Learning Another Language Such as English To Survive in a Globalized World

Learning Another Language Such as English To Survive in a Globalized World To Survive in a Globalized World The age of globalization is upon us. This means that people from different cultures have opportunities to interact with each other, thus, they need to find ways to communicate better. Learning a second language on top of their native one may be one step in reaching out to people from another culture.Advertising We will write a custom research paper sample on Learning Another Language Such as English To Survive in a Globalized World specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Parents are now becoming more keen in letting their young children learn second, third and even multiple languages to prepare them for the competition they have to face in the world when they grow up. Children’s television shows such as Dora, the Explorer and Sesame Street are very popular, because these shows feature learning words in another language other than the child’s first language. Young children find exposure to more l anguages at an early age due to the encouragement of multicultural education. English has become the global language for businesses world wide, so many people from foreign countries engage in learning it as a second language. However, several issues have come up regarding linguistic diversity. Educators need to investigate and understand these issues so that they can better design second language learning strategies to implement in their multicultural classes. This paper will investigate language learning and discuss concepts, principles, theories and methods in learning language, specifically a second language. It will also discuss how learning a second language affects the first language as well as determine if age is a factor in learning a new language or if strategies employed in the learning of the language can override the age factor. This is in consideration of more and more adults wanting to learn a second language for their own benefit. Language Acquisition and Development Language acquisition and development has been a point of keen interest of educators, psychologists and researchers that numerous studies have been done to unveil more knowledge about it.There have been many theories conceptualized as to how language is acquired by human beings. A great deal of a child’s acquisition of linguistic structure occurs during the first five years of life. This is the period when he is most active in discerning a set of underlying organizational principles of language from the expression that surrounds him. It is amazing how at a very young age, he is capable of abstracting meaning from direct experience with other language users depending on his own context.Advertising Looking for research paper on linguistics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Beaty (2009) explains that even at an infant stage, the baby’s early nonverbal communication helps in preparing her for the spoken and w ritten language to follow and at 6 months, she has become a language specialist, based on the sounds she hears most frequently. At 20 months, she may possess a sizable vocabulary if she hears adults around her talk to one another and to her all the time. Of course good hearing and sensitive listening are paramount to language development. According to Lightbrown Spada (1999), like the first language, â€Å"learner’s age is one of the characteristics which determine the way in which an individual approaches second language learning.† (68). Language has four elements, and these elements have related skills necessary to develop a proficiency in language. According to Larsen-Freeman (1986), the natural order that children follow when learning their native language in terms of skill acquisition is: listening, speaking, reading and writing. Crucial to the development of teaching approaches is an understanding of such processes involved in language use. Learning of language and literacy is very much interrelated. With young children, it is essential that the learning approaches in teaching literacy be selected appropriately. Educators use different approaches to help children become literate: Whole language approach: emphasizes a holistic, meaning-based and context-based approach in linking printed text with spoken language. Little attention is paid to specific or isolated skills and limited emphasis is placed on the role of focused practice. Language and literacy are viewed as integrated systems, and specific components of language such as sounds of each letter are not learned in isolation (Norris Hoffman, 1993). Phonetic approach: emphasizes phonological awareness training value the provision of specific and focused opportunities to practice segmenting words into phonemes, blending phonemes into words and learning to rhyme. Natural literacy: expands the concept of emergent literacy by emphasizing the role of interactions with adults or more competent peers in a child’s learning experiences. Although the whole language approach and the phonetic approach seem to be opposing camps, there is good reason to suggest an integration of both for more effective literacy development. Watkins Bunce (1996) gives the rationale: â€Å"On the one hand, because the process of literacy acquisition occurs through natural, meaningful experiences with print and reading, these experiences should play a role in efforts to facilitate such skills. On the other hand, because phonological awareness contributes to early reading achievement, some focus on particular phonological awareness abilities appears warranted. Thus, a rationale exists for integrating whole language and phonological awareness perspectives in attempts to promote literacy proficiency in young children.