CHAPTER I
BACKGROUND
A. Background of The Problem
Language is a tool that is used to communicate among people. By language every human can share everything like idea, opinion and so on. As nature of human, children as proposed by Scovel (1998:8) had no language until they utter their first word, usually of the time of their first birth. They usually utters by crying, cooing, and babbling and after all of them they learned to produce language.
Although children had no language at the first time they was born, they have natural ability or innate capacity to learn language (Saville-Troike, 2006:13). As Saville-Troike, Ellis (1997:32) stated mentalist theory which viewed that every human beings are capable of learning language because they have language acquisition device (brain). It just oriented to how the innate properties of the human mind shape learning. This paradigm looked that environment didn’t shape learning output, it is just needed as a trigger of language acquisition device. So, the big point of this paradigm is human’s brain process.
By this view, parents was almost never care about children’s environment. They just looked of how their children’s brain became smart by increasing brain’s ability. Whereas, as human that lived in a society children will get influence by the environment. Beside of that, we couldn’t disown that human learn language by their environment (input). So, whether good or bad the input that take a place from the environment will take influence of how language is processed.
Different from the previous theory, Ellis (1997:31) stated her behaviorist theory that viewed learning language as habit formation. It means that behaviorist didn’t pay attention to how children’s brain process the input (environment) in producing language. So, we got the point that behaviorist didn’t take a look to human’s brain process. It looked like that brain was not important one in producing language.
In learning process, one of the important one is the output. If we took a look to behaviorist theory, the process in producing language is not important at all. Whereas, we could assume that the human’s brain process (in producing language) is important because this process will influence the quality of output (product of language).
Teachers in learning their student that only looked behaviorist theory gave the same treatment (conducting the environment) for all of their learners (especially young learners). Whereas, we have known that every human were born with their unique characteristics and language acquisition device (brain) to learn language. So, in learning language both of innate capacity (brain) and environment (input) is assumed important.
In collecting the data, the writers use qualitative research and descriptive analysis method. By using this method, the writers collect the data and describe the problems briefly in order to analyze and find out solution.
B. Formulation of The Problem
After finding some problems, the writers can formulate the problems as follows:
1. What is Interactionist Paradigm?
2. What is The Relationship between Interactionist Paradigm and Social Context?
3. What is The Relationship among Interactionist Paradigm, Social Relationship and Learning Language Process?
C. Purposes of The Paper
This paper has a purpose is to know:
1. Interactionist Paradigm
2. Relationship between Interactionist Paradigm and Social Context
3. Relationship among Interactionist Paradigm, Social Relationship, and Learning Language Process
D. Uses of The Paper
By completing this paper, the writers have a wish that it will be useful for:
1. Government
This paper can be used as a contribution in increasing teaching learning process quality.
2. Teacher
This paper can be used as reference in order to make teaching learning process more have quality.
3. Society
This paper can be used as recommendations in teaching children at their first time.
E. Procedure of The Paper
In completing this paper, the writers use qualitative research and descriptive analysis method. By using this method, the writers collect the data and describe the problems briefly in order to analyze and find out solution.
CHAPTER II
DISCUSSION
A. Theoretical Studies
1. Definition of Psycholinguistics
Firstly, before we are going stated some theories about psycholinguistics, it is important for us to understand what does psycholinguistics study about. Based on Clark and Clark (1997) stated that psycholinguistics studies concern in comprehension (how people understand spoken and written language), speech production (how people produce language), and acquisition (how people learn language).
According to Cowles (2011:10), Psycholinguistics came from psychology and linguistics. Linguistics is the Scientifics study of language. Psychology is the Scientifics study of human behavior and cognition. So, psycholinguistics is the relationship between aspect of human cognition on processing, producing and using language. It’s supported by Scovel (1998:4) who states that psycholinguistics is the use of language and speech as a window to the nature and structure of human mind.
On the other hand, Field (2003:2) that restated by Sa’diyah (2008) psycholinguistics explores the relationship between human mind and language.
From some definition above, the writer will conclude that Psycholinguistics is the study of how humans acquire, produce, and use language by using human mind.
2. Definition of Paradigm
Irpan (2012) stated that:
“Paradigm in the intellectual discipline is the perspective of one's self and the environment that will influence the thinking (cognitive), attitude (affective), and behave (conative). Paradigm can also mean a set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices applied in looking reality in the same community, in particular, in an intellectual discipline.”
3. Definition of Psycholinguistics Paradigm
Finding the definition of psycholinguistics and paradigm, the writer can conclude that psycholinguistics paradigm is the assumption or concept about how humans acquire, produce, and use language by using human mind.
B. Interactionist Paradigm
Before we are going to talk about interactionist paradigm, we ask where does interactionist paradigm come? Based on the definition of psycholinguistics paradigm itself we found the term “acquire”. In acquiring language, there are three boundaries paradigm, there are interactionist, behaviorist, and mentalist.
Different with behaviorist and mentalist theory that viewed the important thing of language acquisition is one of input (linguistic environment and internal language processing (learner’s brain or learner’s internal mechanism). According to Ellis (1997:44) stated that interactionist viewed both of input and internal language processing are important in language acquisition. It’s supported by Campbell and Lindsay (2010) who stated that Interactionists argue that language development is both biological and social. Interactionists argue that language learning is influenced by the desire of children to communicate with others.
