Theories On Second Language Acquisition English Language Essay

Theories On Second Language Acquisition English Language Essay Several studies have revealed how dynamics in cultural identity influenced the learning of a second language (Graham Brown, 1996; McCarthy, Giardina, Harewood, Park, 2003). The process of language learning itself is socially and culturally constructed (Norton-Piece Toohey, 2001). How social formations, individual identities, and interpretations belonging to a particular culture is crucial to the development of language. Culture As defined by Brown (2007), culture is the ideas, customs, skills, arts, and tools that characterize a given group of people in a given period of time (p. 380). A more comprehensive definition of culture developed by DÃ ­az-Rico and Weed (2006) views it as: The explicit and implicit patterns for living, the dynamic system of commonly agreed upon symbols and meanings, knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, customs, behaviors, traditions, and/or habits that are shared and make up the total way of life of a people, as negotiated by individuals in the process of constructing a personal identity. (p. 233) This definition highlights the fact that culture is a dynamic, instead of static process and is neither something to be memorized nor a program that can be encoded to dictate behavior. The process of learning a new language while being immersed in a new culture involves cultural conflict and reconciliation of that conflict in order to come to terms with the host culture. Learning a second language even demands of an individual to take on a new identity (Guiora, 1995, p. 145). As a consequence, ones basic sense of self and confidence in ones abilities are challenged in this process of developing a new identity to cope with the acquisition of a new language. This process is called acculturation, generally referred to as the act of adjusting to a new culture. Acculturation There have been different models to explain the role of acculturation in the acquisition of a second language. Many authors have suggested that acculturation need not mean the eradiction of the old culture itself. Acculturation is adapt[ing] to a second culture without necessarily giving up ones first culture (Diaz-Weed, 2007, p. 246). This is contrary to the view that acculturation is synonymous to assimilation (total absorption into the new culture) or accommodation (mutual adjustment of cultures). Absorbing particular domains of a new society does not mean total surrender of the old or the zero-sum trade off (Berry, 1997, p. 34). Degrees of acculturation could be in four levels: integration (positive relationship to new and old), assimilation (relinquishing old, embracing new), segregation (retaining old, rejecting new), and marginalization (relinquishing old and new) (Berry, 1997). Theories on Second Language Acquisition The earliest research on second language acquisition (SLA) have been motivation studies which hypothesized that motivation is the fundamental factor toward SLA. Founded on the work of Robert Gardner and Wallace Lambert, the relationship of motivation and SLA have been helpful in understanding how the social and cultural environments of L2 learners shape their attitudes and motivations toward the L2, its culture, and L2 speakers (Gardner, 1979, 1980). These studies have pointed out that as a consequence, learners display behaviors which could either promote or impede their SLA outcomes (Gardner, 1979). Motivation for learning an L2 is divided by Gardner into two components: instrumental and integrative motivation. Instrumental motivation concerns an individuals primary concern for linguistic growth, apart from social goals in SLA (Gardner, 1979, 1983, 1988; Gardner Lambert, 1959, 1972). Integrative motivation refers to an individuals willingness and interest in promoting L2 acquisiti on through social interactions with members of the L2 group (Gardner Lambert, 1959, 1972; Gardner, 1979, 1983, 1988). Instrumental motivation is suggested by Gardner and Lambert to have a primary role in learning of the L2, while integrative motivation is depicted playing a lesser, supporting role (Gardner, 1979, 1983, 1988; Gardner, Tremblay Masgoret, 1997; Gardner Lambert, 1972). Many theorists have criticized motivation studies as not sufficiently explaining the role of acculturation in SLA. According to Brown (1980, 2007), second language learners are optimally suited to learn the Culture and SLA second language when certain conditions of acculturation are met. Specifically, the optimal period is when learners are in the third stage of acculturation and also see themselves as outside of both their native culture and the second culture. Schumann (1986) claims that acculturation, or the integration of the L2 learner into the target linguistic community, is not a direct cause of second language acquisition (SLA), but rather it is the first in a chain of factors which results in natural SLA. He proposes that acculturation as a remote cause brings the learner into contact with TL-speakers and verbal interaction with those speakers as a proximate cause brings about the negotiation of appropriate input which then operates as the immediate cause of language acquisition (p. 385). Acculturation (made up of social and affective variables) is the causal varibale of SLA. That is, if learners acculturate, they will learn; if learners do not acculturate, they will not learn. Acculturation initiates a chain reaction including contact in the middle and acquisition as its