summary of teachability hypothesis

The Multidimensional Model and the Teachability Hypothesis

Cite this chapter.

• Vivian Cook  

Part of the book series: Modern Linguistics Series ((MAML))

280 Accesses

1 Citations

A further model based on the type of research outlined in Chapter 2 was developed by a group that included Clahsen, Meisel, Pienemann, and Johnston, first in Germany and later in Australia. The most common name for its first version is the Multidimensional Model of Meisel, Clahsen, and Pienemann, (1981); the later version is often called the Teachability Hypothesis, after one of its main claims (Pienemann, 1989). The label ‘multidimensional’ reflects the central claim of the model that L2 acquisition has two sides: on the one hand there is a rigid developmental sequence for certain aspects of language that is unaffected by aspects of the learner or of the environment, on the other a variational sequence for other aspects of language which responds to differences in the learner or the situation. The developmental sequence is claimed to depend on general factors of language processing. The variational sequence is based on learner variables such as the extent to which the learners are integrated into the target culture. Thus the Multidimensional Model brings together two of the separate strands seen in Chapters 2 and 4: the common sequences of acquisition found in L2 learners and the variation between learners.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Unable to display preview.  Download preview PDF.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 1993 Vivian Cook

About this chapter

Cook, V. (1993). The Multidimensional Model and the Teachability Hypothesis. In: Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. Modern Linguistics Series. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-22853-9_5

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-22853-9_5

Publisher Name : Palgrave, London

Print ISBN : 978-0-333-55534-7

Online ISBN : 978-1-349-22853-9

eBook Packages : Palgrave Social & Cultural Studies Collection

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science

Published: 2015-11-09

DOI: 10.9734/BJESBS/2016/21688

Issue: 2016 - Volume 13 [Issue 2]

Short Research Article

Learnability, Teachability Hypothesis: How Does It Work in Learner-centered and Learning-centered Instruction?

Mohammad Reza Mozayan *

Shahid Sadoughi University of Sciences and Health Medical Services, Yazd, Iran.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.

This paper primarily poses the question whether the instruction per se is useful in teaching L2 or not. The different positions adopted by the researchers are presented in length, the last one of which is the teachability hypothesis. The tenets of the learnability/teachability hypothesis are presented in the following section and a brief comparison of the hypothesis with UG is also made. Later the concepts of learner-centeredness (exercising attention to the learners’ needs, goals, and strategies) and learning-centeredness (viewing acquisition of the linguistic system as incidental and not intentional) are explained as well. And finally, the study discusses the application of the learnability/teachability hypothesis in the learner-centered and learning-centered paradigms.

Keywords: Learnability/teachability hypothesis, UG, learner-centeredness, learning-centeredness.

How to Cite

• Download Citation
• Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)

© Copyright 2010-Till Date, Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science. All rights reserved.

Teachability Hypothesis – Best Explanation

Teachability Hypothesis relates to the Chomskian concept of a natural or pre-determined ‘universal’ order for language acquisition.

Teachability Hypothesis

According to Pienemann (1989), the teachability of language is constrained by what the learner is ready to acquire. In terms of grammar, he believes that “every learner builds up his or her own grammar” (p. 53). In teaching settings like the ESL classroom, for most learners, the classroom is just one source of language learning, the other being the “unguided process of natural acquisition” (Pienemann, 1989, p. 53).

According to Pienemann (1989), “You can’t teach everything you want” (p. 57). He further continues that the acquisition process cannot be steered or modeled just according to the requirements or precepts of formal instruction. On the contrary, he argues that teaching per se is subject to some of the constraints which determine the course of natural acquisition.

This is technically referred to as Teachability Hypothesis (Pienemann, 1984). The Teachability Hypothesis predicts that instruction can only promote language acquisition if the interlanguage is close to the point when the structure to be taught is acquired in the natural setting (Pienemann, 1989).

According to Pienemann (1989), formal and natural L2 acquisition could well be different, given, for example, that elements and structures filtered out of formal input cannot be acquired. In addition, there may also be learning strategies which are exclusive to formal acquisition. Therefore, “the Teachability Hypothesis should hold just as well for purely formal contexts as it does for natural ones” (Pienemann, 1989, p. 63).

