论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】The question of whether second language learners have access to Universal Grammar has been an important topic among those who are interested in Second Language Acquisition（SLA）. As for the accessibility of Universal Grammar in SLA， opinions diverge. This paper lists four hypotheses about the role Universal Grammar plays in SLA and makes a comparison of these views.
【Key words】Universal Grammar； Second Language Acquisition； accessibility
1. Introduction
According to Noam Chomsky， the ability of acquiring one’s mother tongue is attributed to the inherent properties of the mind： Universal Grammar（UG）. But how would UG perform when one is acquiring a second language？
2. Universal Grammar
Chomsky defines “Universal Grammar” as “the system of principles， conditions， and rules that are elements or properties of all human language...the essence of human language” （qtd. in Cook， 2000： 2）.
According to Chomsky， whatever language is being spoken， UG is the common possession of human beings. Chomsky infers that human beings are innately endowed with universal language. This explains why all children learn language at a time when they have difficulty grasping other kinds of knowledge， and why it is possible for intellectually impaired children to acquire the language around them.
3. The Role of Universal Grammar in Second Language Acquisition
Chomsky’s theory of UG was offered as an explanation for first language（L1） acquisition， but whether UG can also explain SLA is still under debate.
SLA research focuses on “the developing knowledge and use of a language by children and adults who already know at least one other language” （Norbert， 2009： 115）.
At present， controversy about the role of UG in SLA is far from settled. Linguists argue for and against the accessibility of UG in SLA. Vivian Cook （2000： 291-297） groups these various opinions into three major hypotheses.
3.1 Direct Access Hypothesis
Second language （L2） learners may “employ the principles of UG and set the parameters without any reference to their L1 values” and “L2 speakers have parallel competences in L1 and L2” （Cook， 2000： 292）. This hypothesis accepts that UG is accessible entirely to L2 learners； L1 and L2 acquisition are guided by the same language faculty. When learning a second language， one can stimulate parameter settings sanctioned by UG， independent of their first language settings. 3.2 Indirect Access Hypothesis
Indirect Access Hypothesis holds that “L2 competence will only reflect those parts of UG that are made use of in the L1”（Cook， 2000： 293）. In indirect access， L2 knowledge is connected with L1 knowledge. L2 acquisition has access to L1 competence， which is ultimately based on UG. UG is available， but only in the pattern that has already been used in the learners’ first language. L2 learners would necessarily start from the L1 settings for the parameters.
3.3 No Access Hypothesis
No access hypothesis holds that UG is unavailable in SLA and regards SLA as essentially different from L1 acquisition. According to this hypothesis， “L2 competence is distinct from L1 competence and created in a totally different way” （Cook， 2000： 294）. A second language can be learnt from a grammar book or from constant practice， instead of making use of UG. Accordingly， there is no link between L2 learning and UG； SLA is not constrained by innate language learning faculty.
Vivian Cook introduced 3 hypotheses concerning the role of UG in SLA， but there is a fourth hypothesis， the Partial Access Hypothesis. The Partial Access Hypothesis （Guo， 2013： 44） proposes that UG is partially available in SLA， and does not have dictatorship in guiding L2 learners to construct their L2 grammar. The true picture is that UG， L2 input， L1 knowledge and learning strategies are interactive in acquiring L2.
4. Summary
Although SLA research has not provided a definite answer about the role of UG in SLA， it is generally agreed that UG is not totally inaccessible， and that L2 learners do exhibit language behaviors which must have originated in UG. Some L2 learners clearly attain subtle knowledge which does not derive solely from their first language. This suggests that SLA is a complicated linguistic phenomenon and UG is not the only factor involved in acquiring a second language.
References：
[1]Vivian Cook.Chomsky’s Universal Grammar：An Introduction [M].Beijing：Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2000.
[2]Diane Larsen-Freeman.An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research[M].Beijing：Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2005.
【Key words】Universal Grammar； Second Language Acquisition； accessibility
1. Introduction
According to Noam Chomsky， the ability of acquiring one’s mother tongue is attributed to the inherent properties of the mind： Universal Grammar（UG）. But how would UG perform when one is acquiring a second language？
2. Universal Grammar
Chomsky defines “Universal Grammar” as “the system of principles， conditions， and rules that are elements or properties of all human language...the essence of human language” （qtd. in Cook， 2000： 2）.
According to Chomsky， whatever language is being spoken， UG is the common possession of human beings. Chomsky infers that human beings are innately endowed with universal language. This explains why all children learn language at a time when they have difficulty grasping other kinds of knowledge， and why it is possible for intellectually impaired children to acquire the language around them.
3. The Role of Universal Grammar in Second Language Acquisition
Chomsky’s theory of UG was offered as an explanation for first language（L1） acquisition， but whether UG can also explain SLA is still under debate.
SLA research focuses on “the developing knowledge and use of a language by children and adults who already know at least one other language” （Norbert， 2009： 115）.
At present， controversy about the role of UG in SLA is far from settled. Linguists argue for and against the accessibility of UG in SLA. Vivian Cook （2000： 291-297） groups these various opinions into three major hypotheses.
3.1 Direct Access Hypothesis
Second language （L2） learners may “employ the principles of UG and set the parameters without any reference to their L1 values” and “L2 speakers have parallel competences in L1 and L2” （Cook， 2000： 292）. This hypothesis accepts that UG is accessible entirely to L2 learners； L1 and L2 acquisition are guided by the same language faculty. When learning a second language， one can stimulate parameter settings sanctioned by UG， independent of their first language settings. 3.2 Indirect Access Hypothesis
Indirect Access Hypothesis holds that “L2 competence will only reflect those parts of UG that are made use of in the L1”（Cook， 2000： 293）. In indirect access， L2 knowledge is connected with L1 knowledge. L2 acquisition has access to L1 competence， which is ultimately based on UG. UG is available， but only in the pattern that has already been used in the learners’ first language. L2 learners would necessarily start from the L1 settings for the parameters.
3.3 No Access Hypothesis
No access hypothesis holds that UG is unavailable in SLA and regards SLA as essentially different from L1 acquisition. According to this hypothesis， “L2 competence is distinct from L1 competence and created in a totally different way” （Cook， 2000： 294）. A second language can be learnt from a grammar book or from constant practice， instead of making use of UG. Accordingly， there is no link between L2 learning and UG； SLA is not constrained by innate language learning faculty.
Vivian Cook introduced 3 hypotheses concerning the role of UG in SLA， but there is a fourth hypothesis， the Partial Access Hypothesis. The Partial Access Hypothesis （Guo， 2013： 44） proposes that UG is partially available in SLA， and does not have dictatorship in guiding L2 learners to construct their L2 grammar. The true picture is that UG， L2 input， L1 knowledge and learning strategies are interactive in acquiring L2.
4. Summary
Although SLA research has not provided a definite answer about the role of UG in SLA， it is generally agreed that UG is not totally inaccessible， and that L2 learners do exhibit language behaviors which must have originated in UG. Some L2 learners clearly attain subtle knowledge which does not derive solely from their first language. This suggests that SLA is a complicated linguistic phenomenon and UG is not the only factor involved in acquiring a second language.
References：
[1]Vivian Cook.Chomsky’s Universal Grammar：An Introduction [M].Beijing：Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2000.
[2]Diane Larsen-Freeman.An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research[M].Beijing：Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2005.