The Interaction hypothesis is a theory of second-language

acquisition which states that the development of language

proficiency is promoted by face-to-face interaction and communication.
[1]
The idea existed in the 1980s,[2][3] but is usually credited to Michael
Long for his 1996 paper The role of the linguistic environment in
second language acquisition.[4][5] There are two forms of the Interaction
Hypothesis: the "strong" form and the "weak" form. The "strong" form is
the position that the interaction itself contributes to language
development. The "weak" form is the position that interaction is simply
the way that learners find learning opportunities, whether or not they
make productive use of them.[1]
Outline[edit]
Similarly to Krashen's input hypothesis, the interaction hypothesis
claims that comprehensible input is important for language learning. In
addition, it claims that the effectiveness of comprehensible input is
greatly increased when learners have to negotiate for meaning.[6] This
occurs when there is a breakdown in communication which
interlocutors attempt to overcome.[7]One of the participants in
a conversation will say something that the other does not understand;
the participants will then use various communicative strategies to help
the interaction progress. The strategies used when negotiating
meaning may include slowing down speech, speaking more
deliberately, requests for clarification or repair of speech,
or paraphrases.[8]
Interactions often result in learners receiving negative evidence.[7]
[6]
That is, if learners say something that their interlocutors do not
understand, after negotiation the interlocutors may model the correct
language form. In doing this, learners can receive feedback on
their production and on grammar that they have not yet mastered.
[6]
The process of interaction may also result in learners receiving more
input from their interlocutors than they would otherwise. [7] Furthermore,
if learners stop to clarify things that they do not understand, they may
have more time to process the input they receive. This can lead to
better understanding and possibly the acquisition of new language
forms.[6] Finally, interactions may serve as a way of focusing
learners' attention on a difference between their knowledge of

the target language and the reality of what they are hearing; it may also
focus their attention on a part of the target language of which they are
not yet aware.[5]
Primacy of interaction[edit]
Although there are several studies that link interaction with language
acquisition,[9] not all researchers subscribe to the idea that interaction is
the primary means by which language proficiency develops. [8] In
a survey of the literature on the subject, Larsen-Freeman and Long say
that interaction is not necessary for language acquisition; they do say,
however, that it helps in certain circumstances.[10] Gass and Selinker
claim that as well as interaction facilitating learning, it may also function
as a priming device, "setting the stage" for learning rather than being
the means by which learning takes place.[5] In addition, Ellis notes that
interaction is not always positive. He says that sometimes it can make
the input more complicated, or produce amounts of input which
overwhelm learners. According to Ellis, this can happen if interlocutors
use lengthy paraphrases or give complex definitionsof a word that was
not understood, and he comes to the conclusion that the role of
interaction in language acquisition is a complex one. [6]
The Interaction Hypothesis is a type of theory proposing that one of
most effective methods of learning a new language is through personal
and direct interaction. This theory is applied specifically to the
acquisition of a foreign or a second language. It is usually attributed to
Professor Michael Long, when he wrote a paper entitled The Role of
the Linguistic Environment in Second Language Acquisition in 1996.
Through the Interaction Hypothesis, Professor Long integrated and
reconciled two hypotheses on second language acquisition (SLA): the
input and the output hypotheses. TheInput Hypothesis states that a
language learner only needs to be supplied with input through the
forms of reading, listening to conversations, and lessons on grammar
and vocabulary. The Output Hypothesis, on the other hand, stresses
the importance of practicing and speaking to retain and remember the
language. The Interaction Hypothesis combines both the input and
output by stating that interaction is not only a means for a learner to
study the language, but also a way for the learner to practice what he
has learned.

Ad
Among the types of interactions, conversation is probably the most
emphasized in the Interaction Hypothesis, an idea most probably
derived from the discourse approach by Professor Evelyn Hatch who,
in 1978, wrote papers that stressed the importance of constant
communication and interaction for SLA. The Interaction Hypothesis
acknowledges that during conversations, there are certain situations
wherein a participant does not understand what the other says, but it is
in these situations where learning becomes more effective. The theory
refers to this occurrence as negotiation, wherein the participants will
attempt to understand and repair the miscommunication during the
interaction.
The first step in the negotiation is the interaction itself, when both
participants begin to engage in conversation. The second step, the
negative feedback, occurs when a participant does not understand a
certain word, sometimes seen in a nonverbal action such as in the
furrowing of the brow. In some cases, the other participant may request
clarification by saying, Pardon? or Can you say that again? The
process wherein the misunderstood participant strives to make the
other participant understand is called modification output. The
participant may paraphrase or give examples to make the meaning of
the word clearer, until the other participant responds in an affirmative
way that he has understood.
Interaction Hypothesis suggests an interaction between a secondlanguage learner and a native speaker, so the learner can study the
language in its most authentic setting. In this way, the learner not only
learns about the language, but also the nuances and other nonverbal
cues the go along with the words. Many universities in Englishspeaking countries have English programs and classes focusing on
personal interaction for many foreign students who go abroad just to
learn how to speak English.