To the appropriate utilization of language. At the

To answer this question, we begin by taking a closer
gander at the crystally clear distinction between acquisition and learning. As
we now know, it was the American professor, Stephen Krashen (1982, p. 10), who
prominently propounded the theory that there is a difference used for
distinction between two independent processes: acquisition and learning. At the
one pole, in a broad definition, ‘Acquisition’ is a subconscious process which
has as a meaning to pick up a language without any formal instruction and
without a sustained conscious effort to learn the language, but through
informal, implicit learning. In the same vein, it is important to note that
once you have acquired something, you’re not always cognizant of the fact that
you have done it, in contrast, it just feels natural; it feels as if it has
always been there.  The fact is the
unconscious can conduce to the acquisition, access, and application of
knowledge without deliberate and controlled attention. To cite one case,
children acquire their first language in this way and become quite proficient
at picking up any language anywhere without tuition. “Children master the intricacies of their native language before they
are able to tie a knot, jump rope, or draw a decent-looking circle.” writes
William O’Grady. For some
unaccountable reason, normally-developing children, even very young ones, have
a marvelous aptitude for acquiring their first language (L1) fluently and
efficiently within a short time, irrespective of any notable conscious effort. To be more precise, early in life children exhibit
great skill or act of comprehending of the phonological, syntactic, and
semantic systems, not to mention of a high degree of communicative competence
in the appropriate utilization of language. At
the same time, it goes without saying that parents, gladdened with the addition
of each successive word, take it for granted that children will acquire their
native language without a hitch courtesy of giving the impression that the
entire process is manageable and straightforward. More
specifically, research in L1 has explicated that children acquire language
spontaneously and as a matter of course through exposure and interaction. As is particularized by Chomsky, the knowledge system
that the child has acquired at the end empowers him/her to have the ability to
comprehend and produce a countless number of sentences which have not been
heard or generated before, and deploy them judiciously in conversations and
other social interactions/contexts. Therefore, this process is called the
creative aspect of language acquisition. Another remarkable detail is that this
complexity or copiousness happens no matter what kind of input the child
receives. It stands to reason that
children vary widely from each other when it comes to their socio-economic
backgrounds and linguistic input they experience, despite these differences,
however, all children end up with comprehensive knowledge of their language
when excluding exceptions. Above
all, it seems pertinent to remember that every child can acquire a language at
any setting, heedless of their background provided that they get exposure to
language use. Moreover, language acquisition takes place sequentially,
beginning with nonsense words in babbling phase, followed by the one-word stage
where the child starts to utter her first single words.
Consecutively, the child opens to produce two-word
expressions either in noun or verb phrase forms when h/she is close to two
years old. We can see then, that the multi-word stage is a relatively brief and
gradual shift from the two-word sentence stage; by and large, it is attained by
age 3, a time children possess an operational grammar, accurate pronunciation,
and enough number of words in their lexicon. Considering these salient
hypotheses, one thing taken into account today in language teaching methodology
is that teachers give pre-eminence to creating an environment in the classroom
which approximates to the “real life” communicative use of language. One might
ask ”what’s all this process in aid of?” I endorse wholeheartedly the opinion
that the process of first language acquisition whereby contributes information
about the nature of language along with other interacting phenomena such as
imitation, mental organization, mental capability, cognition, intelligence,
socialization, association and so forth. The
question of what determinants are responsible for language acquisition is not
so clear-cut as the process itself. According
to the theory of Behaviorism, imitation is the principal determiner of language
acquisition in the form of habit formation, just like any other habit. As
opposed to Behaviorism, the theory of Nativism postulates that every human
being is endowed from birth with an innate capacity for language development
referred to Language Acquisition Device (LAD) which initiated through listening
to speech.

Written by