Contrastive analysis is the systematic study of two languages to identify their structural differences and similarities. It was originally used to establish language families but was later applied to second language acquisition in the 1960s. The contrastive analysis hypothesis claimed that elements similar between a learner's first and second language would be easier to acquire, while differences would be more difficult. However, empirical evidence showed this could not predict all errors, and some uniform errors occurred regardless of first language. This led to the development of error analysis and the concept of interlanguage, seeing second language acquisition as its own rule-governed linguistic system rather than an imperfect version of the target language.
Contrastive analysis is the systematic study of two languages to identify their structural differences and similarities. It was originally used to establish language families but was later applied to second language acquisition in the 1960s. The contrastive analysis hypothesis claimed that elements similar between a learner's first and second language would be easier to acquire, while differences would be more difficult. However, empirical evidence showed this could not predict all errors, and some uniform errors occurred regardless of first language. This led to the development of error analysis and the concept of interlanguage, seeing second language acquisition as its own rule-governed linguistic system rather than an imperfect version of the target language.
Contrastive analysis is the systematic study of two languages to identify their structural differences and similarities. It was originally used to establish language families but was later applied to second language acquisition in the 1960s. The contrastive analysis hypothesis claimed that elements similar between a learner's first and second language would be easier to acquire, while differences would be more difficult. However, empirical evidence showed this could not predict all errors, and some uniform errors occurred regardless of first language. This led to the development of error analysis and the concept of interlanguage, seeing second language acquisition as its own rule-governed linguistic system rather than an imperfect version of the target language.
languages with a view to identifying their structural differences and similarities. Historically it has been used to establish language genealogies. Contrastive Analysis and Second Language Acquisition
Contrastive Analysis was used extensively in the field of Second
Language Acquisition (SLA) in the 1960s and early 1970s, as a method of explaining why some features of a Target Language were more difficult to acquire than others. According to the behaviorist theories prevailing at the time, language learning was a question of habit formation, and this could be reinforced or impeded by existing habits. Therefore, the difficulty in mastering certain structures in a second language (L2) depended on the difference between the learners' mother language (L1) and the language they were trying to learn. History The theoretical foundations for what became known as the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis were formulated in Lado's Linguistics Across Cultures (1957). In this book, Lado claimed that "those elements which are similar to [the learner's] native language will be simple for him, and those elements that are different will be difficult". While this was not a novel suggestion, Lado was the first to provide a comprehensive theoretical treatment and to suggest a systematic set of technical procedures for the contrastive study of languages. This involved describing the languages (using structuralist linguistics), comparing them and predicting learning difficulties. History During the 1960s, there was a widespread enthusiasm with this technique, manifested in the contrastive descriptions of several European languages, many of which were sponsored by the Center of Applied Linguistics in Washington, DC. It was expected that once the areas of potential difficulty had been mapped out through Contrastive Analysis, it would be possible to design language courses more efficiently. Contrastive Analysis, along with Behaviorism and Structuralism exerted a profound effect on SLA curriculum design and language teacher education, and provided the theoretical pillars of Audio-Lingual Method. Criticism In its strongest formulation, the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis claimed that all the errors made in learning the L2 could be attributed to 'interference' by the L1. However, this claim could not be sustained by empirical evidence that was accumulated in the mid- and late 1970s. Criticism It was soon pointed out that many errors predicted by Contrastive Analysis were inexplicably not observed in learners' language. Even more confusingly, some uniform errors were made by learners irrespective of their L1. It thus became clear that Contrastive Analysis could not predict all learning difficulties, but was certainly useful in the retrospective explanation of errors. Error analysis
Pit Corder (1967) The significance of learner‘s
errors. • L2 acquisition should not be looked at from a purely pedagogical perspective. • Errors in L2 are interesting because they reflect underlying linguistic rules. • The study of L2 can be seen as a subfield of general linguistics or cognitive science. Error analysis
Contrastive analysis Error analysis
Pedagogical orientation Scientific orientation
Focus on linguistic and
Focus on input, practice, cognitive processes inductive learning Errors of transfer Multiple types of errors Interlanguage
Larry Selinker (1972): A second language is
not an imperfect copy of the target language but a rule-governed linguist system in its own right. Rod Ellis (1990): • A learner’s interlanguage is a linguistic system. • A learner’s interlanguage consists primarily of implicit linguistic knowledge.
• A learner’s interlanguage is permeable.
• A learner’s interlanguage is transitional.
• A learner’s interlanguage is variable.
• A learner’s interlanguage is the product of
multiple interacting forces: transfer, general learning mechanisms, input. • A learner’s interlanguage may fossilize. Interlingual vs. Intralingual There are two types of interferences with second language aquisition. Intralingual has more to Interlingual is the effect do with proper usage of of language forms when grammar. Intralingual two languages cross or usually occurs once a overlap. It involves with large portion of the accurate pronunciation second language has been or proper way of acquired. This is where describing something. they start making For example, instead of mistakes of the English "Jackbook" someone language that is not may say "the book of explicitly taught, such as, Jack." irregular verbs and the correct or incorrect usage of articles.