What do you think?
Rate this book
Second-language Learning: Myth and Reality
110 pages, Paperback
First published January 30, 1973
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
March 6, 2022
Rather dated, but insightful into how SLA thinking has progressed over the last 40 years
August 24, 2015
I had bought read this book many years ago, sometime in the mid seventies, and it had sat on my shelves since. I picked it up this afternoon and idly started to read it again. It was well enough written to keep me going to the end.
It starts off interestingly. Paul Christophersen makes some good points about the logical difficulties of terms like mother tongue, native speaker, L1 and L2, etc. At first glance, these seem clear enough: one is born into a family, learns to speak the native language, or mother tongue or L1. Later, at school perhaps, one studies the L2, as a non-native speaker of a foreign language. But this scenario doesn't cover all situations, and leads to inconsistencies which become apparent when these other situations are considered. This the case whether they are defined in terms of order of learning, or language of the family, or which language is dominant. For example, it is not uncommon for children to first learn a language other than that of their parents, from playmates or nurses during a sojourn in another country, only to lose it through disuse upon return to the home country. Chronologically the forgotten language is the L1. In terms of dominant usage, their parent's language would be the L1. On the other hand, neither is it unheard of for children of migrant families to abandon their parent's language for the language of the country in which they now live. Or for people who move to another country to use their second language more than their first. So far, so good: it is worthwhile thinking about these situations to see how far one can usefully stretch a term like L2, and where it can lead to blind spots.
However, as one reads on it becomes apparent that there is little, apart from this sensible discussion on terminology, to be found here about second language learning. There is some reference to the fact that there are different approaches to the teaching of languages, but little or no information about what they are. There are references to the literature, but they on't amount to much.
And then there are these strange discursions on how bilingual people aren't trustworthy: "It has to be recognised that there is more maladjustment among bilinguals than among unilingual people." (pp. 78-9) There is plenty more, but this gives a taste of his views.
So, as a guide to the prejudices of the time in which it was written, I personally found this an interesting read. As a source of information on language learning, it is of limited value.
It starts off interestingly. Paul Christophersen makes some good points about the logical difficulties of terms like mother tongue, native speaker, L1 and L2, etc. At first glance, these seem clear enough: one is born into a family, learns to speak the native language, or mother tongue or L1. Later, at school perhaps, one studies the L2, as a non-native speaker of a foreign language. But this scenario doesn't cover all situations, and leads to inconsistencies which become apparent when these other situations are considered. This the case whether they are defined in terms of order of learning, or language of the family, or which language is dominant. For example, it is not uncommon for children to first learn a language other than that of their parents, from playmates or nurses during a sojourn in another country, only to lose it through disuse upon return to the home country. Chronologically the forgotten language is the L1. In terms of dominant usage, their parent's language would be the L1. On the other hand, neither is it unheard of for children of migrant families to abandon their parent's language for the language of the country in which they now live. Or for people who move to another country to use their second language more than their first. So far, so good: it is worthwhile thinking about these situations to see how far one can usefully stretch a term like L2, and where it can lead to blind spots.
However, as one reads on it becomes apparent that there is little, apart from this sensible discussion on terminology, to be found here about second language learning. There is some reference to the fact that there are different approaches to the teaching of languages, but little or no information about what they are. There are references to the literature, but they on't amount to much.
And then there are these strange discursions on how bilingual people aren't trustworthy: "It has to be recognised that there is more maladjustment among bilinguals than among unilingual people." (pp. 78-9) There is plenty more, but this gives a taste of his views.
So, as a guide to the prejudices of the time in which it was written, I personally found this an interesting read. As a source of information on language learning, it is of limited value.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews