A Critical Examination of the Beliefs about Learning a Foreign Language at Primary School

Adults are said to find it more difficult to suppress the problem-solving
mechanisms. Both Felix and Rosansky suggest that the pre- and post-puberty
learner may apply different processes in acquiring a second language but
Rosansky suggests that the outcomes might not necessarily be different

2.5 Affective Considerations

2.5.1 Affective and Social Considerations

Krashen & Terrell (1988) claimed that that there was no fundamental change in
the language acquisition process at puberty and that the ability to acquire
language 'naturally' did not disappear. 'Affective' factors were held responsible
for any differences in attainment between pre-and post-puberty learners. The
filter hypothesis claims that:

"...no real change in the language acquisition device occurs at puberty.
The l_AD does not shut off, nor does it even 'degenerate'. Rather, the
necessary input may be kept out." (Krashen, 1982: 216)

Krashen & Terrell state that the 'filter* explanation OfchiIdZaduIt differences in
second language acquisition is related to the Monitor model (Krashen, 1977)
and the distinction between natural acquisition and conscious learning. With
the stage of formal operations the adolescent gains the Monitor, the ability to
examine language input consciously and adjust language output. However,
self-consciousness in adolescence leads to an overfocus on rules at the
expense of natural processes. Krashen hypothesised that formal operations
resulted in personality changes at puberty and that the self-conscious
adolescent builds up an 'affective filter* which blocks 'natural' language

108

<<   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   >>

More intriguing information