Scribd
Upload
1K views4 pages

Roger Andersen

The Nativization Model proposed by Roger Andersen seeks to explain how L2 learners create and reorganize their interlanguage systems through interaction with more proficient speakers. The model states that L2 acquisition consists of two processes: nativization, where learners make the input conform to their existing L1 and world knowledge, and denativization, where learners adjust their interlanguage system to fit the input through inferencing strategies. Andersen recognized that these are not separate processes but aspects of the overall acquisition process.

Uploaded by

Lovelyn Maristela
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
1K views4 pages

Roger Andersen

The Nativization Model proposed by Roger Andersen seeks to explain how L2 learners create and reorganize their interlanguage systems through interaction with more proficient speakers. The model states that L2 acquisition consists of two processes: nativization, where learners make the input conform to their existing L1 and world knowledge, and denativization, where learners adjust their interlanguage system to fit the input through inferencing strategies. Andersen recognized that these are not separate processes but aspects of the overall acquisition process.

Uploaded by

Lovelyn Maristela
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Roger Andersen (1979) proposed the Nativization Model which sought an explanation on how

learners create and reorganize their interlanguage systems verbally interacting with more
proficient speakers. It says that L2 acquisition consists of two general processes: nativization
and denativization. Nativization is done when learners make the input based on their knowledge
that they already possess (L1 knowledge and knowledge of the world). In denativization, on the
other hand, learners adjust their interlanguage system to make them fit with the input through
inferencing strategies. Consequently, Andersen (1990) has recognized that these two terms are
not two separate forces but aspects of the same overall process of acquisition.

Such instances are evident in the paper “Don’t Put Your Leg in Your Mouth: Transfer in
the Acquisition of Idioms in a Second Language” by Suzanne Irujo (1986) of Brown University
and Boston University. Findings of the study states that the subjects were able to generalize
from the meaning of the Spanish idiom to its meaning in English, even when the form is slightly
different. When the differences between the two languages are slight, more transfer from one
language to another occurs. When the differences are great, lesser or little transfer occurs. The
findings also support the notion that advanced learners of L2 whose L1 is related to the L2 can
use their knowledge in L1 to comprehend and produce L2 language. Hence, nativization is done
in this part, where the language learners use their knowledge of the L1 to be able to comprehend
the L2.

In teaching in ESL or foreign language classes, it is substantial when language learners


use their knowledge in their L1 to comprehend and produce their L2, and language teachers
should take advantage of it. During comparison in L1 and L2, language learners were able to
identify which aspects can be transferred from L1 and which are likely to cause interference.
Hence, they will take advantage of those similarities and take careful moves on those which will
cause interference to be able to master the target language. From the study of Irujo (1986),
results indicated that positive transfer was being used by the subjects. Hence, it is also vital to
teach the language learners on how to utilize positive transfer and avoid interference (negative
transfer). They must also be given the time and enough opportunity to practice their L2 in
contextualized situations. This would be of great help for them to produce the language
correctly.

Roger Andersen
Nativization Model
Nativization Model, is to a great extent modeled on Schumann’s Acculturation
Model, with the difference that it is much more focused on cognitive aspects of
learning processes.
The research resulted in the 'Nativization Model,' according to which language acquisition consists of two
general processes,
nativization and denativization.
 characterized by assimilation

 learners make the input conform to their own internalized view of what constitutes the L2 system.
 they simplify the learning task by forming hypotheses based on knowledge that they already
possess (L1 knowledge and knowledge of the world).
 they attend to an 'internal norm.'

 This can happen when a second language used by adult parents becomes the native language of
their children.

The result is the kind of pidginization evident in early language acquisition and documented in
Schumann's work.
It proposes that there is a human biological capacity for language representing a set of internal norms for
language.

 involves accommodation

the learner adjusts his internalized system to make it fit with the input

 learner uses inferencing strategies to reshape his interlanguage according to an “external norm”
 is a construction of grammar based on the form specified by the input.

 Language acquisition consists of 2 general processes:

Nativization and Denativization.


SLA is the gradual transition of attention from an internal
to an external norm…the switch that learners make from
reliance on simplifying to reliance on inferencing
strategies.
Language development situation:
INACCESSIBLE
ACCESSIBLE

 cognitive or processing limitations of the acquirers


 the limited of access to native speakers
 psychological resistance to the input
 input is too variable and inconsistent ->>>>> the learner cannot deduce a consistent set of rules
from the input.

