SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION THEORIES & PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS FOR TEYL

ASSIGNMENT 2:

 QUESTION: Discuss the generally accepted categorization of SLA theories, and select ONE (1) SLA theory for the following tasks:

a)    Identify the major issues of concern and how they are dealt with within the framework of the theory.

b)    Explain why this theory is the best framework to guide you in your future role as a TEYL teacher? Support your stand with appropriate theoretical arguments and empirical examples.

INTRODUCTION

            The study of language acquisition has caused many theories to be created for the past three decades. The theories are formed to explain the events that take place when the process of language acquisition occurs. Since there are many events that occur, how do we classify all the theories in second language acquisition?

            According to McLaughlin (1987), the theories of second language acquisition can be classified according to different criteria. According to their form theories can be classified along a continuum with ‘deductive’ on one end and ‘inductive’ on the other. Theories following the deductive approach contain concepts and constructs that are assumed to be true without proof. These are the axioms of the theory. Laws of logic are applied on these axioms to obtain the ‘hypotheses’ of the theory. If these hypotheses are empirically supported then they become the laws and facts of the theory

            He also added that unlike the deductive approach, the inductive approach does not begin with axioms. Instead it is empirically based. Theoretical statements are formulated after a significant amount of empirical relationships have been established. Theories that follow the inductive approach formulate hypotheses based on certain empirical facts.

SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION THEORIES

            Before further discussion, I would like to explain briefly the five most significant second language acquisition theories. I feel that these five theories are the most significant theories and the theories are Contrastive Analysis Theory, Monitor Model, Universal Grammar, Error Analysis as well as Interlanguage.

            Contrastive Analysis is one of the earliest second language acquisition theories. This theory suggests that by studying the points of similarity and dissimilarity between languages, it would facilitate the acquisition of second language. Therefore, native language of L1 is seen to play a major role in second language acquisition. In Contrastive Analysis, by contrasting linguistic differences among two languages, it would be easier to see the comparison between the two languages. In fact, Dr. David Towey (2008) from University of Hong Kong stated that Contrastive Analysis helps to improve teaching as well as predict areas of difficulty for the learner based on the error that the students made. However, a question that was raised is does all the errors occur?

            The second theory that I have chosen is Monitor Model Theory proposed by Stephen Krashen. In this Monitor Model Theory, there are five hypotheses that are formed to explain the second language acquisition that takes place. The five hypotheses are The Acquisition-Learning Hypotheses, The Natural Order Hypotheses, The Monitor Hypotheses, The Input Hypotheses as well The Affective Filter Hypotheses.

            The third theory is Universal Grammar or better known as UG. This theory is based on Chomsky’s view. He viewed that the ability to learn language is innate which means every human is born with the capability of learning language. Chomsky also believed that very human is born with Language Acquisition Device (LAD) and input plays the role of activating the device.

            Error Analysis is another significant theory in second language acquisition. This theory exists due to the change of perspective where the theorists feel that instead of looking at languages and trying to predict errors, it is much better to analyze the errors that occur. This is stated by Stephen Pit Corder (1967) who said that:

“A learner's errors, then, provide evidence of the system of the language that he is using (i.e. has learned) at a particular point in the course (and it must be repeated that he is using some system, although it is not yet the right system).”

In Error Analysis Theory there are few steps in identifying errors. The steps are data collection, error identification, error classification, error quantification, determining the source or cause of error as well as designing materials to address the source or cause of the errors. Other than that, Error Analysis Theory aims to distinguish mistake and error. This is because learner often perceives mistake and error as the same concept where in actual fact, they are not similar. Mistake shows one’s performance towards the language but errors show one’s competence of the language.

The last theory that I am going to briefly explain is Interlanguage Theory. The term “interlanguage” was first coined by Larry Selinker in 1969. According to Wikipedia.com, interlanguage is defined as an emerging linguistic system that has been developed by a learner of a second language who has not become fully proficient yet but only approximating the target language. Selinker sees interlanguage system as a result of five cognitive processes which are overgeneralization, transfer of training, strategies of second language learning, strategies of second language communication as well as language transfer.

