This document summarizes Stephen Krashen's five hypotheses of second language acquisition: 1) The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis distinguishes between acquired, subconscious language and learned, conscious language. 2) The Natural Order Hypothesis states that language rules are acquired in a predictable order. 3) The Input Hypothesis posits that language is acquired by understanding input just beyond a learner's current level. 4) The Monitor Hypothesis describes the role of conscious learning and editing in language production. 5) The Affective Filter Hypothesis addresses how affective variables like anxiety and motivation impact acquisition.

1. TASK 3 - LANGUAGE
ACQUISITION
BY: DANIEL DAVILA
Task 3 - Language
Acquisition
By: Daniel Davila

2. Professor Emeritus at the University of
Southern California
Linguist, educationalresearcher, and activist
Haspublished more than 350 papers and books
Introduced the concept of 5learning hypothses
KRASHEN BIOGRAPHY

3. The5 hypotheses are about the learning of a second language
The 5hypotheses are asfollows:
Acquisition Learning Hypothesis
Natural Order Hypothesis
Input Hypothesis
Monitor Hypothesis
Affective Filter Hypothesis
THE 5HYPOTHESES

4. Two Methods toLearning a
second language:
Learning
Acquisition
THE ACQUISITION-LEARNING
HYPOTHESIS

5. Conscious study of thelanguage
According toKrashen, this does
not lead to fluent speaking
Ex: In China after multiple hours of
studying English grammar,
students were unable to engage
in meaningful conversation
LEARNIN
G

6. Picking up language the way children naturally do
Subconscious
Ex: Picking up language through meaningful conversations
that they observe and eventually engage in
ACQUISITIO
N

7. WHAT DOES THISMEAN?
• The point of Krashen’s “Acquisition Learning”
hypothesis is to show that though alone neither
learning or acquisition are successful, when used
together they can produce real results in English
proficiency

8. “Conscious learning is available only asa"Monitor," which can
alter the output of the acquired system before or after the
utterance is actually spoken or written. It is the acquired system
which initiates normal, fluent speech utterances.”
• Internal grammar editor, or “Monitor”
• Implies that the ELLthinks about what they sayor write, and has
the ability to“self-correct”
THE MONITOR
HYPOTHESIS

9. EXAMPLE OF THE MONITOR
HYPOTHESIS
I goed to the store…
I mean….
I went to the store.

10. THE MONITOR
HYPOTHESIS
Keys to EffectiveMonitoring
• Time
• An ELLmust have sufficient timeto
think about and use rules
consciously
• Focus on grammaticalform
• Even with ample time, one may be
so involved in what they’re saying
they don’t think about how they’re
saying it
• Knowledge of rules
• Complex

11. THEMONITORHYPOTHESIS
Types of MonitorUsers
• Under-user
• Have not learned
• Or, prefer not to useknowledge
• Over-user
• Constantly monitoring
• No fluency
• Optimal User
• UsesMonitor whenappropriate
• Useslearning asasupplementto
acquisition

12. Language learners acquire
(rather than learn) the rules of a
language in apredictable
sequence
Acquisition of grammatical
structures follows anaturalorder
NATURAL ORDER
HYPOTHESIS

13. Beaware that certain
structures of alanguage are
easier toacquire than others
Start by introducinglanguage
concepts that are relatively
easy for learners to acquire
and then use scaffolding to
introduce more difficult
concepts
TEACHER
APPLICATION

14. Second language acquisition is the
direct result of learners’ understanding
the target language in natural
communication situations
INPUT
HYPOTHESIS

15. learners progress in their knowledge of the language
when they comprehend language input that is slightly
more advanced than their current level
“i” is the language input
“+1” is the next stage of language acquisition
INPUT HYPOTHESIS
CONT.

16. 1. Relates toacquisition, not learning
2. Weacquire by understanding language that
contains structure beyond our current level of
competence
3. When communication is successful, when the input
is understood and there is enough of it, i+1will be
provided automatically
4. Production ability emerges. It is not taught directly.
FOUR PARTS TO THE INPUT
HYPOTHESIS

17. “People acquire second languages when they obtain
comprehensible input and when their affective filters are low
enough to allow the input in [to the language acquisition device].”
• Addressesthe relationship between social-emotional variables
and second languageacquisition
• The goal is to have a weak affective filter (low anxiety).
THE AFFECTIVE FILTER
HYPOTHESIS

18. THEAFFECTIVE FILTER
HYPOTHESIS
• Low-anxiety learning
environment
• Motivation to learn
language
• Self-confidence
• Self-esteem
Most ImportantAffective
Variables

19. LOWERING THE AFFECTIVE
FILTER
Get to knowyour
students
Lots of praise
Encourage all expressions
of English
Incentives
Interesting topics

20. 1. How do you think a high-stress environment affects
an ELLtrying to acquire asecond language?
2. How do you think the population of other ELL
students (high versus low) affects the learning of
English in schools?
3. Canyou describe three activities that promote
second language acquisition?
QUESTIONS

21. CONCLUSIO
N
•Krashen’s Monitor Model and 5
hypotheses are all a model of
teaching for the learning of a
second language
•They are all based off of the natural
way a first language islearned

22. WORKS CITED
• Fortin, Katherine. (2009, Nov. 13) Teaching
Foreign Languages: Make Your Students Feel At
Ease. Retrieved from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-
B0B0KWqGMI
• Krashen, S.D. (1981) Second Language
Acquisition and SecondLanguage Learning,
Pergamon Press, Inc. Retrieved from
http://sdkrashen.com/content/books/sl_ac
quisition_and_learning.pdf
• Krashen, S.D. (1982) Principles and Practice in
Second Language Acquisition, Pergamon Press, Inc.
Retrived from
http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/pri
nciples_and_practice.pdf
• Peregoy, S. & Boyle, O. (2013) Reading, Writing, and