A person will construct their grammar on the basis of internal norms.


A person will construct their grammar on the basis of the input and deviate more or less from their internal
norm.
Andersen has been strongly influenced by Slobin's idea of
.

"children possess a language making capacity"


consisting of:

 principles that enable them to perceive and segment items in the input
 principles that govern how they organize and store new information

Focus : the processes, the cognititve operating principles, and communicative strategies that could fit in
his model.

they are cognitive in nature and characterize the way in


which children perceive their environment and try to make
sense of it and organize it.
!!!!!!!
operating principles have been criticized in both L1 and L2 acquisition research on the grounds that they
difficult to test and are not mutually exclusive.

the one-to-one principle


the multifunctionality principle
the principle of formal determinism
the principle of distributional bias
the transfer to somewhere principle
the relixicalization principle
the relevance principle
an interlanguage system should be constructed in such a way that an intended underlying meaning is
expressed with one clear variant surface form or construction. e.g.: Clitic pronouns in French and Spanish
are placed before the verb but in IL, they are placed after the verb, like full NPs. Examples of clitics are
the pronoun "'em" in "I see 'em" and the definite article in French "l'arme", "the arm."
(a) Where there is a clear evidence in the input that more than one form marks the meaning conveyed by
only one form in the interlanguage, try to discover the distribution and additional meaning (if any) of the
new form.
(b) Where there is evidence in the input that an interlanguage form conveys only ne of the meanings that
the same form has in the input, try to discover the additional meaning of the form in the input.
e.g.: Spanish learners of L2 English typically acquire a single negator, ‘no’, to begin with. However, the
input supplies evidence of other negators; e.g.: ‘not’, and ‘don’t’, each with a different meaning.
Pay closer attention to form-meaning relationships that are clearly and uniformly encoded in the input
than to other form-function relationships.
e.g.: Learners pay attention to negations other than ‘no’ in the input because the other forms are modeled
clearly in the input such that their meanings are transparent.
If both X and Y can occur in the same environments A and B, but a bias in the distribution of X and Y
makes it appear that X only occurs in environment A and Y only occurs in environment B, when you
acquire X and Y, restrict W to environment A and Y to B.
e.g.: in Spanish, punctual verbs tend to occur in the preterit form, and state verbs in the imperfect form;
L2 learners manifest this bias in the use of the two tenses.
A grammatical form or structure will occur consistently and frequently in IL as a result of transfer if, and
only if:

 (1) natural acquisitional principles are consistent with the L1 structure, or


 (2) there already exists within the L2 input the potential for (-mis) generalization from the input to
produce the same form or structure.

e.g.: French learners of L2 English do not place pronouns before the verb even though this is possible in
French because no model for such transfer is available in the input.
When you cannot perceive the structural pattern of the L2, use your L1 with lexical items from the L2.
e.g.: Japanese learner of L2 English have been observed to use English lexis in S+O+V sentence frames,
but this may be short-lived because English provides no evidence of S+O+V word order.
If two or more functions apply to a content word, try to place them so that the more relevant the meaning
of the functor is to the meaning of the content word, the closer it is placed to the content word. If you find
that a notion is marked in several places, at first mark it only in the position closest to the relevant content
word
e.g.: in the Spanish verb system, aspect is most relevant to the lexical item it is attached to (i.e. the verb),
tense has a wider scope but is still closely related to the verb, and subject-verb agreement is least
attached to the verb. L2 learners acquire aspect, tense and agreement in this order.

Nativization Model
Andersen sees SLA as the result of two general forces, which labels nativisation and denavitisation.
Nativisation consists o fassimilation; the learner makes the input conform to his own internelized
view of what constitute the L2. and Denavitisation is apparent in depidginization (i.e the elaboration
of pidgin language which occurs through the gradual incorporation of form from an external language
source) and also in later first an second language acquisition.
Evaluation
The acculturation and Nativist Model focus on the power mechanism of SLA. They provide
explanations of why L2 learner, unlike first language learners, often fail to achieve a native-like
competence.

You might also like