THE ISSUES OF INTERLANGUAGE THEORY

After a few series of readings and discussion as well as consideration, I have decided to choose Interlanguage Theory as the main theory of discussion. This is because I feel that the issues raised in this theory are very interesting and they are closely related to my role as a future English teacher.

One of the major issues that I would like to highlight here is the conceptual basis of interlanguage. Ellis (1985) proposes two conceptual basis of this theory. The first conceptual basis is L2 learner interlanguage is permeable. The word “permeable” according to WordWeb.com means “able to pass through or penetrated”. In the context of interlanguage, the learner’s knowledge of linguistics’ rules is not fixed and due to that, it is permeable. Therefore, the learner’s knowledge is opened for amendment. For example, in the case of eleven year old Portueguese boy who is the process in learning English Language. The boy uttered the sentence, “No look my card.” However, after a few minutes of correction, the Portuguese boy was able to utter the correct negation sentence that is, “Don’t look my card”.

The second conceptual basis of interlanguage theory is L2 learner interlanguage is transitional. This is because the L2 interlanguage is going through a process of constant change due to the receiving of new input. Even though the L2 learner interlanguage is constantly changing, it does not jump from one stage of another. In fact, this is agreed by Tarone (1983) who specifically distinguished the stages in interlanguage continuum. This interlanguage continuum can be seen as the followings:

    In this interlanguage continuum, the learner goes through all these stages before achieving the second language competency. In vernacular style stage, this is the first stage where the learner has just begun learning or acquiring his or her second language. Due to that, this stage is known as an unattended speech stage where the knowledge of the second language is limited and this cause a great hindrance to the learner to produce the language effectively. As for the style two, this is the stage where the learner has already began to produce the language carefully but has not yet achieved the competence level of the language. This stage is also known as an attended speech stage.

For style three, style four and style n, these three stages is where the learner goes through various elicitation tasks in the process of achieving the language competency. For example, the learner would learn about imitation, sentence combining or many other rules in the second language that he or she tries to acquire. As for the style n, it signifies the stages that the learner would have to go through before achieving the careful style stage. The careful style stage is a stage where the learner is able to make grammatical judgments before producing the language that he or she has acquired.

The second issue that I would like to discuss here is how interlanguage system is created or more accurately to say here is how the learner creates his or her own interlanguage system. According to Selinker, there are a number of basic processes that take place in creating the interlanguage system. However, in his later work, Selinker insists upon learning strategies that the learner adopts in order to help him or her in acquiring the second language.

The first learning strategy is language transfer. According to Wikipedia.com, language transfer refers to speakers or writers applying knowledge from their native language to a second language. Other terms for language transfer is L1 interference, linguistic interference as well as cross meaning. Language transfer is divided into two which are positive transfer and negative transfer. However, a great focus is given to negative transfer because it is seen as the most important element in acquiring second language. It is said that, the more similar the native language and the second language, the more language transfer will occur.

The second way of how learner creates his or her own interlanguage system is by overgeneralization. This is the process where the learner would try to use the second language rules in a way that is never been used by the native speaker. For example, “What does she doing now” instead of “What is she doing now?”.

The last way of how a learner creates his or her interlanguage system is through simplification. This is agreed by Corder (1981) who suggests that language learner starts with some simple grammar which is the simplification of L2 knowledge. By having this process, the learner would be able to acquire the language bit by bit. This is because some learner could not digest the input given to them. Therefore, by having simplification in their early stage of acquiring the second language, it will gradually enhance their understanding over certain linguistic knowledge.

 The last issue that I would like discuss here is interlanguage fossilization. According to Selinker (1972), interlanguage fossilization is a permanent cessation of progress toward the target language. He also adds that:

 "Fossilizable linguistic phenomena are linguistic items, rules, and subsystems which speakers of a particular native language will tend to keep in their interlanguage relative to a particular target language, no matter what the age of the learner or amount of explanation and instruction he receives in the target language."

            Interlanguage fossilization has been widely discussed all over the world. Many researchers have attempted to explain this issue and ways to overcome it. A learner would never become a competent second language user if fossilization is not overcome.

MY ROLE AS A FUTURE TEYL TEACHER

In less than two years, by God’s will, I would graduate from this course and become a TEYL teacher. I would be teaching English Language to a bunch of kids in primary school where I would be posted. Interlanguage Theory is one of the theories that has a great impact on me. I feel that this theory as an early exposure for me to understand the language acquisition process that takes place in an individual especially my students in the near future.  