outcome. Schumanns (1986) acculturation model includes seven social variables (1. social dominance, 2. assimilation, preservation, and adaptation, 3. enclosure, 4. cohesiveness and size, 5. congruence, 6. attitude, 7. intended length of residence) and four affective variables (1. language shock, 2. culture shock, 3. ego permeability, and 4. motivation) which presumably affect the quantity and quality of contact that second language learners have with the target language community, thus affecting SLA. Schumann argues that the degree to which a learner acculturates to the TL group will control the degree to which he acquires the second language (Schumann, 1978, p. 34), but he makes his claim only for the context of natural SLA, i.e., where learning takes place in the environment where the L2 is spoken and without direct language instruction (1986, p. 385). Language proficiency and acculturation There has been a dearth in empirical studies that examined the impact of a learners degree of acculturation on language proficiency or acquisition. Extant studies have however suggested that acculturation and language acquisition have a positive relationship. Acculturation is a more significant determinant in language proficiency than motivation or attitudes, as evidenced by Clements (1986) study. Clement (1986) showed how the interplay of motivation, individual attitudes and degree of acculturation result to SLA proficiency in quantitative cross-sectional study. In a correlational research conducted in a bilingual Canadian university, students were asked to fill up questionnaires that assessed ethnolinguistic vitality, motivation, and attitudes. Moreover, interviews were conducted among respondents to evaluate their proficiency in spoken English as a second language. Minority group members exhibited more self-confidence in their skill of speaking English as a second language and were also judged to be more proficient than members of the majority group. The level of acculturation measured by the frequency of L2 use and frequency of contact with L2 speakers was revealed to be functional in language proficiency. Motivation and attitudes tow ard L2 speakers, and L2 culture were not significantly correlated to language proficiency. Friendships and immersion with native English-speaking people is also important in cultivating SLA and proficiency. As shown in Graham and Browns (1996) study in a bilingual community in Mexico, the difference in proficiency among native Spanish speakers in speaking English could be a result of the varying levels of their acculturation to native English speakers. Using Schumanns (1986) acculturation model and variables, the degree of acculturation was measured among native Spanish-speaking households in Colonia Juarez town. To measure language proficiency, an oral proficiency interview was conducted. Native-like English proficiency among native Spanish speakers was attained only by those enrolled in bilingual schools. Their enrollment in the schools proved favorable to their SLA. Moreover, they developed more positive perceptions about the English-speaking community and developed more intimate friendships with their English-speaking peers (Graham Brown, 1996). Degree of acculturation, age, and marital status are also important factors in language proficiency. Lee (2005) investigated the relationship of English proficiency and degree of acculturation in terms of U.S. media consumption. The results revealed that the use of Korean language over the Internet negatively correlated with acculturation. Those that did not use English when consuming and participating in Internet-based communication were less proficient in speaking English than those that used English frequently. Moreover, younger and single Koreans were more proficient in speaking English than older and married Koreans due to their higher levels of U.S. media consumption (Lee, 2005). Lees study is consistent with the findings from Jiang et al. (2009) which found that greater degrees of immersion in American society leads to higher proficiency in the English language. Jiang et al. (2009) studied acculturation and Enlighs proficiency by studying an older Chinese-English population. Correlational analyses revealed a strong relationship between the degree of immersion in the dominant society and proficiency in oral English. Nevertheless, while speaking proficiency was found to be correlated with acculturation, accents were not.

Essay --

Income inequality can be defined as the difference of distribution of assets, wealth, and income between the populations. The term income inequality refers to the inequality among persons within a society. The topic is commonly debated, and the liberties and rights of people are often brought into the debate being made. In America, it has been said that â€Å"The 400 richest people in the United States have more wealth than the bottom 150 million put together† leading the reader to believe there is a huge inequality problem that is only growing wider. There is no doubt that the income gap in America is growing, with the middle class taking home 9% less than they had in 1999, but I feel that the government does not have the obligation to lessen the gap between rich and poor. There is no doubt that the economic ladder is growing farther and farther apart and the rungs of this ladder are becoming harder and harder to climb, however, the government does not hold the obligation to lessen the gap. The UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that equality and liberty will be protected...

