to our brain, which has been called Language Acquisition
Device (LAD).
In surface terms, it is easy to denote a relationship between these LA theories linked
to the definition of the same concept: Language Acquisition (LA). LA implies a long-term
process for the authors, which is supposed to be developed and improved during the human
growing process, as individuals. On his behalf, Stephen Krashen (2003) talking about his
Comprehension Hypothesis notes that learners need an input one level over the knowledge
they have in order to achieve LA. Besides, his Natural Order Hypothesis indicates that
learners of any language acquire verbal communication (talking about the L1) throughout

4. the gain of language structures in an expected sequence, due to the fact that the complexity
of each one of these structures is similar in all languages over the world. Similarly, Noam
Chomsky (1984) in his Universal Grammar theory illustrates that Language Acquisition
(talking about L1 and L2) and children’s lives development are arisen as connected facts at
the hand of Language Acquisition Device. It means that language is achieved, as well as
physical changes, through our maturation process. Although for him (referring to Chomsky,
2013) not only humans have this device, but also every animal all around the world,
making difference just in the kind of communication they use to transmit a message. Hence,
the connection between these ideas lies in the fact that both indicate a developmental
process of the language that is comparable to the inherent process of growing of a person,
in a specific order. This order is, in both cases, a hierarchy in which the process of the
language happens: for Krashen, from the most important (verbs, nouns) to the less
important words (prepositions, determiners), or for Chomsky, to the most simple to the
most complex grammatical structures. Nonetheless, it is important to bear in mind that this
point has to do with acquisition of the language, but in his work, Chomsky only refers to
the learning of grammar configuration.
An evident dissimilarity between these theories of LA is the impact of the input in
each case, because even though Krashen and Chomsky refer to this expression, they pay
different degree of attention to this item. For Krashen, input is almost everything in the
process of LA. The main argument is based on the motivation we receive to speak, which is
processed in our mind and as a result learners will have as a response an output. However,
for Chomsky the input does not have relevance in the process of LA because he strongly
believes that everything happens in the human mind, as an internal process, defining
“input” as the goal for teaching lexis and vocabulary facts mainly.
According to the Krashen’s regards to affective filter by mentioning that there is no
impact of the affective variables in the language acquisition in a direct way, but that it
prevents input from being assimilated (Krashen, 2003). This belief is shared by Chomsky’s
theory; even he called it “Language Acquisition Device” (LAD). This assumption
expresses, although with different names, that one issue could interfere in the acquisition of
the input and not in the acquisition process itself. As a way of illustration, figure that in a

5. classroom there is a group of students who are watching a video to learn present perfect
tense. Meanwhile, one of the students is thinking about family problems in the classroom,
he feels worried and depressed; as a result, he is not going to achieve the acquisition
process, losing the complete lesson. This issue interferes in the act of watching the video,
causing that the student does not learn the verb tense which has been exposed. In other
words, the affective filter is being affected by an obstruction or interference, and it is
translated into a barrier that is impeding the realization of the language acquisition process,
but it is just a momentary obstacle.
As a conclusion, it could be asserted that the two authors’ researches have exposed
two of the most renamed theories focused on the processing of a language. Their individual
thoughts not only have some adjacent points. But there also exists some disagreements
between both of these theories; principally, in terms of definitions and explanations given
to the same topic, as it has been demonstrated previously. Trying to analyze and create an
opinion related to the foundations of each one of these theories, we would like to mention
that two aspects keep our attention for the most part: Chomsky’s Universal Grammar
Theory refers to the acquisition as a mental process occurred in the LAD, which is quite
asserted from our point of view, because language is something that is acquired almost by
force of habit; however, are interaction or external factors really affecting the learning and
acquisition processes? In our opinion the answer is ‘yes’. First of all, because the UG
theory seems too much rigid, we agree with Krashen in his Affective Filter Hypothesis,
because even when it could be an internal process only, emotions, feelings and personal
interests are different for every person, taking into consideration that we are all diverse in
facts as personality, beliefs, likes/dislikes, among others. In addition, obviously these facets
could affect in a positive or negative way the processes that are constantly happening in our
minds while learning and acquiring any sort of knowledge, as a second language. These
theories are fundamental for the understanding of LA, which is why it is vital to go in depth
into this topic; especially for whom are preparing to develop the challenging task of
teaching a Second Language, and attempting to achieve the goal of acquiring a certain
language. Eventually, there will always be debate and difference among opinions with
regard to these theories, due to the fact that the learning and acquisition processes are being
studied and improved persistently to achieve an unquestionable and omnipotent answer, but

6. we need to try to take the best portions of these theories in order to fulfill the learners’
needs.
REFERENCES
Chomsky, N. (1984). On Language and Culture: N. Chomsky interviewed by W.
Osiatynski. Retrieved from http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/1984----.htm
Cook, V. (2013). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching (Fourth Edition).
London: Routledge.
Krashen, S. (2003). Explorations in Language Acquisition and Use, Principles of
Language Acquisition (pp. 1-15). Portsmouth: Heinemann.