The study of learner English J. C. Richards & G. P. Sampson 2007 년 2 학기 담당교수 : 홍우 평 이중언어커뮤니케이 션

Introduction Apparent lack of linguistic paradigm for second language research Lack of a linguistic research may yet lead to interesting and original findings: –development of new theories relevant to the particular domain under investigation –The data gathered could provide corrective feedback to general linguistic theory and to language teaching practice

The study of learners’ approximate systems Juxtaposition of language systems in SLA –a new super-system which combined features of both systems –an intersystemic interference (between two systems The notion of interference –especially interesting –appeared to account for the problems of SLA

The study of learners’ approximate systems /2 Lado (1957), Linguistics across cultures –emphasized points of contrast between two language systems: contrastive analysis arose as a field of research The major defect of CA –the attention mainly paid to the analysis of two grammars

The study of learners’ approximate systems /3 Corder (1967), The significance of learners’ errors –suggested that linguists study the process of language acquisition and the various strategies learners may use (the performance of actual learners)

The study of learners’ approximate systems /4 Error analysis –Errors should not be viewed a problems to be overcome, but rather as normal and inevitable features indicating the strategies that learners use –done within a framework which stressed interference: errors which did not fit systematically into the native language or target language system were ignored

The study of learners’ approximate systems /5 Recently… –it has been suggested that errors alone are of little interest; rather the entire linguistic system of the SL learner should be investigated A growing terminology –error analysis, idiosyncratic dialects, interlanguage, approximate systems, transitional competence

7 factors may influence and characterize these SL learner systems: –language transfer –intralingual interference –sociolinguistic situation –modality –age –successions of approximate systems –universal hierarchy of difficulty

Language transfer –sentences in the learner language may exhibit interference from the mother tongue –considered to be major, but not the only, source of difficulty by linguists doing CA –‘1/3 of the deviant sentences from SL learners could be attributed to language transfer’ (George 1971) –interacts with other factors in determining the learners’ approximate language system

Intralingual interference –items produced by the learner which reflect not the structure of the mother tongue, but generalizations based on partial exposure to the target language –SL learners try to derive the rules behind the data to which they have been exposed → develop hypotheses that correspond neither to the mother tongue nor target language –overgeneralization etc.

Sociolinguistic situation Different settings for language use result in different degrees and types of language learning & different learner language system –the socio-cultural setting on the learner’s language –the relationship between the learner and the target language community (learner’s particular motivations etc.)

Sociolinguistic situation /2 The socio-cultural setting –e.g. the distinction of compound/co-ordinate bilingualism (bread & pain) compound bilingualism: 1 concept 2 words co-ordinate bilingualism: 2 separately stored words –probably too simple a model to explain real linguistic differences but still useful for sociolinguistic analysis –tutored vs. untutored learning, EFL vs. ESL

The general motivational variables –e.g. the ‘instrumental’ type of motivation vs. the ‘integrative’ motivation Examples (the influence of social processes on the transmission/use of language) –non-standard dialects –pidgins and creoles –immigrant language learning etc. Sociolinguistic situation /3

Sociolinguistic situation /4 Other forms/patterns which may be attributable to social variables –simplification: when the need is for communication of simple information with the help of non-linguistic clues – When are you coming? vs. When you come? / Me Tarzan, you Jane –The influence of the mother tongue on the learner’s language may also vary according to the sociolinguistic situation

Modality The learner’s language may vary according to the modality of exposure to the target language and the modality of production Interference between the bilingual’s languages is generally on the productive rather than receptive side (Vildomec)

Modality /2 SL learners acquire some distinctions on the basis of auditory cues, some on the basis of articulartory cues, and others on the basis of a combination of these cues –auditory cues: the discrimination between /f/ and /θ/, /v/ and /ð/ –articulatory cues: the contrast between bilabial and velar stops (in English)

Age Some aspects of the child’s learning capacities change as he grow → may affect language learning –the child’s memory span increases –acquisition of a greater number of abstract concepts Lenneberg (1967) –notes a period of primary language acquisition, postulated to be biologically determined, continuing until puberty

In some ways adults are better prepared for language learning than children –better memories –a larger store of abstract concepts –a greater ability to form new concepts Acquisition of syntax, however, poses a task for the adult which is no longer easy –The language acquisition device (for L1 acquisition) is perhaps not readily activated Age /2

Age /3 - The LAD is activated in only 5% of adults (Selinker)? - Most language learners activate a different though still genetically determined structure (Selinker)? No categorical statement about the relationship of language learning to age can be made

Age /4 Explaining how the rules for the generation of sentences in two or more languages by the same speaker are related: different hypotheses

Successions of approximate systems The lack of stability of the learner’s approximate systems –there is invariably continuing improvement in learning the target language Many elements are observed to go through a stage where they are sometimes used and sometimes omitted –a grammar for such features might contain the rule but specify that it was optional

Universal hierarchy of difficulty A hierarchy of difficulty –is concerned with the inherent difficulty for man of certain phonological, syntactic or semantic items and structures –Some forms may be inherently difficult to learn: e.g. /v/-/ð/ & /f/-/θ/ in English –may affect the learner’s organization of what he perceives and the organization of what he produces

Universal hierarchy of difficulty /2 The cues which the learner uses to identify elements in the new language –cognates, derivatives, loan words –where the target language follows a structure in the mother tongue: is it feasible to compare categories across language? No – what is syntax in one language e.g. may be vocabulary in another

Universal hierarchy of difficulty /3 What the learner finds difficult will also depend on the degree and nature of what he has acquired of the SL SL knowledge = part of the data by which the learner infers the meaning of new elements (plural markers, tense markers, word order constraints etc.)

Universal hierarchy of difficulty /4 Difficulty in language learning defined by psycholinguists –sentence length –processing time required –derivational complexity –types of embedding –number of transformations –semantic complexity

Universal hierarchy of difficulty /5 Comprehension vs. production –Learners may avoid a word or structure they find difficult (in production): I’m going to telephone you tonight instead I’ll telephone you tonight – not the case in comprehension –Why first learned words/structures tend to be overused and may resist replacement by latter taught one : Facility and economy of effort

Significance of learner systems The seven factors discussed above suggest that the approximate system of language learners are much richer in linguistic, pedagogic and social significance than heretofore suspected Future research on the systems of language learners will take into account perhaps the interaction of all of these factors