Reflection # 2

As much as I disliked Skinner four years ago when I first studied his approach, I do agree with two of his views, first with the fact that imitation plays a big part in learning languages (the first one and other ‘second’ languages), and second, with the role (positive or negative depending on the case) of reinforcement and punishment in education. Imitation and practice are very important in first (and second) language development, but kids don’t sit and repeat words again and again until they master them, instead they keep on using them as much as they can and many times they actively look for and create situations to use new words and patterns. In contrast, very often adults learning a second language will repeat and study and try to memorize (relying heavily on drills or on memory), but they will be reluctant to take the risk and use their new skills in real life situations. Finding situations where we can practice the second language we are learning is not easy even when we live in a country where the language is spoken. The learner has to be willing to actively look for situations and take advantage of them; the situations won’t come by themselves. Learners have to be willing to make mistakes and to sound “silly” just as children make mistakes and sound funny in the first stages of language acquisition. The problem I see is that many adults and even young adults are afraid of making mistakes and sounding silly; they don’t take risks. They don’t want to see language acquisition as what it is: a process that will take time and practice and “failing”. Many adults don’t find it “fun” to make mistakes, while in language learning process “mistakes” should be enjoyed and laughed about (by the learners and even by other, why not, if it’s funny, it’s funny). Also, learning a language is hard work and it can be frustrating even for first language acquisition. I’ve seen my almost-5-year-old boy getting frustrated many times because we don’t understand what he’s saying.

Although I agree with Chomsky and the innatists about humans being biologically programmed for language, it is imitation and environment what determines which language a child acquires. Environment is not just “a basic contribution” otherwise how do we explain that children in a Polish (very complex language) speaking environment learn Polish but not English, for example. I don’t think language should be put together with the other “natural functions” that don’t need to be taught like walking, otherwise children that are raised without human contact would acquire a language (the question again is what language?) just as they learn to walk. I do however, agree with human predisposition for language as I also believe in linguistic talent and other talents that some people have more than others (multiple learning styles theory), that can make language learning easier for some people. But I think that more than biological and talent predisposition, personality is a better predictor of language learning success: extroversion, perseverance, risk-taking, discipline and the ability to laugh at everything including oneself.

About the way English-speaking and non English-speaking families interact with their children, I couldn't really say because I'm not very familiar with these differences. I believe that culture plays a big role in the first language acquisition both the culture inside and the culture outside the home because in different ways, children are exposed to those cultures and affected by them. In my experience, I was born and raised in Venezuela, but I consider the Italian culture as mine since that was (mostly) the culture practiced at home. I think that Spanish was my first language in the sense that it's my mother's language and that I received my school education in Spanish, however, Italian remains my "gut" language, the one that comes when I'm angry and the one that I use with my son :-)