Acquisition vs. Learning

Acquisition vs. Learning



The terms "acquisition" and "learning" are often used interchangeably in relation to a second language, but there is a clear distinction between them. Stephen Krashen's Acquisition - Learning hypothesis states that while acquisition is a subconscious system, learning is an explicit and conscious process. To put this distinction into context, native speakers may have a tacit knowledge of language, but they focus on meaning to interact with other speakers. However, non-native speakers or second language learners have a conscious knowledge of their target language and rely on grammar rules to perform orally and in writing. The L2 learner's conscious use of grammar rules explains why very few adult learners, if any, achieve native-like proficiency in their second language. Acquisition, in this sense, mirrors the subconscious process children go through while acquiring their first language. 

Language instructors' primary purpose is to provide a conducive atmosphere in the classroom for the learner where meaningful interaction in the target language takes place, enabling second language learners to focus on the communicative act (meaning), not on form (grammar).  

Krashen, Stephen D. Second Langauge Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Prentice-Hall International, 1988. 

The following table makes a distinction between "acquisition" and "learning".    

Acquisition	Learning
Implicit, subconscious	Explicit, conscious
Informal situations	Formal situations
Uses grammatical “feel”	Uses grammatical rules
Depends on attitude	Depends on aptitude
Stable order of acquisition	Simple to complex order of learning

As shown in the table, acquisition is seen as an implicit and subconscious process whereby the learner is exposed to Primary Linguistic Data (PLD) in informal situations such as homes and social gatherings. A learner who has acquired a linguistic system has a tacit knowledge of grammar and generally uses grammatical "feel" to make a goodness judgment about a sentence uttered by both native and non-native speakers. For example, a native English speaker might not be able to explain why "I am going to home" is syntactically awkward, but s/he will undoubtedly declare that the sentence is ungrammatical. Furthermore, acquisition depends on the learner's attitude, and the order of acquisition is stable.  

In contrast, learning is usually explicit and conscious. The adult second language learner is almost always aware of grammar rules and learns the target language in formal situations such as a classroom or a workshop focusing on speech and pronunciation. Unlike acquisition, learning depends on aptitude and simple grammatical structures are learned before complex structures are internalized. 

Any curriculum that aims to develop students' communicative abilities in a second language must simulate natural language acquisition. Instruction can be effective if it uses acquisition processes, allowing the second language learner to focus on getting meaning across to the interlocutor in a comprehensible manner, the main purpose of communication. Rather than imposing a grammar agenda on the vulnerable and linguistically-impoverished second language learners, language teachers may be better off conducting a needs-based analysis of their pupils and providing a conducive learning atmosphere where students negotiate meaning by raising and responding to questions, by offering specific examples to substantiate their position, and by asking for an explanation when needed. S. Pit Corder wisely pointed out: 

"We may be able to allow the learner's innate strategies to dictate our practice and determine our syllabus, we may learn to adapt ourselves to his needs rather than impose upon him our preconceptions of how he ought to learn, what he ought to learn and when he ought to learn it."