For the first issue that I have mentioned, I feel that it would be easy for me to help my students in their language learning process if I take the right approach. Furthermore, since I would be teaching young learners, it would be a great challenge for me. However, I believed that young learners are able to acquire second language easily. This view that young learners are able to acquire language easily is based on the Critical Period Hypothesis which was first proposed by Montreal neurologists, Wilder Penfield and Lamar Roberts in 1959. This hypothesis later was popularized by Eric Lenneberg in 1967. Lenneberg stated that the difficulty to acquire language is due to the brain lateralisation at puberty as the mechanism closes down the brain's ability to acquire language.

As I have mentioned before, if I take the right approach in teaching my students, they would be able to learn the language easily. Since the first issue is regarding of the learner’s permeability and transition, I feel the right approach of teaching should be carefully selected. One of the teaching approaches suggested to me is based on the Ausubel Learning Theory.

Ausubel Learning Theory is developed by David Ausubel in 1963. Ausabel is credited with the learning theory of advanced organizers. This theory is easily applicable to second language acquisition and due to that, I have decided to discuss upon this learning theory. Ausabel along with other scientists has worked hard in order to develop the system that later would help learners to achieve the learning outcomes.

What really attracted me to use this learning theory with my students in the future is because Ausubel believes that meaningful learning is crucial for classroom instruction. According to Ausubel, meaningful learning entails new knowledge that relates to what one already knows and that can easily retained and applied. I agree with this statement because meaningful learning would help the learner to internalize the input that they received from the teacher.

In my classroom later on, I would use pictures, titles of stories, reviews of previously learned concepts or short video segments and organize it so that my students would not be confused and they could understand what I teach bit by bit. This method is based on the advanced organizer concept proposed by Ausubel.

As for the second issue that I have mentioned, I feel that there should be a close monitoring towards the learner’s interlanguage system. This is because I feel that if I know how the learner’s interlanguage is constructed or how it is produced, it would be easier for me to tackle the problem. Furthermore, the knowledge of interlanguage continuum that I have previously mentioned would be a great help in determining the level of my students. Therefore, this would be a great opportunity for me to see the learner in different perspective.

Fossilization is the last issue that I have mentioned. As a future TEYL teacher, I feel that I would also face this problem myself and also it would happen to my students. Based on my readings, usually the students would be facing the difficulty in producing grammatically correct sentences especially in the case of tenses. For example, the use of present perfect tense as opposed to the past simple.

a)    Serena has been to Milan last year.

b)    I have read the book yesterday.

The students tend to forget that the word “last year” and “yesterday” signify that the actions above have already taken place and the correct sentences are:

a)    Serena had been to Milan last year.

b)    I read the book yesterday.

            This is one example of the phenomena of fossilization in interlanguage. There are actually many other errors that were produced by the learner in learning second language. One way that I could take in order to solve this problem is by giving the students more exercises in tenses. This would make them aware of the errors that they produced. Furthermore, it would help them to overcome the problem. The issue of fossilization has been widely discussed and it actually depends on me as English Language teacher to overcome this problem.

CONCLUSION

            The process of second language acquisition is a process that could not be explained by a single theory. However, in the context of English teacher teaching in Malaysian setting, I feel that interlanguage has raised many issues that are closely related to the teaching and learning of English Language in a classroom.

            However, it is our responsibility as teachers to help our students later in the future. Through hard work and dedication toward our profession, we would be able to produce competent English Language users.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Corder, S. (1981). Error Analysis and Interlanguage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of Second Language Learning. London: Edward Arnold.

Tarone, E. (1983). On The Variability of Interlanguage Systems. Great Britain: Briton Publisher.

Stephen Pit Corder (1967). The Significance of Learners‘ Errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics 5.

Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistic.

Towey, D. (2008). Interlanguage. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong.