† (n.p.) The activities teachers of young children should plan for them should comply to the requirements necessary to meet the developmental needs of young chi ldren in terms of their language and literacy development. Not only should children be literate, but they should also become good communicators in the future especially if they are exposed to more of developmentally-appropriate activities in their very young age.Advertising We will write a custom research paper sample on Learning Another Language Such as English To Survive in a Globalized World specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Otto (2010) differentiates language acquisition and language learning as thus: in language acquisition, a child learns language unconsciously in a natural way because he needs to understand meaning. On the other hand, in language learning, a child consciously learns rules in formal instruction in learning a language. Emphasis here is on the form of the language. Vygotsky (1962, as mentioned in Clay, 1998) emphasizes the value of children’s talk and their growing ability to articulate their understanding of their world orally and in writing. Taking part in negotiating meanings is part of the educational process, and Vygotsky believes that just being with others helps children learn. Benson McMullen (1998) agrees that children’s collaboration with their peers in problem-solving sessions encourages listening to each other’s ideas and in turn, express their own thoughts clearly. The varied ideas on dealing with problems evolve in group discussions making children understand that there may be more than one solution to a problem. It also prompts children to negotiate with others which solution to try. Adults play a huge role in the language development of children, as they need someone who uses simple language in correct form and is flexible enough adjust his language to suit the child’s (Clay, 1988). Lindfors (1987) notes that the child’s language environment includes a set of specific sentences, however, it is not this set of sentences that he acquires, but deduces from these an underlying set of organizational principles and sound-meaning relationships. To illustrate, children as young as two do not talk by simply using the specific sentences they hear, but rather, they construct sentences according to their own early version of organized principles underlying the specific sentences they have heard. Perhaps due also limited language and motor skills, the child’s early linguistic system is different from the adult’s and results in telegraphic and grammatically erratic sentences like â€Å"He no want to sit me.†, â€Å"I not like it†, and â€Å"He gived it to me.†Advertising Looking for research paper on linguistics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Over time, his language system will be revised in many different situations, and his sentences will become more adults of story themes are protagonists who dealt with race issues and children who solved problems successfully. Lesson plans should incorporate culturally relevant ideas in each diverse classroom (Edwards Kuhlman, 2007). For children learning a second language at an earlier age, it is important that their cultural background will not be discounted, as it makes up so much of their personhood. CBI strategies that are known it widely include content in its teaching strategies should focus more on the culture the learner comes from along with the culture of the second language he or she is learning. Having a good second language teacher is essential to learning the language more fluently. I do not discount the fact that imitation of proper pronunciation and intonation is necessary. Hence, learners should have attentive ears and retentive minds, and of course, cooperative to ngues to be able to speak fluently in such language. I also believe they need opportunities to practice speaking and listening to the second language outside the language lessons, so that means they need a support system of learners to interact with. I agree with the behaviorists’ concept of language learning through imitation, repetition and reinforcement; socioculturalists’ concept of social influence in language learning and Ausubel’s need for meaning in order to learn language. Thus, it makes sense that I would lean towards the communicative approach in second language learning. For me, it is more practical and user-friendly. I am not restricted to just learning the second language exclusively, but I am given freedom to refer to my native language for meaning. I also get to engage in meaningful activities that would make me appreciate the language better. I do not agree with â€Å"getting it right the beginning† because I see the value in making mista kes. I know they do not have to remain mistakes because the lesson is that they need to be corrected and stay corrected the more I get proficient with the language. I liken it to a child first learning how to write. To correct her in her attempts at writing and spelling may discourage her from exploring her own learning capacities and may just stifle