Acculturation
The Acculturation Model (Schumann, 1978) proposes that second language acquisition is determined by the degree of social and psychological distance between the learner and the target language community. The closer a learner is to the TL group — socially and psychologically — the more input, interaction, and integration they experience, and the more they acquire. When distance is great, acquisition stagnates, and the learner's interlanguage may fossilize at an early stage.
The Model
Schumann defined acculturation as "the social and psychological integration of the learner with the target language (TL) group" (1978, p. 34). He proposed two clusters of distance variables:
Social Distance Factors
| Factor | Promotes acquisition (low distance) | Inhibits acquisition (high distance) |
|---|---|---|
| Social dominance | TL and L2 groups are roughly equal in status | L2 group is dominant, subordinate, or politically marginalized |
| Integration pattern | Assimilation or acculturation | Preservation of own culture; rejection of TL culture |
| Enclosure | L2 group shares social institutions (schools, workplaces, churches) with TL group | L2 group has its own separate institutions |
| Cohesiveness | L2 group is loosely organized; members mix with TL group | L2 group is tightly knit and inward-looking |
| Group size | Small L2 group relative to TL community | Large L2 group; easy to function without TL |
| Cultural congruence | L1 and TL cultures are similar | Cultures are very different |
| Attitudes | Positive mutual attitudes between groups | Negative attitudes, prejudice, hostility |
| Intended length of residence | Long-term or permanent | Short-term, temporary |
Psychological Distance Factors
| Factor | Description |
|---|---|
| Language shock | Fear of looking foolish when using the L2 |
| Culture shock | Disorientation, anxiety, and hostility when immersed in an unfamiliar culture |
| Motivation | Integrative vs instrumental orientation |
| Ego permeability | Willingness to let the boundaries of one's identity become flexible enough to adopt a new language |
The Alberto Case Study
The model was developed from Schumann's longitudinal case study of Alberto, a 33-year-old Costa Rican worker in the United States. Over ten months, Alberto showed virtually no progress in English morphosyntax despite considerable exposure. Schumann attributed this to maximal social and psychological distance: Alberto worked with other Spanish speakers, socialized within his own community, had no intention to stay permanently, and showed low integrative motivation.
Alberto's English resembled an early-stage pidgin: simplified verb forms, no auxiliaries, no inversion for questions, missing inflections. This led Schumann to propose the Pidginization Hypothesis — that early SLA, when social/psychological distance is high, mirrors the structural simplification found in pidgin languages.
Criticisms
The Acculturation Model has been extensively critiqued:
- Untestable as formulated. The model has too many variables with no clear mechanism for how they interact or how to measure "distance" operationally (Larsen-Freeman & Long, 1991).
- Too deterministic. It treats learners as products of their social context, underestimating individual agency, effort, and variation within the same social group.
- Single case study basis. Alberto may have had other factors affecting his acquisition (aptitude, cognitive ability, L1 literacy) that were not controlled for.
- Irrelevant to EFL. The model was designed for naturalistic immigrant SLA contexts. In classroom EFL settings (e.g., Vietnam, Japan, Brazil), social distance to a TL community is not the primary variable.
- Ignores instruction. The model has no role for formal instruction, corrective feedback, or focus on form, all of which can override "natural" acquisition patterns.
Despite these criticisms, the model made an enduring contribution by foregrounding the social and affective dimensions of SLA at a time when the field was dominated by cognitive and linguistic approaches.
Later Developments
Schumann (1986) revised the model, arguing that acculturation was not the only causal variable but that SLA "is just one type of acculturation" — language development is a subset of the broader process of cultural adaptation.
Norton (2000) developed the concept of investment as a more nuanced alternative to motivation and acculturation. Norton argued that learners are not simply "motivated" or "acculturated" but make strategic investments in language learning based on their understanding of how it will increase their cultural capital and social power. This reframing addresses the agency problem in Schumann's model.
Dörnyei (2005) and others incorporated social-contextual factors into motivation theory (the L2 learning experience in the L2 Motivational Self System), acknowledging Schumann's insight that social context matters without adopting the full acculturation framework.
Why It Matters for ELT
- Social context is not neutral. Even in classroom settings, the social dynamics of the learning group, attitudes toward the TL and its speakers, and learners' sense of belonging all affect acquisition.
- Study-abroad programs succeed partly through acculturation. The documented benefits of immersion and study abroad (Freed, 1995) align with the model's prediction that reduced social distance promotes acquisition.
- Immigrant learners face real acculturation challenges. For teachers working with immigrant populations, understanding social and psychological distance helps explain why some learners progress rapidly while others plateau.
- Cultural content in coursebooks matters. Positive, diverse representations of TL cultures can reduce psychological distance. Tokenistic or stereotypical portrayals may increase it.
- The Affective Filter captures part of the same reality. Schumann's psychological distance factors (language shock, culture shock, ego permeability) overlap significantly with Krashen's affective filter variables.
References
- Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Freed, B. F. (Ed.). (1995). Second Language Acquisition in a Study Abroad Context. John Benjamins.
- Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. H. (1991). An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research. Longman.
- Norton, B. (2000). Identity and Language Learning: Gender, Ethnicity and Educational Change. Longman.
- Schumann, J. H. (1976). Second language acquisition: The pidginization hypothesis. Language Learning, 26(2), 391–408.
- Schumann, J. H. (1978). The Pidginization Process: A Model for Second Language Acquisition. Newbury House.
- Schumann, J. H. (1986). Research on the acculturation model for second language acquisition. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 7(5), 379–392.