Academic journal article Quarterly Journal of Chinese Studies

Situation of Chinese Language Input in Primary & Secondary School of Nepal 1

Academic journal article Quarterly Journal of Chinese Studies

Situation of Chinese Language Input in Primary & Secondary School of Nepal 1

Article excerpt


The social use of Language is to communicate and share feeling with others. American Heritage (Dictionary of English) defines language as a communication of thoughts and feelings through a system of arbitrary signals, such as voice sounds, gestures or written symbols. Similarly, Collins Dictionary writes language as a system for the expression of thoughts, feelings, etc by the use of spoken sounds or conventional symbols. Shormani (2014) states that acquiring language is as natural as we learn how to walk, this phenomenon is indeed, as naturally as leaves coming to a tree (Shormani, 2014). According to Tokuhama - Espinosa, ' Small Children treat language as a code to be broken or a game to be played. Like a game, children gather up all the pieces they have handy and make up the rules as they go along. After they start to play, they are corrected by their peers or parents and so modify these mies until they perfect their game.' (Tokuhama- Espinosa, 2008:45). Every normal human being has capacity to learn at least a language and there are more than 6000 different languages spoken all around the world. Also, many linguists believed that most of the people in the world are using at least two different languages in their daily life (Cenoz & Genesee, 1998; Sridhar, 2009). De Angelis also agree that all humans are capable of learning and speaking more than two languages, they are all actual or potential multilingual learners and speakers at any given time in their lives. In fact, humans can be argued to be multilingual by default, with the option of being monolingual or bilingual depending on the factors such as educational and social context, personal interest, individual motivation and so forth (De Angelis, 2007:2). Gass states that "second language acquisition is shaped by the input one receives-(1997:161), so, for language input is essential for language learning and acquisition (Krashen, 1985; Long, 1996; Gass, 1997; Verspoor, Lowie and De Bot; Piske & Young- Schölten, 2009).

The primary and secondary Level students, living in multilingual environment of Nepal were provided Multilingual Education (MLE) System. The study attempted to explore how the Nepalese students were exposed to different languages as well as the present situation of Chinese language input, modes of Chinese language input and the problem faced on TCFL in the primary and secondary schools of Nepal. The study is based on Language Input Theory to analyze the situation of Multilingualism in Nepal.

Input as key of language acquisition/leaming

For learning any languages, learner need appropriate linguistic environment (input). Piske & Young- Schölten (2009:1) states that, ' as long as there is input, acquisition will occur'. He emphasized the importance of language input is for both learning as well as acquisition of any language. In the earlier days, Language input were regarded as the direct expose to target language and children learn languages by imitating the models surrounding them (Lado, 1957; Skinner, 1957, also cited in Tokuhama - Espinosa, 2008:45) and the L2 learners ' output was obviously regarded as mirror of the language which Native- speakers of the Target language provided (Gass & Selinker, 2008). Briefly, all types of data from a target language that the learners are exposed to and from which they learn is called " input" (Anani Sarab & Karimi, 2008).

According to Krashen ' s Input Hypothesis, the access of type of language input, which is comprehensive, leads the language learners to SLA (Krashen, 1985). He stated that for language acquisition, the language acquirer with "level i" must receive comprehensive input to achieve "level i+1", simply "we acquire only when we understand language that contains structure that is a little beyond where we are now ' and if not capable to understand the message, there will be no acquisition (Krashen, 1982). Krashen' s Input hypotheses on Second language acquisition, emphasize that acquisition is more important than learning; comprehensible input that should be further beyond the acquirer ' s current level ' i ' and a low or weak affective filter to allow the input 'in'. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.