Interlanguage Theory. Surf on 10 March 2009, from Wikipedia.com

Ausubel Learning Theory. Surf on 10 March 2009, from tip.psychology.org/ausubel

Permeability. Surf on 10 March 2009, from WordWeb.com

Key Issues In Second Language Acquisition

ASSIGNMENT 1:
KEY ISSUES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

Question: Discuss the key issues raised by R. Ellis (1989) paying particular attention to the TWO (2) following aspects:


a) How these issues have been organized into a coherent framework with which to approach to the study of SLA.
b) From your perspective, what should be the major issues of concern to TEYL teacher? State your reasons.


************************************

INTRODUCTION

Second Language Acquisition or SLA has been a major topic discussed all over the world. It has been an important topic that attracted attention from theorists and researchers from many parts of the world. Therefore, a great number of researches have been carried out to determine many areas in this field. Before further discussion, let’s define what SLA is all about.


According to Wikipedia.com, second language acquisition is the process by which people learn a second language in addition to their native language(s). The term “second language” is used to describe the acquisition of any language after the acquisition of the mother tongue. The language to be learned is often referred to as the "target language" or "L2". Second language acquisition may be abbreviated "SLA", or L2A, for "L2 acquisition".


There are also many opinions regarding the term “acquisition” and “learning”. According to Wu Heping (1996), the term of “acquisition” is preferred by some theorists because they believe that the process of language acquisition was viewed as a biological process of growth and maturation rather than as social learning through experience, environmental influence or deliberate teaching that the learner go through.


However, Rod Ellis (1989) in his book, “Understanding Second Language Acquisition” uses the term interchangeably even though the term “acquisition” refers the process of unconsciously picking up the language through exposure and the term “learning” as the process of conscious study of a second language.


KEY ISSUES


A lot of questions have been raised regarding second language acquisition. What is second language acquisition? How does it occur? How does it happen? And so many other questions that require answers and explanation from the experts of linguistics field. Due to that, a lot of researches have been carried out and finally, the experts managed to come up with many answers that later has become important issues in second language acquisition. Therefore, what are the issues in second language acquisition?


There are many issues in SLA but Ellis (1989) has raised these five important issues that later have been organized into a coherent framework in SLA. The issues are situational factors, linguistic input, learner differences, learner processes and linguistic output as can be seen in the diagram below.


All these factors or issues are interrelated to each other and it will be discussed one by one in this assignment before considering the major issue of concern to a TEYL teacher. A better framework for all these issues is as the following:


SITUATIONAL FACTORS


Situational factors can be defined as the environmental factors that influence the process of second language acquisition. For example, a Malaysian student studying in United States of America will eventually acquire English language effectively due to the constant exposure of the language. Ellis (1989) has identified two types of acquisition related to environmental factors that are naturalistic SLA and classroom SLA. I would like to discuss upon on classroom SLA.


Classroom SLA is the formal instruction in second language learning and this definitely occurred in classroom where a teacher has to teach second language to the learners. From a teacher’s point of view, formal instruction is important in the acquisition of the language. This is because as mentioned by Ellis (1989), formal instruction or classroom SLA could enhance the process of acquiring the second language. In fact, it will accelerate the process if the right device or the right pedagogy is implied in the classroom. Even though that there is a great doubt that formal instruction could help the students to produce the second language effectively, at least the students have managed to acquire the language based on the different skills apart from speaking.


Naturalistic SLA is actually the opposite of classroom SLA. This is because in naturalistic SLA, it is said that there is a “natural” route in acquiring second language and formal instruction would only distort this route. Furthermore, Chomsky (1980) believe that each person in this world is equipped with the innate capacity of learning a language and it is the matter of time for it to be triggered by the environmental factors.


LINGUISTIC INPUT


Wikipedia.com defines input as “a learner direct contact with a language.” In the process of acquiring second language, learner’s most direct information is the target language itself. The more input that the learner gains, the more he knows and learns about the language. The access to the input may be in the form of exposure both in natural setting or formal instruction.


Krashen (1981) introduced The Monitor Model which proposed that a language input should be at the level comprehensible for the learners and this is where, the term “comprehensible input” occurred. In other words, the learner is able to understand the language but is unable to fully understand the input given to them.


In the early stage of SLA, the importance of input is emphasized through the habit formation that involves the process of practice and reinforcement. In the Behaviourist view of learning, the learner is given a great number of practices until the learner manages to achieve the level where he or she has overlearnt or in other words, they could produce the input automatically. Behaviourist views learner as “a language-producing machine” where the success of the learner in acquiring the language is based on the external factors.


