Definition : The Input Hypothesis is one of the five hypotheses in the Monitor Model proposed by Krashen in his work in the 70s and 80s.
For Krashen, acquisition was dependent
only on input. If you received the right sort of input, your brain would
automatically work on it to acquire the language. The "right sort of
input" was seen by Krashen as being at the "i+1 " level. ie
comprehensible at the acquirer's current competence ("i") but
containing "new " language which would be the next structure to be
acquired ("+1"). The Natural Order hypothesis stated that this
wouldn't be just any language that happened to crop up but would be a
specific morpheme/structure which was "next on the list" for
acquisition. As we have only a hazy view of what the list might be, Krashen
argued that we couldn't plan to introduce the next item, but that by providing
"roughly tuned input" - ie input that was comprehensible for the
learner but contained a certain amount of new items, made comprehensible by the
already understood language, gesture and visuals etc, the "next" item
would naturally crop up.
For Krashen then, productive use had
no part to play in acquistion - and in fact he suggested that beginners needed
a "silent period" in which they weren't asked to speak but just to
comprehend.
Criticisms : As with the Acquisition/Learning Hypothesis, many people have disagreed with this, including Swain who posited
that negotiating meaning – ie “noticing” failures in communication and
attempting to formulate language in a way that is comprehensible - was also a factor in acquisition. She called
this the Output Hypothesis and suggests it has three stages :
For example:
- Noticing function: While attempting to use the language in speech or writing, learners find gaps between what they want to say and what they are able to say, and so they notice what they don't know or are unsure about in the L2.
- Hypothesis-testing function: When a learner uses the language, it may be what Swain calls "a trial run" - the learner is attempting to say something using language which s/he hypothesises might express the concept. Feedback - which could be an interlocutor failing to understand, or reformulating the utterance "pushes" the learner to reformulate the utterance until something "works" .
- Metalinguistic function: Learners reflect on the language they have used or heard other people use, and reprocess their hypotheses about the language. This is a social constructivist view of language-
A: I'm going there on Tuesday.
B: Tuesday? That's too late. You must go this week.
A: Yes -Tuesday. Not tomorrow but after tomorrow.
B: Oh - you mean Thursday.
A: Oh - yes... Thursday.
Further reading
Baker, C. and Prys Jones, S. Encyclopedia of Bilingualism and Second Language Acquisition
Bygate, Skehan and Swain (eds) Researching Pedagogic Tasks, RoutledgeBaker, C. and Prys Jones, S. Encyclopedia of Bilingualism and Second Language Acquisition
