Stephen Krashen’s Hypotheses on Language Acquisition
Language acquisition does not require extensive use of
conscious grammatical rules, and does not require tedious
drill." Stephen Krashen
By the 1980s, the theories of Stephen Krashen had become the prominent paradigm in
SLA. In his theories, often collectively known as the Input Hypothesis, Krashen suggested
that language acquisition is driven solely by comprehensible input, language input that
learners can understand. Krashen's model was influential in the field of SLA and also had a
large influence on language teaching.
Krashen’s 5 Hypotheses to Language Acquisition:
1) Acquisition Learning ; 'adults have two distinctive ways of developing competences
in second languages .. acquisition, that is by using language for real communication ...
learning .. "knowing about" language' (Krashen & Terrell 1983)
2) Monitor : 'conscious learning ... can only be used as a Monitor or an editor' (Krashen
& Terrell 1983)
3) Natural Order : 'we acquire the rules of language in a predictable order'
4) Input : 'humans acquire language in only one way - by understanding messages or by
receiving "comprehensible input"
5) Affective Filter ; 'a mental block, caused by affective factors ... that prevents input
from reaching the language acquisition device' (Krashen, 1985, p.100)
(From: Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition 1987)
[Acquistion learning, monitor, input, natural order, and affective filter are the 5 pillars
of Krashen’s theory]
I. Acquisition Learning Hypothesis
“Fluency in second language performance is due to what we have acquired,
not what we have learned.” Krashen
Conscious learning and subconscious acquisition are NOT able to exist at
the same time (mutually exclusive).
Two Systems of language performance acquired and learned.
1. Acquired- Subconscious like how a child learns there L1.
2. Learned- Knowledge gained from formal instruction, grammar of the L2 is picked up
this way.
This is the relationship between acquired and learned language. It is a correcting
function that should be used sparingly “to give speech a more polished appearance”
The Acquisition-Learning distinction is the most fundamental of all the hypotheses in
Krashen's theory and the most widely known among linguists and language practitioners.
According to Krashen there are two independent systems of second language
performance: 'the acquired system' and 'the learned system'. The 'acquired system' or
'acquisition' is the product of a subconscious process very similar to the process children
undergo when they acquire their first language. It requires meaningful interaction in the target
language - natural communication - in which speakers are concentrated not in the form of
their utterances, but in the communicative act.
The 'learned system' or 'learning' is the product of formal instruction and it comprises a
conscious process which results in conscious knowledge 'about' the language, for example
knowledge of grammar rules. According to Krashen 'learning' is less important than
'acquisition'.
II. Monitor Hypothesis
Only involved in learning, x acquisition
Device for editing & making corrections
Krashen, “such explicit intentionally learning should be avoided.”
Should only be applied after fluency is established
The Monitor hypothesis explains the relationship between acquisition and learning and
defines the influence of the latter on the former. The monitoring function is the practical
result of the learned grammar. According to Krashen, the acquisition system is the utterance
initiator, while the learning system performs the role of the 'monitor' or the 'editor'. The
'monitor' acts in a planning, editing and correcting function when three specific conditions are
met: that is, the second language learner has sufficient time at his/her disposal, he/she focuses
on form or thinks about correctness, and he/she knows the rule.
It appears that the role of conscious learning is somewhat limited in second language
performance. According to Krashen, the role of the monitor is - or should be - minor, being
used only to correct deviations from 'normal' speech and to give speech a more 'polished'
appearance.
Krashen also suggests that there is individual variation among language learners with
regard to 'monitor' use. He distinguishes those learners that use the 'monitor' all the time
(over-users); those learners who have not learned or who prefer not to use their conscious
knowledge (under-users); and those learners that use the 'monitor' appropriately (optimal
users). An evaluation of the person's psychological profile can help to determine to what
group they belong. Usually extroverts are under-users, while introverts and perfectionists are
over-users. Lack of self-confidence is frequently related to the over-use of the 'monitor'.
III. Natural Order Hypothesis
By following the earlier morpheme order studies of Dulay and Burt…
Krashen claimed that:
we acquire language in a predictable or “natural” order
Based on the findings of Dulay , Burt, Fatham, and Makino during the 1970’s Krashen
concluded that independent of age, L1, and conditions of exposure L2 learners will learn
grammatical structures in a predictable order almost 100% of the time. However, Krashen
rejects grammatical sequencing in instruction.
The Natural Order hypothesis is based on research findings (Dulay & Burt, 1974;
Fathman, 1975; Makino, 1980 cited in Krashen, 1987) which suggested that the acquisition of
grammatical structures follows a 'natural order' which is predictable. For a given language,
some grammatical structures tend to be acquired early while others late. This order seemed to
be independent of the learners' age, L1 background, conditions of exposure, and although the
agreement between individual acquirers was not always 100% in the studies, there were
statistically significant similarities that reinforced the existence of a Natural Order of
language acquisition. Krashen however points out that the implication of the natural order
hypothesis is not that a language program syllabus should be based on the order found in the
studies. In fact, he rejects grammatical sequencing when the goal is language acquisition.
IV. Input Hypothesis (i+1)
Krashen: Comprehensible the only true foundation
input = of SLA
Comprehensive input: understanding of input language, that
contains ‘a bit beyond’ the current level of competence. (i + 1)
Speech will ‘emerge’ once acquirer has built up enough
comprehensible input
This only deals with acquisition of L2 not learning. A learner improves when they receive
input one step beyond their current competency.
The Input hypothesis is Krashen's attempt to explain how the learner acquires a second
language. In other words, this hypothesis is Krashen's explanation of how second language
acquisition takes place. So, the Input hypothesis is only concerned with 'acquisition', not
'learning'. According to this hypothesis, the learner improves and progresses along the
'natural order' when he/she receives second language 'input' that is one step beyond his/her
current stage of linguistic competence. For example, if a learner is at a stage 'i', then
acquisition takes place when he/she is exposed to 'Comprehensible Input' that belongs to level
'i + 1'. Since not all of the learners can be at the same level of linguistic competence at the
same time, Krashen suggests that natural communicative input is the key to designing a
syllabus, ensuring in this way that each learner will receive some 'i + 1' input that is
appropriate for his/her current stage of linguistic competence.
Motivation, self confidence and anxiety play a major roll in L2 learning. Learners
with high motivation and self-confidence, with a good self image, a little anxiety best
equipped for L2 learning.
V. Affective Filter Hypothesis
Krashen: the best acquisition will occur when we have low anxiety and
defensive-free on low “affective filter” (in Krashen’s terms)
The fifth hypothesis, the Affective Filter hypothesis, embodies Krashen's view that a
number of 'affective variables' play a facilitative, but non-causal, role in second language
acquisition. These variables include: motivation, self-confidence and anxiety. Krashen claims
that learners with high motivation, self-confidence, a good self-image, and a low level of
anxiety are better equipped for success in second language acquisition. Low motivation, low
self-esteem, and debilitating anxiety can combine to 'raise' the affective filter and form a
'mental block' that prevents comprehensible input from being used for acquisition. In other
words, when the filter is 'up' it impedes language acquisition. On the other hand, positive
affect is necessary, but not sufficient on its own, for acquisition to take place.
