Contrastive Analysis, Error Analysis and Interlanguage

Contrastive Analysis, Error Analysis and Interlanguage

1. The "Outreach" of the Areas of Research

   • Contrastive Analysis
     • Is claimed to be central to all linguistic research-in developing a general theory of language based on the discovery of the "universals" of language
   • Error Analysis
     • Is significant for the insights it provides into the strategies employed in second language acquisition, and in turn into the process of language learning in general
   • Interlanguage
     • implications for theories of language contact, language change and language acquisition, besides its usefulness in describing, special language types.

2. Contrastive Analysis

   • Charles C. Fries
     • Established contrastive linguistic analysis as an integral component of the methodology of TL teaching.
       • The most effective materials are based upon a scientific description of the language to be learned carefully compared with a parallel description of the native language of the learner
     • Lado
       • work Linguistics Across Cultures
         • Manual for practical contrastive studies.
     • Chomsky
       • Language Universals
   • The Rationale for CA
     • Three sourses: (a) practical experience of foreign language teachers; (b) studies of language contact in bilingual situations; (c) theory of learning.
     • Foreign language teacher knows that mistakes can be traced to the "pull of the mother tongue."
       • A "carry over" seems to result in the largest number of deviant sentences in areas where the structures of the native language and the TL differ the most.
         • "interference," which Weinreich defines as "those instances of deviation from the norms of either language which occur in the speech of bilinguals as a result of their familiarity with more than one language."
         • "transfer" refers to the hypothesis that the learning of a task is either facilitated ("positive" transfer) or impeded ("negative" transfer) by the previous learning- of another task, depending on, among other things, the degree of similarity or difference obtaining between the two tasks.
   • The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis
     • "strong" version of the CA hypothesis (Lee 1968)
       • 1. that the prime cause, or even the sole cause, of difficulty and error in foreign-language learning is interference coming from the learners' native language
       • 2. that the difficulties are chiefly, or wholly, due to the differences between the two languages
       • 3. that the greater these differences are, the more acute the learning difficulties will be
       • 4. that the results of a comparison between the two languages are needed to predict the difficulties and errors which will occur in learning the foreign language
       • 5. that what there is to teach can best be found by comparing the two languages and then subtracting what is common to them, so that 'what the student has to learn equals the sum of the differences established by the contrastive analysis
   • Its Pedagogical Claims
     • Potential role of CA in TL teaching.
     • Hall (1968) says uniform, standard textbook hould be geared to the native language of the learner;
       • Crucial role of CA in both "didactic and "methodic"
         • The results of CA provide ideal criteria for selecting testing items
   • CA and Linguistic Models
     • The earlier contrastive studies were conducted in the structural framework, although structural linguistics, with its insistence on describing each language in its own terms, theoretically precluded any comparison across languages.
       • Taxonomic CA displayed the similarities and differences between languages in terms of similarities and differences in
         • i) the form
         • ii) the distribution of comparable units
       • Three aspects of the TG model have profoundly influenced CA:
         • 1) the universal base hypothesis
           • Provides a sounder theoretical foundation for CA as contrasted with the structuralisms relativity hypothesis
             • The assumption that all languages are alike at an abstract
         • 2) the deep and surface structure distinction
         • 3) the rigorous and explicit description of linguistic phenomena.
       • The explicit incorporation of two levels of linguistic organization makes it possible for the contrastive linguist to capture and represent the intuitions of bilinguals about the translation equivalence of utterances in two languages, although they are disparate on the surface
         • Adaptation of mathematical models
           • Descriptions to be rigorous and explicit
   • CA: The Methodology
     • a) Selection
       • Firthian "polysystemic" approach. Assumption that language is a "system of systems."
       • b) Comparability: the problem of equivalence
         • For a given sentence in language A there would be only one "roughly unique" translation in language B
         • Harris proposed to construct a "transfer" grammar on the basis of the "minimal grammatical differences
         • Catford believes that "the only basis for equating phonemes or for equating grammatical units in two languages is extra-linguistic-is substantial rather than formal." The test of translation equivalence is the interchangeability of the items in a given situation.
         • (i) structural (or formal) equivalence; (ii) "translation" equivalence; (iii) both structural and translation equivalence.
   • The Scope of Contrastive Studies
     • The "competing" terms differ from each other in the two languages; and interferences are likely on the non-denotative meaning level of the second language, the source of which lies in the influence of the mother tongue
     • Is necesary to include comparison of cultures as an integral part of contrastive linguistics,
       • More studies in phonology and syntax, and less in lexicography and semantics.
   • Critics
     • (i) criticism of the predictions made by contrastive analysis
       • Many of the difficulties predicted by CA do not show up in the actual learner performance at al
         • The non-occurrence of error does not necessarily invalidate the prediction
           • It may confirm it in that it provides evidence that the student is avoiding the use of problematic structures
     • (ii) criticism of the theoretical basis of CA
       • it may confirm it in that it provides evidence that the student is avoiding the use of problematic structures
         • Is needed free theory of errors and, for another, "predictive" CA brings to light areas of difficulty not even noticed by EA
           • CA is in principle incapable of accounting for learner behavior.
           • interference is an otiose idea and that ignorance is the real cause of errors (Newmark and Reibel 1968)

