Five Key Language Learning Ideas from The Natural Approach

by Daniel

In 1983, Stephen Krashen and Tracy Terrell published one of the most influential books on second language acquistion: The Natural Approach.

I encountered their ideas both in my experiencing teaching ESL and in trying to learn foreign languages. Even three decades after it was written, I think most of what's in The Natural Approach still holds up today..

Here are five language learning hypotheses from The Natural Approach that have shaped my thinking on learning a language:

The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis

First off, the acquistion-learning hypothesis.

When people study a language, they are either making progress knowing about a language or knowing a language.

Traditional classrooms are usually centered on helping you know about a language. You learn the rules, but you would be hopeless at having a conversation in a foreign country.

If that is what is considered "learning" a language, you might be better off trying to acquire a language. Language acquisition isn't as focused on teaching rules, but on picking up the rules implicitly through practice, just like a child learns their first language.

The Natural Order Hypothesis

The natural order hypothesis says that certain grammatical features are learned earlier and some later.

An easy example comes from my own kids learning English (as their first language). They pretty quickly master -ed as the regular past tense form of English verbs, because it develops early on. But, even at ages 6 and 7, they haven't learned all of the irregular past forms. They use teached and hitted as they gradually acquire each of those rules.

The Monitor Hypothesis

The monitor hypothesis basically says that even if someone knows a grammar rule, they may only be able to apply it after they've formed their thought.

Here's a common occurrence for me: I say something in another language, and as soon as it's out of my mouth I know I said it wrong.

This also means that people will usually be able to write more accurately than they speak, because they have time to apply these learned rules.

The Input Hypothesis

The input hypothesis may be the most important takeaway from The Natural Approach.

You will make progress acquiring language if the input is just a little beyond your current ability.

If you already understand everything in the input, there's nothing to learn, and you won't make progress.

If you can't understand most of the input, you just don't have enough clues to figure out the missing pieces. It's why beginners don't benefit from watching foreign language TV, it's just a stream of unfamiliar sounds.

If the language you understand is i, then you need to receive i + 1 as input. Input that is i + 10 is too challenging, but just getting more i input won't help you grow.

(In Growing Participator terms, the input hypothesis corresponds to the zone of proximal development (ZPD).)

The Affective Filter Hypothesis

Your ability to learn language is shaped by two key factors: your motivation and your self image.

People with high motivation and a postive self-image will seek out more input. Thinking in terms of the input hypothesis, their i is steadily climbing from greater input, and they are always ready for a new i + 1.

These people have a low affective filter, which also gives them a greater range of what fits in their i + 1. An anxious language learner will miss out on the contextual clues that would help them pick up something new in the language. But a confident learner will guess, "They are probably wanting me to..." and try to respond accordingly. Every correct attempt at responding expands the i of their language knowledge.

In the Growing Participator Approach, a good language nurturer can help those with a high affective filter. If you are hesitant to try out language in public, afraid of getting laughed at or communicating the wrong thing, working one-on-one can give you a safe place to seek out input.

Implementing The Natural Approach Hypotheses in Flue

All five of the natural approach's hypotheses shaped how I designed Flue:

• The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis - Flue doesn't grade you for grammatical accuracy. It lets you compare your production to a native speaker, trusting that with enough repetitions, you will get closer and closer to what is modeled.
• The Natural Order Hypothesis - Flue's lessons are structured to put useful and straightforward ideas first. And it's okay to produce some things incorrectly at first; with more input they'll get sorted out.
• The Monitor Hypothesis - With Flue, there's no pressure to get it right the first time. You can self-repair your speech until you are satisfied with it.
• The Input Hypothesis - Flue's levels are carefully structured to only present one or two new patterns at a time. All of the other vocabulary and structures will be things you've already encountered.
• The Affective Filter Hypothesis - An app is the perfect place to learn while you try to lower your affective filter. There are no classmates to laugh at you, no grouchy shopkeeper to roll his eyes at you.

Implementing the ideas from The Natural Approach are one of the reasons I think Flue is the best way to start learning a language.