Pienemann (1989) proposes that second/foreign language learners will not acquire a new structure until they are developmentally ready to do so. If there were no connection between the development of explicit knowledge about a grammar point and the eventual restructuring of the unconscious linguistic system to accommodate the point in the learner’s internal interlanguage, then, indeed grammar instruction would not be of much use. However, it has been suggested that there is a connection, so grammar instruction is ultimately useful. In this response, practice of language points can lead to automatization.

Teachability Hypothesis predicts that instruction can only promote language acquisition if the interlanguage is close to the point when the structure to be taught is acquired in the natural setting so that sufficient processing requirements are developed. So Teachability Hypothesis suggests that instruction does not subvert the natural sequence of acquisition but rather helps to speed up learner’s passage through it (Ellis, 1997).

Ellis, R. (1997). Second language acquisition . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Natural or artificial? Testing the Teachability Hypothesis

2015, Language Learning

The current study was designed to assess the central claim of the Teachability Hypothesis (TH), a corollary of general Processability Theory (PT), which predicts instruction cannot alter posited universal, hierarchically organized psycholinguistic constraints behind PT's developmental sequences. We employed an interventional design, which adhered to instructional procedures of Systemic Theoretical Instruction, and we taught four university learners at Stage 2 (subject‐verb‐object) Chinese topicalization for Stage 4 (object‐first, e.g., Pizza tā yě chī le, Pizza 他 也 吃了, ‘Pizza he also ate’). We believe the findings show that, under the instructional conditions utilized in the study, the predictions of TH do not hold. We conclude it is possible to artificially construct a developmental route different from the one predicted by natural developmental sequences, in agreement with the claims of Vygotsky's developmental education.

Related Papers

Clare Wright

Journal of psycholinguistic research

Anna Gavarró

There is a debate as to whether topic structures in Chinese involve A'-movement or result from base-generation of the topic in the left periphery. If Chinese topicalization was derived by movement, under the assumptions of Friedmann et al.'s Relativized Minimality (Lingua 119:67-88, 2009), we would expect children's comprehension of object topicalization (with OSV order) to be worse than their comprehension of subject topicalization (with SVO order). This study examined 146 Mandarin-speaking children from age three to age six by means of a picture-sentence matching task with an appropriate context. The results showed a subject/object asymmetry when the topic marker is overt, and no asymmetry when the topic marker is covert. This suggests that the presence or absence of topic markers play an important role in children's comprehension of topicalization. We propose that both structures involve movement in the adult grammar, but not in the child grammar, at least initial...

Stella Lundqvist

Linguistica

Katharina Zipser

Most L2-learners are taught a language on the basis of a textbook. But are these textbooks arranged according to the learners’ needs? For the present study the grammatical structures and their progression in an Italian-language textbook were analysed, and they were compared to the learners’ speaking ability to cross-check the degree of correspondence between what is taught following the textbook and what is actually learned. The question is asked in how far textbook design should consider the findings of current SLA research. It is suggested that even though Processability Theory is right to predict that language acquisition develops in stages, instruction need not be strictly sequenced. Above all it is important to distinguish between input, intake and expected output.

International Journal of Applied Linguistics

Emma Marsden

Open Journal of Modern Linguistics

zalika adam

Nobuhiko Akamatsu

The main purpose of this paper is to briefly review some empirical findings on the processing mechanisms of skilled readers and beginning readers in Chinese and English and to compare the learnability of reading in the two languages. In the learning processes, a similar global-to-analytic developmental path exists in both languages, although there are differences in the kinds of predictors of early reading acquisition. It is argued that while Chinese-English orthography differences have some effect on the learning and processing mechanisms followed, the effect does not amount to making one system as a whole easier and faster to process or to learn than the other. Learnability in Chinese and English

Bruno Di Biase

The objective of this paper is to present an empirical study on the Topic Hypothesis, one of the current Processability extensions (Pienemann, Di Biase and Kawaguchi, forthcoming) and test out its applicability to Italian L2. The Topic Hypothesis is based on non-canonical mapping of constituent structure onto grammatical functions (technically association between cand fstructure). In second language acquisition learners will initially not differentiate between SUBJ and other discourse functions (e.g. TOP). The addition of non-arguments adjuncts (XP+Canonical order) instantiating contextual information (time, place of the event, etc.) will trigger a differentiation of TOP and SUBJ which extends successively to core arguments (e.g. Object). This will require learning of ̳new‘ functions, characterised in LFG as discourse functions (Bresnan, 2001), specifically Topic and Focus, as well as various types of information exchange (unification) required by the implementation of these functio...