Business Documents Essay

English editing (or re-writing) can cause discomfort, because it often reveals hidden weaknesses in the original document. But companies willing to accept the treatment and put in any work necessary will produce a document that shines. By turning existing, long-winded and inaccessible text into clear writing, plain English can shine an uncomfortably bright light on flaws in the original content that would otherwise remain unnoticed. The reality is that in many businesses, a lot of very talented and experienced professionals can spend an awful lot of time doing fantastic research and work only to produce a document that fails dismally to do them credit. Why do all that work if the final report, which may be so critical, simply isn’t fit for purpose? Companies and organisations are increasingly recognising that the reports they produce need to read clearly. They recognise that the text needs to be in plain English. The author is not the reader. Putting the text through the plain English editing process can polish text until it shines with clarity. That’s great if the bones of the report, the facts and figures and findings etc, are already solid. But sometimes, the editing process itself can throw up uncomfortable questions. It reveals flaws in original document, highlights waffle, questions in-house jargon, and draws attention to unsubstantiated claims. And that’s when a businesses’ true grit shows. ‘Your editing highlighted the fact that there were holes in just about every paragraph,’ one client told me. ‘The plain English showed us just how many gaps we need to fill before we can send the report to our client. ’

What (or Who) Killed the Planets Big Mammals

Megafaunal extinctions refers to the documented die-off of large-bodied mammals (megafauna) from all over our planet at the end of the last ice age, at about the same time as the human colonization of the last, farthest-flung regions out of Africa. The mass extinctions were neither synchronous nor universal, and the reasons proffered by researchers for those extinctions include (but are not limited to) climate change and human intervention. Key Takeaways: Megafaunal Extinctions Megafaunal extinctions occur when a preponderance of large-bodied mammals seem to die off at the same time.There have been six megafaunal extinctions on our planet during the Late PleistoceneThe most recent fell between 18,000–11,000 years ago in South America, 30,000–14,000 in North America, and 50,000–32,000 years ago in Australia.  These periods occur when the continents were first inhabited by humans, and when climate changes were occurring.It seems likely that rather than being caused by a particular occurrence, all three things (megafaunal extinctions, human colonization, and climate change) acted together to bring environmental change to the continents.   The Late Pleistocene megafaunal extinctions occurred during the Last Glacial–Interglacial Transition (LGIT), essentially the last 130,000 years, and it affected mammals, birds, and reptiles. There have been other, much earlier mass extinctions, impacting animals and plants alike. The five largest mass extinction events in the past 500 million years (mya) occurred at the end of the Ordovician (443 ma), the Late Devonian (375–360 mya), the end of the Permian (252 mya), the end of the Triassic (201 mya) and the end of the Cretaceous (66 mya). Pleistocene Era Extinctions Before early modern humans left Africa to colonize the rest of the world, all of the continents were already populated by a large and diverse animal population, including our hominid cousins, Neanderthals, Denisovans, and Homo erectus. Animals with body weights greater than 100 pounds (45 kilograms), called megafauna, were abundant. Extinct elephant, horse, emu, wolves, hippos: the fauna varied with the continent, but most of them were plant-eaters, with few predator species. Almost all of these megafauna species are now extinct; almost all of the extinctions occurred around the time of the colonization of those regions by early modern humans. A replica statue of the extinct Mylodon ground sloth which inhabited the south of the Chilean and Argentinian Patagonia, inside a cave in the Torres del Paine national park which was home to the pre-historic creature. Germà ¡n Vogel / Getty Images Before migrating far from Africa, early modern humans and Neanderthals co-existed with megafauna in Africa and Eurasia for several tens of thousands of years. At the time, most of the planet was in steppe or grassland ecosystems, maintained by megaherbivores, massive vegetarians that impeded the colonization of trees, trampled and consumed saplings, and