EXPANDING SCHUMANNS PIDGINIZATION HYPOTHESIS

Schumann (1978b), in addressing criticism of his Pidginization Hypothesis for second language acquisition, elaborates further on the relationship between pidginization‐creoluation‐decreolization and second language acquisition and revises and improves on his model. I propose a further revision and expansion of Schumann's model that distinguishes socio‐cultural aspects of the pidginization cycle from the acquisitional processes of pidgmization, creolization and decrolization and that relates a wider range of language acquisition phenomena to each other. This expanded version of Schumann's model puts creolization back into the model and also adds depidgnization and first language acquisition to it Pidginization/depidginization, creolization/decreolization and first and second language acquisition are herein considered related acquisitional phenomena which develop under different circumstances as specific instances of the more general co‐occuring but opposing processes of nativization and denativization. © 1979 Language Learning Research Club, University of Michigan