KNOWLEDGE
Linguistic knowledge takes the form of a number of dichotomies:
Declarative/procedural. Declarative knowledge (knowledge that) is explicit and can be expressed verbally. It contrasts with procedural knowledge (knowledge how) which determines our ability to handle highly automatic routines such as retrieving words or constructing sentences in our first language. Declarative knowledge involves control: it demands attentional resources and is therefore costly in terms of working memory capacity.
Declarative knowledge can be transformed into procedural knowledge through practice. This leads (a) to separate steps becoming combined and (b) to ever-increasing automaticity. The declarative/ procedural distinction has been used in accounts of second language acquisition to describe the way in which some learners move from rule-based information to the relatively automatic generation of utterances.
Implicit/explicit. Implicit linguistic knowledge manifests itself in performance but the possessor is unable to express it verbally. In second language acquisition, a system of phonology or syntax acquired in a naturalistic (i.e. non-instructional) environment might be stored by means of a mapping between a particular form and a particular context, with no explicit rule attached. Similarly, inductive teaching might present the learner with a typical set of circumstances in which a structure is to be used, without expressing these conditions of use in the form of a rule. In these cases, inferencing is necessary on the part of the user in order to turn implicit knowledge into explicit.
The implicit/explicit distinction is also important in research into first language processes. Certain traditional psycholinguistic tasks draw upon explicit knowledge: requiring subjects, for example, to memorise lists of words, and thus store explicit information. Today psycholinguists increasingly prefer to use indirect or incidental tasks. They might, for example, demonstrate that a reader reads a word more quickly as a result of having been exposed to it recently, even though the reader cannot specifically recall having seen the word.
Categorical/probabilistic. Some linguistic knowledge is categorical in form, enabling the possessor to classify material on an ‘all or none’ basis. An example is the way in which a sharp and consistent boundary is maintained between a set of phonetic exemplars which are perceived as representing one consonant and a set perceived as representing a contrasted one. Other types of linguistic knowledge are probabilistic and operate on the basis of ‘best fit’. This might permit us to recognise lexical items that have been subject to assimilation (e.g. ten pronounced [tem] in the sequence ten pounds).
Formulaic/analysed. Many infants first acquire and produce whole chunks of language in a formulaic way, without being able to analyse them into their constituents. Conversely, a minority appear to acquire speech analytically (word by word). They then have to assemble the words into chunks which are integrated phonologically and can be stored as pre-assembled lexical units. Second language learners in a ‘naturalistic’ context are more likely to acquire language formulaically, while those learning in a classroom setting acquire language in a more analysed form.
See also: ACT, Analysis, Categorical perception, Implicit learning, Incidental learning, Probabilistic
Further reading: Kellogg (1995: Chap. 6)
