Explicit Knowledge and Second Language Learning and Pedagogy
- PDF / 102,389 Bytes
- 11 Pages / 439.37 x 663.307 pts Page_size
- 30 Downloads / 232 Views
EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING AND PEDAGOGY
INTRODUCTION
The role of explicit knowledge in the learning of a second language (L2) is highly controversial (see also Sharwood Smith, Morphological and Syntactic Awareness in Foreign/Second Language Learning, Volume 6). Three different positions can be identified: 1. The non-interface position: Krashen (1981) has argued that implicit and explicit knowledge are entirely distinct, involving separate mental processes and storage. He also claims that explicit knowledge does not convert into implicit knowledge. 2. The strong interface position: DeKeyser (1998) claims that L2 knowledge commences in declarative form and is then changed into procedural form through communicative practice. According to this position, then, explicit knowledge can convert into implicit knowledge. 3. The weak-interface position: R. Ellis (1993) proposes that explicit knowledge functions primarily as a facilitator of the processes involved in the acquisition of implicit knowledge. Not surprisingly, proponents of these positions offer very different pedagogical recommendations. Krashen argues that instruction should be directed primarily at implicit knowledge by ensuring learners have access to ‘comprehensible input’. DeKeyser proposes that declarative rules of grammar are taught and then practised under real-operating conditions (i.e. in communicative tasks). R. Ellis suggests that the teaching of explicit and implicit knowledge be kept separate, with explicit knowledge taught through consciousness-raising tasks and implicit knowledge catered for by means of task-based teaching. In the next section, the two types of knowledge will be defined. The major contributors to work on implicit/explicit knowledge in the field of L2 studies are then identified. Following this are reviews of a number of studies that have investigated L2 learners’ implicit and explicit knowledge. Pedagogical directions are then briefly discussed. Finally, problems in investigating and teaching explicit knowledge and future directions are considered.
J. Cenoz and N. H. Hornberger (eds), Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 2nd Edition, Volume 6: Knowledge about Language, 143–153. #2008 Springer Science+Business Media LLC.
144
ROD ELLIS E A R LY D E V E L O P M E N T S : D E F I N I N G I M P L I C I T AND EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE
The terms implicit and explicit knowledge refer respectively to ‘knowledge of language’ and ‘knowledge about language’. It is important to distinguish implicit/explicit learning and implicit/explicit knowledge (Schmidt, 1994); the former refers to a product—the knowledge that exists in the mind of the learner—whereas the latter refers to a process—how L2 knowledge is internalized. The focus of this article is second language (L2) knowledge. According to Bialystok (1990), implicit L2 knowledge is typically manifest in some form of naturally occurring language behavior (e.g. conversation) and cannot easily be accessed separately from this behavior. It is ‘unanalysed’. Similarly, Mathews et
Data Loading...