her motivation and quit. I believe, this affects her self-esteem and confidence. However, when she feels liberated to explore writing, she will be more interested and passionate about getting it right that she would initiate asking if what she wrote was correct or not. She will come to a point that she would welcome corrections from adults to set her in the straight and proper path. I believe there is richer learning in this process rather than just being spoonfed information to memorize by rote. For me, meaning is more important than form. My beliefs in second language learning is happily validated by the research literature. Although the many theories I have discussed have different points, I derive what I think best suits my own philosophy. I agree with the sociocultural perspective of learning through interactions with others. A supportive environment will prop up beginning learners to reach their goals. I also believe that people have different learning styles. Some may be content with the traditional ways of listening to a teacher and regurgitating back information to her. For these students, the oral and aural learning styles are preferred. The study of learning styles have unearthed other styles which might have been considered unorthodox in the past. There are kinesthetic learners, who learn through actions and movement. It is fortunate that there are now learning approaches that cater to such learners who provide more active learning activities such as singing, games, dancing, interactive activities, etc. and not restricted to paper and pencil tasks and board work. I believe I am a more experiential lear ner, and teaching-learning methodologies that get me up my chair to actively participate will capture my interest more and make me retain new knowledge and skills better. Activities like dining in a restaurant that serves the food of the country where the language I am studying comes from (ex. French restaurant) and order using that language will be a very fruitful experience from me which would keep me on my toes to use the new language I have learned to good use. Another example is watching a foreign movie with subtitles. I can try watching it by turning the subtitles off and see if I can understand it. If not, then I have the freedom to turn the subtitles back on. I still believe in immersion strategies. Ideally, being in the country where the second language originates will leave the learner no choice but to learn, understand and use the language in order to survive. However, that does not mean that the first language gets pushed down in his psyche and forgotten altogether. It w ill serve as the learner’s anchor to understand the second language better. I also believe that the foreign environment can influence the learning process of the second language with the condition of a proper interaction, where according to the social network theory â€Å"personal relationships an individual shares with others such as relatives, friends, coworkers, and neighbors mediate variable linguistic behavior.† (Mantero, 2007, p. 192). The numerous issues on second language learning, especially English, only prove that it is creating much impact on the development of children from diverse cultures. More and more people consider its advantages and possible disadvantages. Such amount of attention is worth it because people think up of ways on how to maximize its benefits. Learning another language apart from one’s native language helps children be ready to be highly competent in an increasingly globalized world. Ausubel, David. A. , Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rinehart Winston 1968. Babbitt, Marcia. â€Å"Making Writing Count in an ESL Learning Community.† In I. Leki (ed), Academic Writing Programs, Alexandria, VA: TESOL. 2001. Benson McMullen, Mary., Thinking before doing: A giant toddler step on the road to literacy, Young Children, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 65-70. 1998. Bonk, Curtis J. Cunningham, Donald J. â€Å"Searching for Learner-Centered,  Constructivist, and Sociocultural Components of Collaborative Educational  Learning Tools† in Electronic Collaborators. 2011. Web. Brewer, Joan., Introduction to Early Childhood Education, Allyn Bacon, 2001. Brown, H. Douglas., Principles of Language Learning and Teaching, 2nd Ed. NJ: Prentice Hall Regents 1987. Carroll, John B, The Critical Need in the Study of Language. College Composition and  Communication, Vol. 13, No. 3, Annual Meeting, Chicago, (1962), pp. 23-26. Chiswick, Barry R. Miller, Paul W., Language skills and earnings among le galized aliens, Journal of Population Economics, 12: 63-89, 1999. Chomsky, Noam., Aspects of a Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1965. Clay, Marie., By Different Paths to Common Outcomes, Stenhouse Publishers, Maine, pp. 5-32. 1998. Clifford, James.. Travelling culture in L. Grossberg, C. Nelson, and P. Treichler (eds.). Cultural Studies. New York: Routledge. 1992. Crandall, JoAnn. (ed), ESL through Content-Area Instruction, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1987. Curtain, Helena, Haas, Mari. â€Å"Integrating foreign language and content instruction in grades K-8†, 2011. Web. Curtain, Helena, Pesola, Carol Ann Bjornstad, Languages and children: Making the  match, Foreign language instruction for an early start grades K-8., White Plains, NY: Longman, 1994. Doman, Evelyn, â€Å"Current Debates in SLA†, Asian EFL Journal, Vol 7, Issue 4, Art. 8. 