However, this notion is criticized by Chomsky (1965) who believes that learner is “the grand initiator”. He believes that input is a trigger that works to activate the internal mental processes in the learner. Unlike the Behaviourist theory that sees input as an external factor.


LEARNER DIFFERENCES


Learner differences have been one of the factors widely discussed in SLA. This is because the learner differences are significant in determining the development of the learner. Some learners could not achieve the level of competency due to these differences. The worst case is when they could not achieve the competency level due to “fossilization” which occurs when the learner feels that he or she has fully acquired the language but at one point, they are still making the same mistakes. “Fossilization” is coined by Larry Selinker (1972) referring to the failure of the second language learner to reach the target language competency.


There are five learner differences as mentioned by Ellis (1989). The key ones are age, aptitude and intelligence, motivation and needs as well as personality and cognitive style. The first difference is age which has been a major discussion among scholars. The language acquisition of adults and children is significant as many researchers have been carried out to determine which learners are superior compared to the other. A general view on language acquisition sees children as better learners compared to the adult. This view is supported by the Critical Period Hypothesis proposing that there is a period when language acquisition takes place naturally and effortlessly. Penfield and Roberts (1959) mention that this critical period is a before puberty period as it is the result of lateralization of the language function in the left hemisphere of the brain. However, this view is doubted due to the lack of empirical research.


The second difference is aptitude and intelligence. Aptitude is defined as the specific ability a learner has in learning a second language. On the other hand, intelligence is defined as the general ability of well we master a whole range of skills, linguistic and non-linguistic. Aptitude is seen as the most important part compared to intelligence because aptitude greatly contributes to the success of second language acquisition.


The third difference is learner motivation and needs. Motivation can be defined as learner’s overall goal or orientation. There are two types of motivation that leads to the success of SLA. The first one is integrative motivation. It is thought that students who are most successful when learning a target language are those who like the people that speak the language, admire the culture and have a desire to become familiar with or even integrate into the society in which the language is used. It is believed that integrative motivation could lead into a native-like pronunciation to the learner.


Another type of motivation is instrumental motivation which refers to the desire to obtain something practical or concrete from the study of a second language. For example, in Malaysian education system, the requirement to enroll in public university is to sit for Malaysian University English Test. Due to that, the learner has to master the four skills of English language that are listening, reading, speaking and writing since the test requires these four skills. Indirectly, the learner tries to learn the language for specific purposes in his or in her life. This instrumental motivation is quite similar to the term “needs” as mentioned earlier.


The last learner difference is personality and cognitive style. It is said that both are important in second language acquisition. However, there is not much of empirical research to prove the notion due to the lack of testing instrument that can measure the truth of the notion.


LEARNER PROCESSES


Learner processes could be divided into two which are cognitive and linguistic strategies. The cognitive strategies are often referred as learner strategies. Tarone (1980) divided the learner strategies into three parts which are learning strategies, production strategies as well as communication strategies.


As for the learning strategies, it is the process where the learner consciously or unconsciously acquires the language through the activities such as memorization, drilling or inferencing. The second strategies can be defined as the process of using the language that he or she has acquired. One example is a Malay student trying to write a short story in English language which has never been done before. These production strategies involve the process of eliciting task as well as judgment towards the language that he or she uses. The last part of learning strategies is the communication strategies. The learner attempts to communicate in the second language but could not fully produce the language effectively due to lack of linguistic knowledge.


As for the linguistic strategies, it is the process involving universal principles of grammar with the learner is innately endowed. Chomsky proposes that there is “language acquisition device”. Since the natural languages consist of highly abstract and complex rules, it is difficult for a learner to acquire certain languages without the innate principles that comprise Universal Grammar or UG. Cook (1985) defines Universal Grammar as “the properties inherent in the human mind”. In other words, Universal Grammar is widely accepted and its principles are suitable for all the natural languages.


LINGUISTIC OUTPUT


Linguistic output is in contrast of linguistic input as I have mentioned before. In linguistic output, it refers to the language produce by the learner. In linguistic output, the aspect of errors is emphasized. This is because errors are the most important source of determining the developmental level of a learner. This is the reason why Error Analysis occurred in the first place. The needs to determine the level of learner’s linguistic output has made this theory as one of the most important theories in SLA.


