Krashen Stephem work and his theoretical model, meet some of this question. It should be noted that these investigations were conducted largely in california. USA.

The work we have done on the acquisition of a second language, the indigenous communities did in Colombia: Cauca Paeces and Embera. They are published in Spanish, it'll upload to web. Approach is utlizo transfer Krashen, in short the first language facilitates the learning of the second.

Thank you Mr Loaiza, I see, I would like to know whether there are differences in "meaning making" process between L1 literacy and L2. Recently I saw here a question about having dyslexia in L1 affecting or not affecting L2. Since I have been teaching ESL/ IELTS to adults and studying literacy/ multimodality, I am trying to find the differences between two "literacies". Rather than bilingual teaching where the two languages develop together, I would like to know how we perceive a second language with lexical and functional differences. Like children "again"? Or is there a cognitive difference?

L2 meaning making for adults is obviously more complex than children's L1 acquisition because there is a base of implicit /tacit understanding of L1 syntax/spelling-sound structures which supports/interferes with intake of the new language items and an established metalinguistic sorting, sifting and filing system. L1 children only develop this gradually in a more piecemeal way from an accumulation of random items that come together like a jigsaw puzzle as they see the appropriate contextual framing from repeated exposure. There are heaps of research studies on different aspects of this L2 process.

Thank you Jean, could you suggest some literature I should be looking at? I am about to write a paper about the similarities/differences of adult second language/children's literacy. I am the only grad student in Literac/Multimodality course, who teaches L2 to adults. The course material is mainly covering children, however I only have experience with adults L2 literacy. I need a connection as you can guess. I would appreciate any suggestion.

Regards,

Leyla

This link may be worth a look as it has a good bibliog?

http://www.cal.org/caela/esl_resources/digests/SLA.html

and I will see what else I can find around research in Australia, which is my home base and there is an excellent TESOL R&D centre at Macquarie University in Sydney

Thank you very much :)

In the 70s and 80s, there were literally tons of studies done comparing first and second language acquisition, particularly on the acquisition of grammatical morphemes and syntactical structures. Researchers found striking similarities, e.g. in the developmental stages of acquisition as well as in the types of errors first and second language learners make, but there were differences as well. One explanation for the differences is of course the fact that adults have explicit metalinguistic awareness, and many researchers attempted to determine the effects of formal instruction on acquisition rates and patterns. Take a look at the research done by, e.g. Larry Selinker on interlanguage, Bailey, Madden & Krashen on natural sequences in adult second language learners, S. Corder on learners errors, D. Larsen-Freeman, T. Pica, etc., but that list doesn’t even scratch the surface.

Thank you Denise, Especially the 'childish' exercises have always annoyed me when both teaching ESL and TESOL, I wanted to know whether we really have to take our adult learners 'back to their childhood" with games and bingos. Activities which might be popular amongst Asian learners always surprised me that way. Games, which would only accomodate child learners. Therefore I would like to know the differences

in approaching adult learners. Despite the fact that I am afraid of essentialising 'cultures' due to the new trends in linguistics ! I have experienced that people from some cultures (Latin and Middle Eastern learners)don't want to be "treated like children". On the other hand there must also be some similarities in learning a new alphabet or structure between L1 literacy and L2 literacy.

Regards,

Leyla

The speech which people address to children usually differs from which they address to adults. It is simpler in structure and more limited in vocabulary, more repetition, and is more closely related to the immediate situation. The language is therefore easier to understand so the child has more opportunity to organise it and remember it. The nature of the speech addressed to second language learners would be an important factor in influencing how well they learn.

There is a lot of research done in this field and I am sure that you would find your answer if you read Krashen, Littlewood, W. ; Lightbownp. and Spada, N etc.

Regards

Liljana

I suggest that you read the works of Patricia Kuhl. You will find them very informative and enlightening.

By the way, it seems that children have a unique ability to pick up language and in adults this ability (maybe brain cells responsible for this) become(s) dormant because they are not used as in children. Because of that, adult learners use some learning strategies as in learning other cognitive skills. Of course, there is a dire need for studies to find out, first, where and what these brain sections (or better to say, genes) are and whether they become dormant in adults or whether they can be reactivated? Studying multilinguals and comparing them with those who possess only one language for communication (their mother tongue) can be especially enlightening to find out if those who have used this ability more than others have better capable of acquisition rather than learning in their technical meaning.

In Spanish literature you can consult Cantero at http://www.appuifle.net/cantero_fonetica_y_didactica_pronunciacion.pdf. This document has bibliograpy for english and spanish. The author has other publications, of course.

Cantero thinks litteracy is an obstacle for adult L2 pronunciation learning, below the manner communicative activities are implemeented -literacy activities- . Cantero propose there must be an initial period for foreing laguage teaching prioritizing or exclusively oral activities -no literacy-.: "La forma material de la comunicación es el sonido" (Materrial form of communication is sound)".

By the way, pronunciacion aspects have been forgotten due to the goals of the communicative approach which don't pretends native-like pronunciation but satisfies with messsage intelligibility.

Cantero cites other -English- spoken authors- who contest the Lennenberg's tesis "critical age period"

P.D. Please, be patient with my English :)

In a cognitive sense, there are fundamental differences between children learning their mother tongue and adults learning a second language. Here they are in a nutshell: 1. What children acquire as their L1 is a tacit/implicit knowledge of the language which subsequently may be converted to explicit knowledge (e.g., grammar rules). With adults, the interface (if any) is from explicit to implicit knowledge (from rules to usage). 2. What this means in a neural framework is that adults are likely to make more use of their declarative memory system (responsible for conscious explicit knowledge) in language learning and use, as opposed to children who will most likely prioritize their procedural and declarative memory systems (see Ullman's declarative/procedural model, 2001) 3. For children language is speech (comprehension & production), which could be viewed as a multimodal (auditory, visual, olfactory, etc.) enhancement system for the brain 'to communicate'. For adults, the new language is subserved by all four skills which they possess thanks to their L1. Thus, its multimodal nature is greater and richer. 4. The same neural pathways are not necessarily used in L1 and L2 use and if/when they are, there could be problems involving the L2 (see Jacobs, 1988). 5. Finally, there is the popular concept of the critical age (or sensitive periods) and its important implications from the standpoint of 'ultimate attainment' (see DeKeyser's or Michael Long's work). I hope this helps.

Dear Prof. Alptekin, your input does more than just help. Your summary & work continues to broaden my perspective in linguistics.Both of the course programs I have been taking have a connection to the fields you have been working on.(Literacy & Multimodality and Culture & Politics in Second Language Education) Therefore I will take the liberty of having your work as reference for both of my final papers.

Regards,

Leyla