3. Error Analysis

   • A was an ad hoc attempt to deal with the practical needs of the classroom teacher.
     • The goals of traditional EA
       • Purely pragmatic
       • "feedback" value in designing pedagogical materials and strategies
       • identifying the areas of difficulty for the learner, could help in
         • (i) determining the sequence of presentation of target items in textbook and classroom, with the difficult items following the easier ones
         • ii) deciding the relative degree of emphasis, explanation and practice required in putting across various items in the TL
         • (iii) devising remedial lessons and exercises;
         • (iv) selecting items for testing the learner's proficiency.
     • The methodology
       • 1. collection of data
         • 2. identification of errors
           • 3. classification into error types
             • 4. statement of relative frequency of error types
               • 5. identification of the areas of difficulty in the TL
                 • 6. therapy
       • Scholars realized that there were many kinds of errors besides those due to interlingual interference that could neither be predicted nor explained by CA.
         • The claim for using EA as a primary pedagogical tool was based on three arguments
           • (1) EA does not suffer from the inherent limitation of CA
             • interlingual transfer
             • intralanguage errors
           • 2) EA, unlike CA, provides data on actual, attested problems and not hypothetical problems and therefore forms a more efficient and economical basis for designing pedagogical strategies
           • (3) EA is not confronted with the complex theoretical problems encountered by CA
       • There is no necessity for a prior comparison of grammars and that an error based analysis is "equally satisfactory, more fruitful, and less time consuming" (Wilkins 1968)
         • EA has its role as a testing ground for the predictions of CA as well as to supplement its results.
   • The Reorientation of EA
     • a. On the notion of "error
       • is a function of the traditional practice to take a teacher-centered viewpoint of the learner's performance and to judge the latter in terms of the norms of the TL.
     • Errors VS mistakes
       • Mistakes are deviations due to performance factors such as memory limitations
         • spelling pronunciations, fatigue, emotional strain, etc.
       • Errors are systematic, consistent deviances characteristic of the learner's linguistic system at a given stage of learning
         • "transitional competence"
           • intermediate systems constructed by the learner in the process of his language learning
     • The goals of EA
       • the theoretical aspect of EA is as worthy of study in and of itself as is that of child language acquisition and can, in turn, provide insights into the process of language acquisition in general.
     • The data and method of EA
       • Not all errors are overtly observable,
       • The "covertly erroneous" utterances
         • Utterances that are superficially well formed and acceptable, but produced by a set of rules different from those of the TL
         • The learner's errors-overt or covert-"are not properly to be regarded as right or wrong in themselves but only as evidence of a right or wrong system" (Corder
         • Describe the whole of the learner's linguistic system and to compare it with that of the TL.

4. Interlanguage (Selinker)

   • "idiosyncratic dialects" (Corder
   • "approximative systems" (Nemser
     • (1) Leamer's speech at a given time is the patterned product of a linguistic system, La, distinct from LS and L T; 2) La's at successive stages of learning form an evolving series La; 3) In a given contact situation, the La's of learners at the same stage of proficiency roughly coincide, with major variations ascribable to differences in learning experience.
   • 1) it captures the indeterminate status of the learner's system between his native language and the T1; (2) it represents the "atypical rapidity" with which the learner's language changes, or its instability; 3) focussing on the term "language," it explicitly recognizes the rule-governed, systematic nature of the learner's performance and its adequacy as a functional communicative system.
     • Treats child language learning as a progression of self-contained, internally structured systems, getting increasingly similar to the adult language system.
   • Explanatory Theory of Interlanguage
     • Selinker, the most crucial fact that any description of IL must account for is the phenomenon of fossilization.
       • In linguistic items, rules, and subsystems which speakers of a particular NL will tend to keep in their IL relative to a particular TL
     • Selinker posits the existence of a genetically determined latent psychological structure
       • "which is activated whenever an adult attempts to produce meanings, which he may have, in a second language he is learning
         • Psychological structure contains five central processes (language transfer, transfer of training, strategies of second-language learning, strategies of second-language communication and overgeneralization of TL linguistic material.
           • Minor ones: hypercorrection, spelling pronunciation, cognate pronunciation, holophrase learning,
             • "Second-language communication strategy" would be the tendency to stop learning once the learner feels he has attained a "functional competence" in the TL.
     • observable data for interlingual identification
       • (1) utterances in the learner's native language produced by the learner; (2) IL utterances produced by the learner; (3) TL utterances by the native speakers of that TL
   • The Empirical Evidence
     • Learner's IL (i) exhibits frequent and systematic occurrence of elements not attributable to either the learner's NL or TL; (ii) constitutes a system exhibiting true internal coherence when studied in sui generis terms.
       • Deviation in the successive stages of language learning; *earlier stages: syncretism (under-differentiation; * later stages: processes of reinterpretation, hypercorrection, etc.
         • Nemser posits the play of two forces: *demands of communication force; * demands of economy force.
       • Dickerson demonstrates that the learner's output at every stage is both systematic and variable
         • Dickerson's use of the Labovian variability model to the study of TL acquisition is significant for at least two reasons
           • (1) methodologically, it is ideally suited for the study of manifestly unstable language phenomena such as learners' intermediate systems; (2) theoretically, it provides a more plausible explanatory account of the so-called backsliding to IL norms.
   • IL in Relation to CA and EA
     • Different attitude toward learner's performance, especially toward the "errors.
     • while CA is concerned exclusively with that aspect of the learner's performance which can be correlated with the characteristics of his native language, IL avoids this limitation
     • Methodologically, IL may be said to incorporate the assumptions of both CA and EA.
       • CA contrasts the learner's native language and the TL, and conventional EA involves contrast between the learner's performance and the TL, IL takes all three systems into account,