Errors could be systematic and non-systematic. This is related to the theory of interlanguage that sees errors as systematic and non-systematic variability. However, systematic variability has gained more attention from the scholars compared to non- systematic variability. In systematic variability which is related to issue of contextual variation of language-learner language, contextual variation is divided into two which are linguistic context and situational context. In linguistic context, errors occur when the learner produces errors in more complex sentences. As for the situational context, the learner is able to produce language effectively at certain situations. However, when the the learner is pressured to communicate instantly, they are unable to produce the correct output and tend to make errors.

MAJOR ISSUE CONCERNING TO TEYL TEACHER


After defining and discussing each factor and relating the factors to the issue, I have decided on one issue that I feel is a major concern to TEYL teacher. The issue that I have chosen is situational factors. The reason why I choose situational factors is because it comprises all the issues related to SLA. Based on my readings, situational factors are seen as the most influential factor in the aspect of linguistic input and the strategies used by the learner.


Ellis (1985) mentions that situational factors involve the external factor of second language acquisition which is the environment. As a teacher, I feel that it is my responsibility to carry out my lesson based on the environment. For example, if I were to be posted to rural areas in any parts of the world, I would have to change my way of teaching according to the level of the students. I could not teach English language to rural students like how I teach the city students. This is because rural area students are usually lack of exposure to the language and their low socioeconomic background disables them from learning the language or being highly exposed to it. Therefore, it is my responsibility to ensure that they are able to learn the language bit by bit.


Ellis also mentions that there are two major types of acquisition which are naturalistic SLA and classroom SLA. I realize that there have been many discussions and debates regarding the effectiveness of acquiring second language in these two types of acquisition. It is said that naturalistic SLA is a better way to learn second language due to the rich exposure of the language and the learner that learns through this way has internalized the language. Compared to classroom SLA, the language that the learner learns in this way is said to be limited. This is because the learner would only learn the language in a classroom setting and they tend to forget what they have learnt when they go back to other informal environments.
However, Ellis argued that the differences between these two should not be overemphasized. He suggested that it should be treated in the same manner. This is because the provided input given to the students is almost the same. The factor that differentiates them is the interaction that occurs. Naturalistic SLA might not be as good as the classroom SLA but still it is an important factor to be considered. Krashen (1976) comments that in a classroom, the learner go through a genuine communication process where in a naturalistic environment, the learner is engaged to the formal study.


As a teacher, I realize that my time of teaching is very limited and it needs a lot of sacrifice if I want my students to succeed in learning English language. As Krashen mentions above, in a classroom, the learner would go through a genuine communication process. Due to this, I would encourage my students to speak up in the class. Since I will be teaching primary school students, I feel that in this situation, my approach to teaching English should suit my learner’s needs. I would approach my students through the approach of Total Physical Response as this approach could be fun and it involves the students’ physical movement. Hopefully, through this approach, they would be able to acquire the language effectively.


CONCLUSION


In conclusion, all the factors as well as the key issues are important in determining our action in teaching and learning of second language. However, in my point of view, situational factors are very important since it comprises all the other factors in second language acquisition. Situational factors help us as teachers to come up with the best method in teaching the second language. Hopefully, through the many researches to come, we would be able to be better teachers to our students in helping them acquiring the language.



BIBLIOGRAPHY


Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press

Cook, V. (1985). Universal Grammar and Second Language Learning. Great Britain: Harper Colin Pubications.

Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. Washington D.C: McGraw Hill

Penfield, W. & Roberts, L. (1959). Speech and Brain Mechanism. New York: Atheneum Press

Krashen, S. (1976). Formal and Informal Linguistic Environment. Oxford: Pergamon Press

Tarone, E, (1980). Communication Strategies, Foreign Talk and Repair in Interlanguage. TESOL: Washington D.C

Second Language Acquisition. Surf on 19 February 2009, from Wikipedia.com

Theories of Language Learning: Key Issues, Central Topics and Basic Approaches. Surf on 15 February 2009, from http://wuhpnet.googlepages.com/sla