2011. Web. Duenas, Maria, A Description of Prototype Models for Content-Based Language  Instruction in Highe r Education, Department of English Studies, University of Murcia, 2002. Echevarria, J. Short, D.J., â€Å"The Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP)†, 2011. Web. Edwards, Sarah Kuhlman, Wilma, Culturally Responsive Teaching: Do We Walk Our Talk?, Multicultural Education, 2007. Ellis, Rod. SLA and language pedagogy. An educational perspective. Studies in Second  Language Acquisition, 19, 69-92. 1997. European Commission, â€Å"An Excellent Way of Making Progress in a Foreign Language† 2011. Web. Herrero, Annabelle H., Content-Based Instruction in an English Oral Communication Course at the University of Costa Rica, Actual Investigations in Education, Vol.5, No. 4, 2005. Kachru, Braj B. The second diaspora of English, In T. W. Machan and C. T. Scotts (eds.), English in its social contexts. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 230– 252, 1992. Kern, R.G., â€Å"Literacy as a New Organizing Principle for Foreign Language Education.† In Reading Betwe en the Lines, New Heaven: Yale University Press, 2002. Kramsch, Claire Sullivan, Patricia, â€Å"Appropriate Pedagogy†, ELT J 50: 199-212, 1996. Larsen-Freeman, Diane, Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford University Press, Inc. 1986. Lenneberg, Eric H.,â€Å"The Capacity for Language Acquisition†, in The Structure of Language, ed. J.A. Fodor and J.J. Katz. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, Inc. 1964. Leon, Edgar, Challenges and Solutions for Educating Migrant Students , ERIC, ED393615, 1996. Lightbown, Patsy M. Spada, Nina, How Languages Are Learned. New York: Oxford University Press. 2006. Lindfors, J.W., Children’s Language and Learning, 2nd Ed. Prentice Hall, Inc. 1987. Lyster, Roy Ranta, Leila, Corrective Feedback And Learner Uptake. SSLA, 20, 37– 66. Mantero, Miguel, Identity and second language learning : culture, inquiry, and dialogic activity in educational contexts. Charlotte, N.C.: IAP. 2007. Merryfield, Merry M., †Å"Institutionalizing cross-cultural experiences and international expertise in teacher education: The development and potential of a global education PDS network†, Journal of Teacher Education, 46(1), 1-9., 1995. Met, M.J.L. Learning Language through Content, Learning Content through Language. Foreign Language Annals 24 (4). (1991). Mohan, B., Language and Content. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1986. Nagata, H. Testing Oral Ability: 1LR am ACTFL Oral Proficiency Interviews.†Ã‚  JALT Applied Materials 12, 1995. Norris, J., Hoffman, P., Whole Language Intervention for School-age  Children. San Diego: Singular Press. 1993. Otto, Beverly. Language development in early childhood. (3rd edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. 2010. Pakir, Anne, Bilingual education with English as an official language: Sociocultural  implications, Georgetown University Round Table On Languages And Linguistics. Georgetown University Press/ Digital Georgetown and the Department of Languages and Linguistics, 1999. Pessoa, S., Hendiy, H., Donato, R., Tucker, G.R., Lee, H., Content-Based Instruction in the Foreign Language Classroom: A Discourse Perspective,  Foreign Language Annals 40 (1) (2007). Platt, John T. (1982) â€Å"Bilingual language policies in a multilingual nation: Singapore†. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, Vol. 5, pp. 17-20. Prodromou, L., â€Å"What culture? Which culture? Cross-cultural factors in language learning†, ELT J 46: 39-50, 1992. Slobin, Dan.I., â€Å"Comments on ‘Developmental Psycholinguistics’†, in The Genesis  of Language: A Psycholinguistic Approach, ed. F. Smith and G. Miller. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1966. Song, Balin, Content-Based ESL Instruction: Long-term Effects and Outcomes, The American University: Elsevier Ltd. , 2005. Stoller, E., Promoting the acquisition of knowledge in a content based course, In J. Crandall D. Kaufman (Eds.), Content-based instruction in higher  educa tion settings (pp. 109-123). Alexandria, VA: TESOL. 2004. Stoller, E, Grabe, W., The six-Ts approach to content-based instruction. In M.Snow D. M. Brinton (Eds.), The content-based classroom: perspectives on  Integrating language and content (pp. 78-94). New York: Addison-Wesley Longman 1997. Stryker, S.N. Leaver, B.L. Content-Based Instruction in Foreign Language Education. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press. 1997. Swain, Merrill Lapkin, Sharon, Task-based second language learning: the uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research 4,3 pp. 251–274, 2000. The IRIS Center for Training Enhancements. (n.d.). â€Å"Cultural and linguistic differences: What teachers should know†. 2011. Web. U.S.ENGLISH Foundation, Inc., â€Å"Language Research: Language in everyday life: The use of language in everyday life, e.g. education, broadcasting, and other†, 2011. Web. Van Lier, Leo., Forks and hope: Pursuing understanding in different ways. Applied  L inguistics,15, 328-347. 1994. Watkins, Ruth. V., Bunce, Betty. H., Promoting language and literacy skills in preschool classrooms. Invited presentation, Kansas Division for Early Childhood, Manhattan 1996. Widdowson, Henry.G.,.The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly 28/2: 377-88, 1994. Yoon, Yeotak T., New Directions for KFL as a Scholarly Discipline, Seoul National University, 2001.