Comprehensible output

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the field of Second Language Acquisition, there are many theories about the most effective way for language learners to acquire new language forms. One theory of language acquisition is the Comprehensible Output Hypothesis.

Developed by Merrill Swain, the comprehensible output (CO) hypothesis states that language is acquired when we attempt to communicate a message to someone else but fail and have to try again. Eventually, through several attempts, we produce the correct form of our utterance and the listener is finally able to understand. Thus, the new language form is acquired.^[1] Although Swain does not claim that comprehensible output is soley responsible for all or even most language acquisition, he does claim that under some conditions, CO facilitates second language learning in ways that differ from and enhance input.^[2]

[edit] Criticisms

Stephen Krashen argues that the basic problem with all output hypotheses is that output is rare, and comprehensible output is even rarer. Even when the language acquirer does speak, they rarely make the types of adjustments that the CO hypothesis claims are useful and necessary to acquire new forms.^[3] Another difficulty with CO is that pushing students to speak in a second language may be uncomfortable for them, raising the affective filter and thus hampering acquisition. When asked which aspects of foreign language learning caused them the most anxiety, students placed speaking in the foreign language at the top of the list.^[4] Methods that are based on comprehensible output frequently put acquirers in this uncomfortable position.

The comprehensible output theory is closely related to the need hypothesis, which states that we acquire language forms only when we need to communicate or make ourselves understood.^[3] If this hypothesis were correct, then language acquirers must be forced to speak.

According to Stephen Krashen, the Need Hypothesis is incorrect. However, Stephen Krashen does point out that need can be helpful when it places the acquirer in a position in which he or she can receive comprehensible input (CI). On the other hand, need, is useless in the absence of CI.^[3]

Perhaps one of the most persuasive arguments against the need hypothesis is presented by Garrison Keillor on the Prairie Home Companion in a segment entitled "The Minnesota Language School", which operates on the need hypothesis. Their method is to take someone who speaks no German, fly them up in a helicopter, and then threaten to push them out of the helicopter unless they start speaking German. If the need hypothesis were correct, then this would work.^[3] However, language acquisition is not quite that easy.

Furthermore, research shows that humans can develop extremely high levels of language and literacy proficiency without any language output or production at all.^[5] In fact, studies show that acquirers usually acquire small but significant amounts of new vocabulary through single exposure to a new word found in a comprehensible text.^[6]"Given the consistent evidence for comprehensible input, and the failure of other means of developing language competence, providing more comprehensible input seems to be a more reasonable strategy than increasing output," says Krashen.^[3]

[edit] References