Remembering this paradigm, we viewed of two major things, there are input (social) and internal language processing (biological). According to Jordan (2004:219-220) who restated Long’s interaction hypothesis that said in the interaction rule the most essential things are negotiation of meaning and comprehensible input.
Why input is important? According to Ellis (1997:47) that restated Stephen Krenshen’s input hypothesis stated that the right level of input (such as correct grammatical form) makes communication understandable. Whereas, Long’s interaction more take a look to negotiation of meaning. According to Jordan (2004:220) stated that negotiation of meaning causes L2 learners who are essentially concerned with meaning rather that form to pay attention to the form in order to understand the message.
C. The Relationship between Interactionist Paradigm and Social Context
As we already know that every society is shaped by culture. So that, we can’t disown that culture get our life influence involve our communication. According to Saville-Troike (2006:16) stated that input and interaction vary depending on cultural and social factors. It’s supported by Levine and Mara (unknown:65) who stated that culture influence communication style.
Remembering the views above, it is important for us to make a good interaction with children that learn their first language. As the aphorism said that children learning what they hear. It means that they learn everything what they hear even it’s good or not.
According to Saville-Troike (2006:27) who emphasized the importance of social context for language acquisition and use. There are two foci for the study of SLA from this perspective: micro social and macro social.
1. Micro social focus
The concerns within the micro social focus relate to language acquisition and use in immediate social contexts of production, interpretation, and interaction. The frameworks provided by Variation Theory and Accommodation Theory include exploration of systematic differences in learner production which depend on contexts of use, and they consider why the targets of SLA may be different even within groups who are ostensibly learning the “same” language. Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory also contributes to this focus, viewing interaction as the essential genesis of language.
2. Macrosocial focus
The concerns of the macrosocial focus relate language acquisition and use to broader ecological contexts, including cultural, political, and educational settings. The Ethnography of Communication framework extends the notion of what is being acquired in SLA beyond linguistic and cultural factors to include social and cultural knowledge that is required for appropriate use, and leads us to consider second language learners as members of groups or communities with sociopolitical as well as linguistic bounds. The frameworks provided by Acculturation Theory and Social Psychology offer broader understandings of how such factors as identity, status, and values affect the outcomes of SLA.
D. The Relationship among Interactionist Paradigm, Social Relationship and Learning Language Process
As human that socialize one another, sometime they have a special relationship (closer relationship). As interactionist viewed the most important thing of interaction is negotiation of meaning. In negotiate meaning every human have their rule to interact the negotiate meaning. It is viewed that the closeness of social relationship among human will be easier the process of negotiation meaning.
As Philp (2008:83) argued that social goals of affiliation and participation impact learner’s interaction with other and these interaction in turn have consequence for language use and language development. This view was clear to clarify that the interaction among children that have close social relationship take influence to how children acquire language.
CHAPTER III
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
According to interactionist paradigm who viewed that in language acquisition is important to take a look to both of environment and learner’s brain. As environment that is shaped by culture, it is also as consideration to how language acquire.
Actually if we pay attention deeply to how children interact one another, we can take benefits for learning language process because as we know that children attest to the complex interaction between linguistics, social, and cognitive needs. We argued that an intense relationship between two children (peer interaction) will help them to learn language each other.
Further, the question appear that is it effective that using social relationship in order to get linguistics goal (learning language process in acquiring language of children)? It still blur to answer if we think about how difficult to analyze what kind of relationship among children that appropriate in learning language. Beside of that, we have to consider again about when the process occurs to find out the effectiveness of this interaction, social relationship in teaching learning process.
B. Suggestion
Refers to interactionist paradigm in acquiring language, it is very important for us (family) to introduce the language through a process of interaction so that children's language acquisition and development can work properly. Furthermore, we also can use the social relationship among our children with their friend that have close interaction in acquiring language.
Bibliography
Campbell, Ashley and Lindsay Mailma. (2010). Language Development: Theory of Language Development. [Online]. Available.http://languagedevelopment.tripod.com/id15.html [27-03-2013]
Cowles, H. Wind. (2011). Psycholinguistics 101. United State of America : Springer Publishing Company, LLC
Ellis, Rod. (1997). Second Language Acquisition. New York : Oxford University Press
Irpan. (2012). Psycholinguistics Of Interactionist Paradigm. [Online]. Availabe.http://irpan28.blogspot.com/2012/05/psycholinguistics-of-interactionist.html [27-03-2013]
Jordan, Geoff. (2004). Theory Construction in Second Language Acquisition. Amsterdam : John Benjamins Publishing Company
Levine, Deena R. and Mara B. Adelman. (unknown). Beyond Language Cross-Cultural Communication Second Edition. New Jersey : Rentice Hall Regents
Philp, Jenefer, et all. (2008). Second Language Acquisition and The Young Learners. Amsterdam : John Benjamins Publishing Company
Sa’diyah, Halimatus. (2008). A Psycholinguistic Study On Perceptive Language Disorder Of The Main Characters In Mozart And The Whale Film. Thesis : State Islamic University of Malang
Saville-Troike, Muriel. (2008). Introducing Second Language Acquisition. New York : Cambridge University Press
Scovel, Thomas. (1998). Psycholinguistics. New York : Oxford University Press
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar