Description
This book focuses on a number of contemporary mainstream theories in second language acquisition (SLA) research that have generated attention among scholars. For several decades, the field of SLA has struggled with the nature of theories, what they are, and what would be an “acceptable” theory of SLA. Indeed, the present volume draws on one particular publication by Michael Long in a special issue of the TESOL Quarterly from 1990 devoted to the construction of a theory in SLA. In that article, Long discussed the nature of what a theory needs to be in SLA and also summarized the research to establish “the least” a theory of SLA needs to explain. We borrow from Long’s article in our first chapter to outline the challenges to contemporary theories and list 10 observations that need to be accounted for on theoretical grounds.
One might ask why there are so many “competing” theories in SLA at this point. Why isn’t there just one theory that accounts for SLA? What is it about SLA that invites a diffusion of theoretical perspectives? To understand this, one might consider the parable about the four blind men and the elephant. These sightless men chance upon a pachyderm for the first time and one, holding its tail, says, “Ah! The elephant is very much like a rope.” The second one has wrapped his arms around a giant leg and says, “Ah! The elephant is like a tree.” The third has been feeling alongside the elephant’s massive body and says, “Ah! The elephant is very much like a wall.” The fourth, having seized the trunk, cries out, “Ah! The elephant is very much like a snake.” For us, SLA is a big elephant that researchers can easily look at from different perspectives. SLA is, after all, an incredibly complex set of processes, and if you have been introduced to the field via any of the excellent overviews of SLA, this most likely is your conclusion. Thus, researchers have grabbed onto different parts of the elephant as a means of coming to grips with the complex phenomenon. This does not mean, however, that researchers and scholars have gone poking around SLA blindly and without thought; the present chapters should convince you otherwise. Unlike the blind men of our fable, researchers grasp that to understand the whole of SLA, they may need to concentrate on the smaller parts first. In the end, we may even need multiple complementary theories to account for different observed phenomena of SLA. As you complete the readings in your book, you might ask yourself, “Just what part of the elephant is each theory examining?”
The present book came about as a perceived need to have a comprehensive yet readily accessible set of readings for the beginning student of SLA. Each of us has taught introductory courses on SLA to students in TESOL and applied linguistics, and we have felt that a good introduction to theories is beneficial. At the same time, we know that it is easy for authors who don’t work in a particular theory to reduce the theory to the point of students misinterpreting it or to misinterpret the theory themselves and pass on this misinterpretation to students. To this end, we decided that a collection of chapters written by the experts who work in the theories would best suit our needs as well as those of our students. We are pleased to present this volume for the beginning student of SLA.
Since the publication of the first edition of this book, the field has continued to develop, incorporating insights from theories and research methods from other fields. In response to some of these developments, we have added two new theories to the original set in the first volume. However, it is important to be clear that this book does not cover all theories of SLA. Notably, it does not cover theories that take “a social turn.” The focus of the original book was on linguistic, psycholinguistic, and cognitive perspectives in SLA, and the second volume has maintained this focus. Since the publication of the first edition, there have been several fine books exploring alternative and, in particular, more social perspectives on SLA. We believe that they complement the current volume.