Teaching Ideas & Others
ACHIEVING NATIVE-LIKE COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE?
By Antonio Rios - January 2010
Learning a foreign language poses a very hard challenge to any person, young or adult. During the learning development, a great number of processes and interactions are involved, and there are different factors and variables which influence on the success in learning a foreign language. Among the models proposed, we can find sociolinguistic models, linguistic models, and cognitive models. Additionally, among the factors intervening in the L2 learning process are age, the environment, the curriculum and materials, the aptitude and intelligence, and other relevant factors. In this assignment, I will try to explain why EFL students usually cannot achieve native-like competence in their second language by describing, based on the models and theories I have studied, how those factors, variables, and processes intertwine during second language learning.
L1 LEARNING THEORIES APPLIED TO L2 LEARNING
First language learning does not represent a difficult task under normal conditions; I mean that “all children with normal hearing and articulatory mechanisms acquire their first language.” Nunan (1999:40). Learning their mother tongue is just part of their development process and is taken as natural by parents and people around children. However, most theorists and researchers agree that acquiring a second language entails processes and tasks which L1 learning does not involve.
Initially, remembering behaviorist theories. It is true that most of the time we are moved by necessity, and that when children learn their first language, they feel the need to communicate with the people around them. However, the stimulus-response-reinforcement model for language learning might fall short if we need to explain language learning. I consider that what we say in a communication exchange is new in many ways and responds to logical thinking and the processing of ideas coherently rather than simply repeating learned habits, which we repeat over and over again under pre-established conditions. Consequently, applying behaviorist principles to first language learning and, indeed, second language learning does not precisely explain the nature of learning a language.
If we had to go for behaviorism and apply it to learning a second language, then a second language learner would find it really hard to develop native-like communicative competence. As habits have already been formed in L1, it would take lots of efforts and time to change and such habits, and the second-language learner might feel de-motivated and eventually give up in his attempt to master L2. Additionally, that way, L1 would play against the development of L2 in clear contradiction to the belief that first language can be used as a performance strategy in L2.
Then I am much more inclined to accept nativists’ ideas about first language acquisition. For one thing, all of us humans are capable to learn our first language due to our human nature and genetic heritage. Such ability to learn a language, according to Chomsky (1965), is embodied somewhere in our brains –human brains- in a “little black box” named LAD, waiting to be activated. I have to agree that once it is activated by learning L1, anyone can try learning a second or third language by using the universal knowledge (Universal Grammar) that nativists claim exists among all human beings.
Among many other contributions, nativists also claim that children develop their language systematically by “forming hypotheses on the basis of input received and then testing those hypotheses in speech and comprehension” Brown (1994;26). This theory seems much more applicable to second language learning. During my classes, for example, I can constantly see my students processing language instruction by drawing conclusions, generalizing rules, testing their hypotheses, and generating their own ideas. They also draw their attention to meaning, abstract thought and creativity during their class interactions.
Another theory which I see clear when explaining L1 acquisition is the developmental or interactionist theory. For instance, I can easily see how my students, depending on their age and their experience, have differed attitudes and skills towards learning English, their second language. This can be explained in terms of Piaget’s theory of adaptation through assimilation and accommodation and his 4-stage cognitive development theory. Similarly, Bloom has added to these theories through his concept of students’ attitude and aptitude in school.
From what is described above, students of a second language will achieve varied communicative competence levels, being their attitude one aspect which plays a key role in the process of learning L2 effectively. It is known that some students show diverse attitudes towards learning a second language due to different factors such as group pressure, ethnic background, their social environment, and others. Other aspects affecting learners’ level of motivation include the school, the learning environment, their self image, and their previous learning experience.
It is evident then that L1 acquisition theories are applicable to L2 learning to a relative degree. Behaviorist theories can contribute with the concepts that learning a language is a process of imitation. The nativist and cognitive theories explain how learners go through a natural development process in which our human condition defines the ability to learn a language. All of those theories aim at developing competence in one way or another and have been relatively effective at making learners native-like speakers of a language.
DEVELOPING COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE IN L2
The Age Factor
Much has been said about the influence of age in achieving native-like communicative competence in L2. But from experience, I can say that the younger a learner starts to learn a second language the more likely to develop a higher level of communicative competence. This can be explained in terms of what theorists and researchers have proposed and investigated in this area.
