know anything yet, and then he get little by little knowledge and skills naturally from the environment around till he can adjust with it. A child hears the words,
utterances, and sentences and how those are used in daily life by the people around him. In certain times he can use and understand those patterns as well as
people around him use to communicate. The way the child acquires the language can be applied to learn second or foreign language through drills as the child hears
those patterns over the times.
b. Rationalism
Other terms are used for refering to the rationalist are nativist innateness and mentalist, and cognitive.
33
Rationalism viewed that people have their own capacity in acquiring the language. Everyone is born with that ability to acquire
the language and to develop the language naturally. Noam Chomsky had criticized Skinner viewpoint about language acquisition.
According to him, Skinner’s theory cannot possible to explain the creativity of children in generating language. He viewed that language is more complex than
stimulus-response connection as Skinner imagined, and the process of children’
creativity need to take place in the human mind. He emphasized that children were born with some kinds of special language processing ability that known as
language acquisition device LAD.
34
Other Rationalists theory such as Eric Lennenberg and David McNeil believed that language learning was controlled by biological mechanisms.
According to Mcneill, LAD has various innate linguistic properties which then by Brown being summarized into:
1 The ability to distinguish speech sounds from other sound
2 The ability to organize language into a system of structures
3 The knowledge of what was possible and what was not possible in any
linguistic system
33
Hadley, op. cit., p. 58
34
Ibid, pp. 57-58
4 The ability to construct the simplest possible system based on the
linguistic data to which one was exposed.
35
Finally Hadley made conclusion that: The basic difference between the two positions seems to lie in the
presumed locus of control of the process of the language acquisition. The rationalist position includes theories that assume that human have an innate
capacity for the development of language, and that we are genetically programmed to develop our linguistic system in certain ways...Meanwhile
empiricists maintain it is the learner’s experience that is largely responsible for language learning and it is more important than any specific innate capacity.
36
Gleason and Ratner explained why he linguist of innate theorist do believed
that the principles of language are inborn and not learned because young children
arrive at successful grammar so much more rapidly than professional linguists. In other words linguist can study a language for years to discover its rules, while
children intuit the rules of language quickly and for the most part accurately.
37
Bartlett and Button also concluded that: What follow from these differing perspectives are very different account of
the way the mind works. Thus the empiricists see the mind as an information- process device which applies processes of attention, sensation, perception and
memory to each new stimuli experience. Conversely, rationalists, and a subsequent related group of thinkers, nativists, governed by their belief that
some ideas are innate, maintain that the mind is similarly preprogrammed with an inherent structure of concept development and language acquisition...
Rationalists will star from their theories of prior knowledge and innateness of mental structures and explore how these are manifest within human behavior.
38
Other Rationalist Such as Stephen Krashen 1982, with his theory known as Monitor Theory which believed that first and second language acquisition are
similar. He introduced “Monitor Model to the language learning. He describes five central hypotheses:
1 The acquisition and learning distinction. Adults have to distich way to
develop competence in a second language. First, acquisition, which
35
Ibid., p. 58
36
Ibid., p. 54.
37
Jean Berko Gleason and Nan Bernstein Ratner ed., Psycholinguistics, Orlando: Harcourt Brace College Publisers, 1998, p. 378
38
Bartlett, op. cit., pp. 97-98.
subconscious process, similar to the way children develop ability in the first language; and second is learning, which is conscious knowledge of
the grammar rules and their application in production of second language. 2
The nature order hypothesis, which maintains that acquisition of grammatical structures primary morphemes follows a predictable order
when that acquisition is natural not formal learning. 3
The monitor hypothesis, that acquisition is initiator of all second language utterances, and responsible for fluency, while learning can function only as
an editor or monitor for the output. This monitor operates only when there is sufficient time, the focus is on form, and language user knows the rule
being applied. 4
The input hypothesis, which maintain that we acquire more language only when we are exposed to comprehensible input language that contains
structures that are a step above our current level of competence i+1, but which is comprehensible throughout use of context, our knowledge of the
world, and other extra linguistic clue directed to us. According to this hypothesis, acquires go for meaning first, and, as a result, acquire structure
as well. The input need to be deliberately planned to contain appropriate structure i+1. A final part of the input hypothesis maintains that speaking
fluency cannot be taught directly, but rather emerge naturally over time. Krashen maintains that although early speech is not grammatically
accurate, accuracy will develop over time as he hears and understands more input.
5 The affective filter hypothesis, comprehensible input can have its effect on
acquisition only when affective conditions are optimal: he is motivated, he has self-confidence and good self image, and his level of anxiety is low.
When learners are put on defensive, the effective filter is high, and comprehensible input cannot get in.
According to Krashen, the comprehensible input is most useful in learning foreign language where the learners do not have input source outside of the class
or for learners who have low competence that they are unable to understand the language of the outside world. Student should never be required to produce speech
unless they ready to do so. Speaking fluency cannot be taught, but emerge naturally in time with enough comprehensible input. Error correction should be
minimized in the classroom because it raises the affective filter, even it should not be used in free conversation or when acquisition is likely to take place. The
requirement of optimal input should be comprehensible, interesting and relevant, not grammatically sequenced, provided in sufficient quality to supply i+1, and
delivered to the student who are willing to do.
39
Based on the explanation above, it seem that language acquisition is similar to the process by which children acquire their native language, and learning
language involves conscious knowledge of grammatical rules. Since second and foreign language acquisition is similar to children acquire their first language,
learning can be function only as an editor of what is produced, and learning can serve as a monitor of performance. Learner acquires new structure only when
comprehensible input i+1 is exposed. Error correction should be minimized in the classroom, where the main purpose of the instruction should be to provide
comprehensible input. For successful in language learning, the learner must be motivated, have a good self-image, and be free from anxiety.
c. Constructivism
According to Bartlett and Burton in their book Introduction to Education Studies,
“Constructivism is predicated on the idea that people make their own sense of things in a unique ways ...Constructivism emphasizes the need to give
learners responsibility for directing their own learning experience”.
40
In addition Pritchard and Woollard explain that “this theory is based on the central notion that
is learners we construct out own understanding of the world around us based on experience as we live and grow. We select and transform information from past
39
Hadley, op. cit., p. 61-62.
40
Bartlett, op. cit., p. 124.