cleared and broke down the organic matter. Seasonal aridity influenced the availability of rangelands, and climate change involving increases in moisture is documented for the late Pleistocene, which is believed to have exerted extinction pressure on megafaunal rangeland grazers by altering, fragmenting and in some cases replacing the steppes with forests. Climate change, migration of humans, extinction of megafauna: which came first? Which Came first? Despite what you may have read, it is not clear which of these forces—climate change, human migration, and megafaunal extinctions—caused the others, and it is very likely that the three forces worked together to re-sculpt the planet. When our earth became colder, the vegetation changed, and animals that did not adapt rapidly died out. Climate change may well have driven human migrations. People moving into new territories as new predators might have had negative effects on the existing fauna, through overkill of a particularly easy animal prey, or the spread of new diseases. But it must be remembered that the loss of the mega-herbivores also drove climate change. Enclosure studies have shown that large-bodied mammals such as elephants suppress woody vegetation, accounting for 80% of woody plant loss. The loss of large numbers of browsing, grazing, and grass-eating mega-mammals certainly led or added to the decrease of open vegetation and habitat mosaics, the increased occurrence of fire, and the decline of co-evolved plants. Long-term effects on seed dispersion continue to affect plant species distributions for thousands of years. This co-occurrence of humans in migration, climate change, and animal die-off is the most recent time in our human history where climate change and human interactions together re-designed the living palette of our planet. Two areas of our planet are the primary focus of the studies of Late Pleistocene megafaunal extinctions: North America and Australia, with some studies continuing in South America and Eurasia. All of these areas were subject to massive changes in temperature, including the variable presence of glacial ice, and plant and animal life; each sustained the arrival of a new predator in the food chain; each saw related decreases and reconfiguration of the available animal and plants. Evidence collected by archaeologists and paleontologists in each of the areas tells a slightly different story. North America Earliest human colonization: 15,000 calendar years ago (cal BP), (pre-Clovis sites)Last glacial maximum: ~30,000–14,000 cal BPYounger Dryas: 12,900–11,550 cal BPImportant sites: Rancho La Brea (California, USA), many Clovis and pre-Clovis sites.Die-off range: 15% disappeared during Clovis and the Younger Dryas overlap, 13.8–11.4 cal BPSpecies: ~35, 72% of megafauna, including dire wolf (Canis dirus), coyotes (C. latrans), and saber-toothed cats (Smilodon fatalis); American lion, short-faced bear (Arctodus simus), brown bear (Ursus arctos), scimitar-tooth sabercat (Homotherium serum), and dhole (Cuon alpinus) While the exact date is still under discussion, it is most likely that humans first arrived in North America no later than about 15,000 years ago, and perhaps as long ago as 20,000 years ago, at the end of the last glacial maximum, when entrance into the Americas from Beringia became feasible. The North and South American continents were rapidly colonized, with populations settled in Chile by 14,500, surely within a few hundred years of the first entry into the Americas. North America lost about 35 genera of mostly large animals during the Late Pleistocene, accounting for perhaps 50% of all mammal species larger than 70 lbs (32 kg), and all species larger than 2,200 lbs (1,000 kg). The ground sloth, American lion, dire wolf, and short-faced bear, wooly mammoth, mastodon and Glyptotherium (a large bodied armadillo) all disappeared. At the same time, 19 genera of birds disappeared; and some animals and birds made radical changes in their habitats, permanently changing their migration patterns. Based on pollen studies, plant distributions also saw a radical change primarily between 13,000 to 10,000 calendar years ago (cal BP). Between 15,000 and 10,000 years ago, biomass burning gradually increased, particularly at the movements of rapid climate change at 13.9, 13.2, and 11.7 thousand years ago. These changes are not currently identified with specific changes in human population density or with the timing of the megafaunal extinction, but that doesnt necessarily mean that they are unrelated—the effects of the loss of large-bodied mammals on vegetation are very long-lasting. Australian Evidence Earliest human