One concept that tries to explain why a learner acquires a language effectively is that of The Critical Period Hypotheses. D. Brown (1994) explains that there is period in our lives before which languages can be acquired easily and effectively and that after it learning a language becomes harder. Such period seems to be marked by puberty (age 11 to 13). And, from what I could see among my students this concept seems to be highly associated to being proficient in pronunciation and automatic use of L2. Students who started learning English at an early age at my language school seem to have a more natural, spontaneous use of the language than those who started later.
Another concept which supports age as a defining factor in L2 learning success is the one proposed by Piaget. As mentioned before, the fourth stage of his cognitive development theory starts at the approximate age of 11 by which an individual has started to develop logical and abstract thinking and has started to complete the maturity of his brain functions. Also adding to this concept, there is the hemispheric lateralization concept, which states that “certain functions are assigned, or ‘lateralized,’ to the left hemisphere of the brain, and certain other functions to the right hemisphere.” Brown (2000:54)
The evidence shows that age is an important factor in developing communicative competence. L1 communicative competence is largely achieved since we acquire our first language during the period of time which researches have found as the years in which language acquisition is relatively easy and mostly done subconsciously. On the contrary, most people learn a second language in a formal instruction setting after that period. Consequently, L2 native-like competence can become a hard task since the learner will have to “fight” against the age disadvantages mentioned above.
Affective and Cognitive Factors
Individual learner factors are also taken into account when we have to discuss communicative competence achievement.
We humans are emotional creatures; consequently, our emotions influence our thinking and acting. Aspects related to emotions are self-esteem, personality factors, motivation, anxiety, and others. We know, for example, that the higher appreciation of himself a learner has, the more confident at learning a second language he will be. Personality factors may lead an individual to develop certain attitudes or determine how he or she can manage anxiety or interact with their peers in a class. Finally, motivation, though many times determined by external factors, affects the route that learning will take. Highly self-motivated learners are successful at achieving high levels of communicative competence.
On the other hand, cognitive factors do their part in influencing the development of language competence. As a language teacher, I see that the theory of multiple intelligences, proposed by H. Gardner, and other theories that classify learners according to their learning styles are more realistic that traditional concepts of aptitude and intelligence. They help identify types of learners and the type of instruction that has to be used in class. Obviously these differences also show differences in learning rates and competence achievement.
L1 transfer
It is true that L1 is a permanent source of errors; however, it is precisely L1 the “departure” point in learning a second language. Having acquired a first language makes the process of L2 learning different. The learner does not start second language learning from “ground zero” and has already developed language mechanisms common to all languages (Chomsky’s LAD, for example, has already been activated.). The learner then will continuously resort to L1 throughout his/her language learning process. Even at high language learning levels, there are times in which the learner will contrast L2 expressions and structures to those of L1. Consequently, effectively managing L1 transfer and using it as a learning tool will contribute to a higher or lower development of competence.
The Monitor Model
Although this model mainly focuses on developing linguistic competence, I would like to refer to this model due to its importance. Personally speaking, though ignoring its existence, monitoring my performance helped me improve my language skills and my communicative skills when I was a language student. I constantly reflected on the correctness and effectiveness of what I performed, later deciding what steps to take based on the judgment I made of my performance.
This model provides teachers with a tool which when fully used can promote competence development. In its application, learners are exposed to situations in which language acquisition is encouraged. Most core books follow a “natural” order of linguistic features in their syllabuses. Learners can be empowered in developing their monitors. Also input treatment in language lessons is crucial. And finally, nice classroom atmosphere is promoted.
Other factors
Other factors which intervene in the development of communicative competence are input, practice, materials, and objectives.
CONCLUSIONS
EFL students have a relatively low chance to achieve native-like communicative competence due to many factors which slow down and even impede its development. First, besides the fact that they do not live in a place where the second language is spoken, they have to deal with the limited input they receive in class. The challenge is to expand exposure to authentic input outside class through the use of resources such as cable TV and the Internet. Second, affective considerations may not help much; some students may not find an authentic and meaningful reason to competently use the language in communicative situations, for example. Finally, most of EFL students start to learn their second language at an age which, due to the varied reasons discussed before, can be late. In brief, the common of our EFL students might not achieve native-like communicative competence in L2. Only a few dedicated and persevering students might develop fully communicative competence.
Is it possible to achieve native-like competence? Is it desirable?
Achieving native-like competence is desirable but not possible for most of our students. The majority of EFL students would like to have a very competent level of language at the end of their language studies -Only a few of them might not want to sound like an L2 native due to some reasons which mainly respond to social aspects such as peer pressure, religion, or ethnic considerations. However, because of the reasons mentioned in the former paragraph, developing the highest level of competence is not possible for an EFL student.
