Monitor Theory plays very important role in second language acquisition and shares a number of the assumptions of the UG approach You must know the effective role of this theory. As with UG, the assumption is that human beings acquire language without instruction or feedback on error. Krashen developed this theory in the 1970s and presented it in terms of five hypotheses.The fundamental hypothesis of Monitor Theory is that there is a difference between ‘acquisition’ and ‘learning’. Acquisition is hypothesized to occur in a manner similar to L1 acquisition, that is, with the learner’s focus on communicating messages and meanings; learning is described as a conscious process, one in which the learner’s attention is directed to the rules and forms of the language.
The ‘monitor hypothesis’ suggests that, although spontaneous speech originates in the ‘acquired system’, what has been learned may be used as a monitor to edit speech if the L2 learner has the time and the inclination to focus on the accuracy of the message.
You Must Know The Accurate Concept About Monitor Theory In Second Language Acquisition
In light of research showing that L2 learners, like L1 learners, go through a series of predictable stages in their acquisition of linguistic features. Krashen proposed the ‘natural order hypothesis.The comprehensible input hypothesis’ reflects his view that L2 learning, like L1 learning, occurs as a result of exposure to meaningful and varied linguistic input, Linguistic input will be effective in changing the learner’s developing competence if it is comprehensible (with the help of contextual information) and also offers exposure to language which is slightly
more complex than that which the learner has already acquired.
The ‘affective filter hypothesis’ suggests, however, that a condition for successful acquisition is that the learner be motivated to learn the L2 and thus receptive to the comprehensible input. Monitor Theory has been criticized for the vagueness of the hypotheses and for the fact that some of them are difficult to investigate in empirical studies.
Nonetheless, it has had a significant impact on the field of L2 teaching. Many teachers and students intuitively accept the distinction between ‘learning’ and ‘acquisition’, recalling experiences of being unable to spontaneously use their L2 even though they had studied it in a classroom.This may be especially true in classrooms where the emphasis is on meta-linguistic knowledge (the ability to talk about the language) rather than on practice in using it communicatively.