colonization: 45,000–50,000 cal BPImportant sites: Darling Downs, Kings Creek, Lynchs Crater (all in Queensland); Mt Cripps and Mowbray Swamp (Tasmania), Cuddie Springs and Lake Mungo (New South Wales)Die-off range: 122,000–7,000 years ago; at least 14 Mammalian genera and 88 species between 50,000–32,000 cal BPSpecies: Procoptodon (giant short-faced kangaroo), Genyornis newtoni, Zygomaturus, Protemnodon, sthenurine kangaroos and T. carnifex In Australia, several studies of megafaunal extinctions have been conducted of late, but the results of them are contradictory and conclusions must be considered controversial today. One difficulty with the evidence is that the human entrada into Australia occurred so much longer ago than that of the Americas. Most scholars agree that humans reached the Australian continent at least as long as 50,000 years ago; but evidence is sparse, and radiocarbon dating ineffective for dates older than 50,000 years old. Genyornis newtoni, Zygomaturus, Protemnodon, sthenurine kangaroos and T. carnifex all disappeared at or shortly after the human occupation of the Australian mainland. Twenty or more genera of giant marsupials, monotremes, birds, and reptiles were likely wiped out due to the direct intervention of human populations since they can find no connection to climate change. The local decline in diversity began nearly 75,000 years before human colonization, and thus cannot be the result of human intervention. South America Less scholarly research concerning the mass extinctions in South America has been published, at least in the English-language academic press. However, recent investigations suggest that the extinction intensity and timing varied across the South American continent, beginning in the northern latitudes several thousand years before the human occupation, but becoming more intense and rapid in the southern higher latitudes, after humans arrived. Further, the pace of extinction seems to have accelerated about 1,000 years after the humans arrived, coinciding with regional cold reversals, the South American equivalent of Younger Dryas. Some scholars have noted patterns of stadial/interstadial differences between North and South America, and have concluded that although there is no evidence for the blitzkrieg model—that is to say, mass-killing by humans--the human presence in combination with the rapid expansion of forests and environmental changes seems to have led to the collapse of the megafaunal ecosystem within a few hundred years. Earliest human colonization: 14,500 cal BP (Monte Verde, Chile)Last glacial maximum: 12,500-11,800 cal BP, in PatagoniaCold Reversal (Roughly equivalent to the Younger Dryas): 15,500-11,800 cal BP (Varies across the continent)Important sites: Lapa da Escrivà ¢nia 5(Brazil), Campo La Borde (Argentina), Monte Verde (Chile), Pedra Pintada (Brazil), Cueva del Milodà ³n, Fells Cave (Patagonia)Die-off: 18,000 to 11,000 cal BPSpecies: 52 genera or 83% of all megafauna; Holmesina, Glyptodon, Haplomastodon, prior to human colonization; Cuvieronius, Gomphotheres, Glossotherium, Equus, Hippidion, Mylodon, Eremotherium and Toxodon about 1,000 years after initial human colonization; Smilodon, Catonyx, Megatherium, and Doedicurus, late Holocene Recently, evidence of the survival of several species of giant ground sloth has been discovered in the West Indies, to as late as 5,000 years ago, coincident with the arrival of humans in the region. Selected Sources Barnosky, Anthony D., et al. Variable Impact of Late-Quaternary Megafaunal Extinction in Causing Ecological State Shifts in North and South America. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113.4 (2016): 856–61.  DeSantis, Larisa R. G., et al. Dietary Responses of Sahul (Pleistocene Australia–New Guinea) Megafauna to Climate and Environmental Change. Paleobiology 43.2 (2017): 181–95.  Galetti, Mauro, et al. Ecological and Evolutionary Legacy of Megafauna Extinctions. Biological Reviews 93.2 (2018): 845–62.  Metcalf, Jessica L., et al. Synergistic Roles of Climate Warming and Human Occupation in Patagonian Megafaunal Extinctions During the Last Deglaciation. Science Advances 2.6 (2016).  Rabanus-Wallace, M. Timothy, et al. Megafaunal Isotopes Reveal Role of Increased Moisture on Rangeland During Late Pleistocene Extinctions. Nature Ecology Evolution 1 (2017): 0125.  Tà ³th, Anikà ³ B., et al. Reorganization of Surviving Mammal Communitie s after the End-Pleistocene Megafaunal Extinction. Science 365.6459 (2019): 1305–08.  van der Kaars, Sander, et al. Humans Rather Than Climate the Primary Cause of Pleistocene Megafaunal Extinction in Australia. Nature Communications 8 (2017): 14142.