The document discusses the concept of the native speaker in linguistics, suggesting that no individual has a true first language but rather an idiolect. It explores various definitions of a native speaker and emphasizes the importance of sociocultural theory in linking language acquisition to social context, particularly highlighting the role of participation in development. Ultimately, it argues that the understanding of native speakers and language learning should incorporate both individual and social dimensions.

2.  According to Trudgill, no
individual has a language as
their first language.
 It is in applied linguistics that real interest in the NS resides,
applied linguistics because that is the field where judgments,
goals and norms have a central place (Davies forthcoming)
and where the standard language finds its home.
 What we all have as our first
language is an idiolect, our own
identifying idiolect which
distinguishes us from everyone
else, even from our own siblings.

3. For linguistics, we can explain the
native speaker as the embodiment
of the standard language
 The goal of the second-language
learner is what near-nativeness.
Native speaker is equated with
standard language.

4. It may be that we cannot distinguish NSs and NNSs
because our premises are inherently flawed, as
Hyltenstam and Abrahamsson (2000) point out, since
there are different views of what being a native speaker
means. They include:
1. native speaker by birth (that is by early childhood
exposure)
2. native speaker by virtue of being a native user
3. native speaker (or native speaker-like) by being
an exceptional learner
4. native speaker through education in the target
language medium
5. native speaker through long residence in the
adopted country.

5.  The linguistic view sees the native speaker as
the repository and guardian of the true language
 The other, the social view, concerns the native
speaker as the
 standard setter.
 But what they reflect is that different positions
can be taken on the basis of interest in and
concern for the same phenomenon, because
what is at issue is the individual speaker in
relation to his/her social group, and to its
community norms, that is the standard language.

6. Sociocultural theory attempts to link
human/mental processes to their cultural,
historical and institutional settings.
 It appears to bridge the psycholinguistic and
the socio linguistic.
 It also allows for the bringing together for
language learning of the native speaker and
the second-language learner and permits a
unified model since in both cases what
Vygotsky termed the zone of proximal
development has to be negotiated.

7.  The key contribution of sociocultural
theory to discussions of and research in
language learning generally is that of
‘participation’ (Pavlenko and Lantolf
2000) which combines the social context
with individual acquisition.
 As such, it permits an explanation of the
native speaker in terms of normal human
development which includes the inter-
relationship of language and thought.

8. In other words, in terms of our discussion of
the native speaker, you do not become an
L1 native speaker on your own, you need
other (especially adult) participation to
negotiate through the zone of proximal
development.
The implications for this approach are probably
most keenly felt in assessment, shown by the
claim that all assessment must be participatory.