Child Development

Roberta Golinkoff

John McCarthy

RELATED PAPERS

Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 226

Gergely Csiky

Srini Kalyanaraman

Studies in Religion / Sciences Religieuses

Christopher R Austin

yordan hidalgo orellana

O Percevejo Online

Vilma Portillo

Nuclear Medicine Communications

Naoya Hattori

The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

Mohammed ahmed

Journal of Polymer Science Part B: Polymer Physics

Vikram Kumar

Istanbul University - DergiPark

BANUR BOYNUKARA

DR FAUZI AZMI

Revista Productos Naturales

Ximena Hernandez

CLEONICE DE ÁVILA CARVALHO

JURNAL ADMINISTRASI NUSANTARA

Edwin Bustami

Richard Leeding

hjfgffg hkjyt

Odontología Sanmarquina

Luis Zavaleta

Bangladesh Journal of Public Administration

FATAI OLUBUNMI ADESANMI

László Kredics

International Journal of Medical Informatics

Abbas Shamsalinia

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Lynne Batchelder

Pesquisas e Práticas na Educaçao Contemporânea - Um Convite para Dialogar Com o Pensamento Educacional de Juana Maria Sancho Gil.

Amparo Alonso-Sanz

Bruce Sangeorzan

Kelly Benati

International Journal of Social Robotics

Antonella D’Amico

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• No results found

Challenges of the Teachability Hypothesis

2.2 foundation research regarding pt, ex 2.5 a dog is seen by peter., 2.6 context basis and exploration for teachability hypothesis, 2.6.3 challenges of the teachability hypothesis.

Do we need a formal structural syllabus? How should it be constructed? Is grammar best taught implicitly or explicitly? Should there be a focus on form, and when should it occur in the overall curriculum? Which forms are amendable to a focus on form? Are some forms resistant to a focus on form? Can tasks and techniques be designed during which problematic forms are likely to arise, so that an opportunity to focus on form occurs only if a learner asks for it?

Some years ago, Krashen (1985) has claimed that teaching has a minimal effect on acquisition. He (1985: 35) has demonstrated that ‘not all the research literature concludes that language teaching is good for SLA’. In all cases, the Teachability Hypothesis may not be effective, since students have a rich source of comprehensible input outside the classroom which they can take advantage of. In addition, even though the appropriate instruction could accelerate learning, some research results suggest the contrary - that premature instruction can actually be harmful, and not just ineffective (Boss, 1996; Johnston, 1987). The Teachability Hypothesis does not imply an alternative teaching method or provide explicit help to teachers to make choices about what structures to present and what errors to correct in terms of the premature input.

Even though ‘practice does not make perfect in language learning because neither teaching nor practice can beat the natural order of acquisition’ (Pienemann, 2008a), appropriate instructions constrained by processability could have a positive influence on L2 learners’ language acquisition, as proposed by the Teachability Hypothesis. Pienemann cited in Pfaff (1986: 162) has suggested that ‘in order to develop psychologically founded language teaching methods, it will be necessary to more closely investigate the process of transmission of rational knowledge to the unconscious system of language processing’. Thus, the blind point – the potential negative effects from premature input – probably could be ‘swept away’.

Moreover, the recent research in PT has applied the Teachability Hypothesis to error correction. Kessler et al. (cited in Pienemann and Kessler, 2011: 153) have concluded that ‘not all learner errors should be treated in the same way’ as there are developmental errors and variational errors. Developmental errors occur since the learners could not process the input in the current state of interlanguage development while the variational errors are due to the choices made by the learners when they try to solve the developmental problems. In this case, if the learners are not ready to process the grammatical structures at certain stage, correcting their developmental errors could not lead to any success in the acquisition process. However, ‘not

correcting variational errors may lead to a simplified variety in interlanguage development, which may result in stabilization’ in language acquisition (Kessler et al. cited in Pienemann and Kessler, 2011: 154).

