7.1. THEORETICAL PRINCIPLES
The theoretical foundations of learning-centered pedagogy are guided by
the theory of language, language learning, language teaching, and curricu-
lar specifications that the proponents of the pedagogy deemed appropriate
for constructing a new pedagogy.
7.1.1. Theory of Language
Although learning-centered pedagogists have not explicitly spelled out any
specific theory of language that governs their pedagogy, their principles
and procedures imply the same theory that informs the learner-centered
pedagogy (see chap. 6, this volume, for details). They have drawn heavily
from the Chomskyan cognitive perspective on language learning, and from
the Hallidayan functional perspective on language use. They particularly
owe a debt to Halliday’s concept of
learning to mean
and his observation that
language is learned only in relation to use. They have, however, been very
selective in applying the Hallidayan perspective. For instance, they have em-
phasized the primacy of meaning and lexicon while, unlike Halliday, mini-
mizing the importance of grammar. There is also an important difference
between the NA and the CTP in terms of the theory of language: while the
NA values sociocultural aspects of pragmatic knowledge, the CTP devalues
them. The reason is simple: unlike the NA, the CTP is concerned with de-
veloping linguistic knowledge/ability that can be used for academic pur-
poses rather than developing pragmatic knowledge/ability that can be used
for social interaction.
7.1.2. Theory of Language Learning
Both the NA and the CTP share a well-articulated theory of language learn-
ing partially supported by research in L2 development. They both believe
that L2 grammar construction can take place incidentally, that is, even
when the learners’ conscious attention is not brought to bear on the gram-
matical system. There is, however, a subtle difference in their approach to
language learning. The NA treats L2 grammar construction as
largely
inci-
dental. That is, it does not rule out a restricted role for explicit focus on
grammar as part of an institutionalized language learning/teaching pro-
gram or as part of homework given to the learner. The CTP, however, treats
L2 grammar construction as
exclusively
incidental. That is, it rules out any
role for explicit focus on grammar even in formal contexts. In spite of this
difference, as we shall see, there are more similarities than differences be-
tween the two in terms of their theoretical principles and classroom proce-
dures.
136
CHAPTER 7
The language learning theory of learning-centered pedagogy rests on
the following four basic premises:
1. Language development is incidental, not intentional.
2. Language development is meaning focused, not form focused.
3. Language development is comprehension based, not production
based.
4. Language development is cyclical and parallel, not sequential and ad-
ditive.
I briefly discuss each of these premises below, highlighting the extent to
which the NA and the CTP converge or diverge.
Language development is incidental, not intentional.
In the context of L2 de-
velopment, the process of incidental learning involves the picking up of
words and structures, “simply by engaging in a variety of communicative ac-
tivities, in particular reading and listening activities, during which the
learner’s attention is focused on the meaning rather than on the form of
language” (Hulstijin, 2003, p. 349). The incidental nature of language de-
velopment has long been a subject of interest to scholars. As early as in the
17th century, philosopher Locke (1693) anticipated the basic principles of
learning-centered methods when he said:
learning how to speak a language . . . is an intuitive process for which human
beings have a natural capacity that can be awakened provided only that the
proper conditions exist. Put simply, there are three such conditions: someone
to talk to, something to talk about, and a desire to understand and make your-
self understood. (cited in Howatt, 1984, p. 192)
Much later, Palmer (1921) argued that (a) in learning a second language,
we learn without knowing that we are learning; and (b) the utilization of
the adult learner’s conscious attention on language militates against the
proper functioning of the natural capacities of language development.
Krashen has put forth similar arguments in three of his hypotheses that
form part of his Monitor Model of second-language acquisition. His input
hypothesis states “humans acquire language in only one way—by under-
standing messages, or by receiving comprehensible input. . . . If input is un-
derstood, and there is enough of it, the necessary grammar is automatically
provided” (Krashen, 1985, p. 2). His acquisition/learning hypothesis states
that adults have two distinct and independent ways of developing L2 knowl-
edge/ability. One way is
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: 