In addition, the Teachability Hypothesis completely rules out the possibility that a learner could have the chance to beat the acquisition order of a given language (Johnston, 1987). In fact, some examples in previous studies have already shown that ‘exceptional cases’ do exist, due to unconfirmed reasons.

In conclusion, even though Pienemann’s ideas on teachability offer the teacher ‘more hope to actively assist the learning process’ (Smith, 1994: 118), as it currently stands, the Teachability Hypothesis should be built up strongly with more experiments and research evidence to prove its generalization.

2.7 Summary

The description of the fundamental issues of the language processing and development in this chapter has provided the required concepts in the Processability Theory, from fundamental studies, through the empirical basis, and then to the Lexical Functional Grammar. The fundamental research contributing to the founding of PT has been paid more attention, due to the fact that it is important to know what is inclusive in the processability hierarchy. Besides, the theoretical and empirical support explains how the L2 learners move towards the target languages; while the LFG could present the process of the movement of the lexical items explicitly.

Basically, Processability Theory (which is a psychologically plausible grammatical model) involves the psycholinguistic processes in the acquisition of a language. It hypothesizes different approaches, from lexical entries to syntactic structures, along the lexical-grammatical continuum. It is stated by Pienemann (1998c and 2005) that the key idea behind PT is that language acquisition is constrained by language processing. The processing procedure is incremental and its components operate largely automatically, which could not be consciously controlled.

develop procedures in a predetermined sequence over time in order to use their implicit systems for production in communicative contexts. Pienemann posits further that the processing devices will be acquired only if the learners have acquired the necessary processing prerequisites in the production process (VanPatten, 1996 and 2003).

In addition, PT affords a new perspective on how a learner acquires the language and how a teacher teaches the language based on the prerequisite knowledge and natural acquisition orders. In one sense, PT provides a wider theoretical context for the ‘Teachability Hypothesis’. The danger of some teaching approaches ignores the learners’ mental architecture of the language processor and the central psychological mechanisms. The Teachability Hypothesis, built upon learnability issues, has then provided thoroughly information in these aspects. The inclusion of language processing in a syllabus does guarantee that it is in accordance with the principles which underlie the learner’s own reconstruction of the target language (Pienemann, 1995). Without a doubt, the drawbacks of the Teachability Hypothesis should also be significantly investigated against the counter-evidence.

Generally speaking, the Processability Theory, building on LFG, learnability, interlanguage dynamics and relevant models, explains and predicts the sequential acquisition process of a second language as a result of the hierarchically-ordered development of the processing procedures. It enables a clearer view of morphosyntactic development and variation. Apart from that, the Teachability Hypothesis, added on PT, allows the teacher to comprehend what structures to teach and how to avoid ineffective structural teaching objectives.

According to these theoretical rationales and previous research, my study is going to contribute to the PT application in acquiring Chinese as a second language at the morphosyntactic level; therefore, the next chapter will discuss the relevant features in the Chinese language.

• Empirical Support of PT in Different Backgrounds
• Discussion and Critique of PT
• Exploration of the Teachability Hypothesis
• Challenges of the Teachability Hypothesis (You are here)
• san zhang bing three CL pancakes
• ta zou-de hen man He walk-V-COMP very slowly.
• ni chi-le fan zai qu ba.
• mugua, zhexie dou lan diao le.
• CSL Studies on Morphemes
• CSL Studies on Synta
• Zhang’s Studies
• Methods Selection in Current Study
• Research Participants
• Aspects of Tasks
• Transcription Convention
• Acquisition Criterion
• Reliability and Validity
• Chinese L2 Learners without a Chinese Background
• Chinese L2 Learners with a Chinese Background
• Relationship between Instructions and PT Profile
• Natural Acquisition or Formal Instruction?
• Pilot Study
• ba structure (stage 5) 1 Structure Explanation

Related documents