Student’s full name: Lê Công Tuyền

Student’s code: 220000684

Group: 30ENG024_NNA D2020 N01

REFLECTION
ON CONTRASTIVE LINGUISTICS
Chapter 1
After finishing chapter 1, I know the basics of Contrastive Linguistic. First we need to
know what Contrastive Linguistic is. The term "linguist" can refer to a person who
professionally studies and teaches one or more languages (usually neither his own
language nor the language of the community in which he works); or is multilingual or can
serve as an interpreter or translator. The term "linguist" can be used to refer to a person
who is interested in a language family or the history of a language; or in the philosophy
of universality or the relationship between language and thought or truth. That is
representative but not exhaustive, or even very thorough or complete. We would feel
better if we developed a system of categorizing different types of linguistic enterprise
rather than making a list of everything we know.Such a classification will involve 3
criteria/ dimensions as follows: 1) The distinction between the generalist and the
particularist approaches to linguistics is made (criterion 1). "On the one hand, linguists
study specific languages. As opposed to this, they take into account the universal
phenomenon of human language, of which specific languages are examples. " (James,
1980; Sampson, 1975:4) Which approach one prefers is said to be largely a matter of
personal preference. In general, particularists are more likely to be anthropologists or
philologists than generalists, who appear to be more interested in philosophy. 2)
"Linguistic typology" (criterion 2), the second dimension, is a classification system for
the world's languages that allows for the placement of various languages according to
their preferred grammatical structures, such as. Synthetic (for instance, Russian),
analytical (for instance, English), inflectional, agglutinating/agglutinative (a language in
which various affixes may be added to the stem of a word to add to its meaning or to
show its grammatical function. Synthetic languages are sometimes used to refer to
agglutinating and inflecting languages, as well as tonal languages (for instance,
Vietnamese, which is typically thought of as an isolating language). (James, 1980; cited).
3) F employs the third strategy. De Saussure (cited by James, 1980) distinguished
between synchronic and diachronic sciences of language (criterion 3): "Everything that
relates to the static side of our science is synchronic; everything that has to do with
evolution is diachronic." ". For instance, when discussing criterion 2, we mentioned
"linguistic typology": this method is synchronic and groups languages based solely on
their current traits, not even taking into account how closely related they are historically.
In conclusion, there are numerous definitions of contrastive linguistics, despite the fact
that they are not precise. According to James, contrastive analysis lies somewhere in the
middle between the two extremes, not being either generalist or particularist. It is not
interested in categorization and, as the term "contrastive" suggests, is more interested in
the differences than the similarities between languages. The word "diachronic" refers to
change that occurs with the human individual or in accordance with ontology. One
example of this is the study of infants' language development. Since there is only one
language involved and the child advances from having no knowledge of the language
spoken around him to adequate mastery by the age of five, the child's language study is
not strictly speaking an interlanguage study. The process by which a monolingual person
becomes bilingual—using two languages—is the subject of the study of second language
acquisition or foreign language learning. Therefore, this is a real-world example of an
interlingual diachronic study. In terms of language, contrastive analysis appears to be a
hybrid (composed of unrelated parts) enterprise. A provisional definition of contrastive
analysis based on the three criteria mentioned above might be as follows: contrastive
analysis is a linguistic endeavor founded on the idea that languages can be compared and
aims to produce inverted (in the opposite order, that is, contrastive, not comparative) two-
valued typologies. Others claim that contrastive linguistics, which is considered a branch
of comparative linguistics, focuses on language pairs that are socioculturally linked
when/if they are spoken by a large number of bilingual or multilingual speakers; and
when/if phrases, sentences, paragraphs, and texts are translated from one language into
another. Contrastive linguistics, on the other hand, is more broadly defined and does not
require a socio-cultural connection between the languages being compared. It can also be
used for comparative analysis of small groups of languages as opposed to just pairs.
Contrastive linguistics, as defined by the "Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied
Linguistics" (1997), is the study of how two linguistic systems, such as grammatical or
sound systems, differ. The following is a list of the specific distinctions between
comparative and contrastive linguistics that have been demonstrated by linguists:
Comparative linguistics Contrastive linguistics
1) Generally speaking, comparative 1) In general, contrastive linguistics
linguistics makes a diachronic study with makes a synchronic study. It studies
a view to reconstructing forms in their lost languages belonging to the same period,
parent languages, or classifying languages without paying much attention to their
into families histories or language families.
2) The subjects of comparison are limited 2) The subjects of comparison may be
to its parent language its parent or notarent language.
3) Comparative linguistics aims at the 3) Contrastive linguistics aims at the
homogeneity of the languages compared. heterogeneity of the languages
compared.
 4) The languages compared are not 4) In general, the languages compared are
limited limited to a pair of languages.
5) Comparative linguistics is intended to 5) Contrastive linguistics provides a
penetrate and to make clear the laws of the practical use in language teaching,
historical development. dictionary compiling, translation,
international communication...
6) Comparative linguistics shows not only 6) Contrastive linguistics focuses on the
the similarities, but also the differences differences rather than the similarities
between or among languages compared. between pairs of languages if or when
compared
And about the Contrastive analysis as interlanguage study, There are other subfields of
linguistics that are more specialized and focused on specific linguistic units. One area of
linguistics called phonetics, for instance, "is concerned with the human noises by which
the message is actualized or given audible shape: the nature of those noises, their
combinations, and their functions in relation to the message. " (O'Connor, 1973:10;
O'Connor, 1977; James, 1980; citations cited). A subfield of linguistics known as
interlanguage study is more concerned with the process of language development than the
final product. The study of interlanguages includes contrastive analysis. F. claims... De.
According to Saussure (cited by James, 1980), contrastive analysis should be seen as
diachronic rather than synchronic in orientation. Interlanguage study, however, is
diachronic in a slightly different sense than that which F intended. De. Saussure because
he conceived of language evolution in the historical sense, which pertains to (i.e., is
related to or relevant to) change that spans (extends over or across) generations and
centuries. However, Carl James uses the word "diachronic" to refer to "ontology," or
change within the human person. I'll give you an illustration to help you understand.
There is research on the development of language in young children (Brown, 1973; cited
by James, 1980). Child language study is not strictly speaking an interlanguage study
because the child advances from having no knowledge of the language spoken around
him to adequate mastery by the age of five and because there is only one language
involved. But the study of second language or foreign language learning is concerned
with a monolingual becoming a bilingual: 2 languages [language 1 (L1) and language 2
(L2)] are involved. So, we are dealing with a real instance of an interlingual diachronic
study. Translation theory (which is concerned with the processes of text conversion),
error analysis, and contrastive analysis are the 3 branches of 2-valued (2 languages)
interlingual linguistics. Each set of texts has its own interlingua. The learner, on the other
hand, is said to develop a succession of successive and intersecting approximative
systems (Nemser, 1971; cited by James, 1980) or transitional dialects (Corder, 1971;
cited by James, 1980) as they advance towards mastery of the foreign language,
according to error analysts. Each stage has distinct characteristics of its own as well as
characteristics with the approximative systems that came before it and those that came
after it. Now come to Contrastive analysis as pure or applied linguistics. The distinction
typically made between pure and applied linguistics, according to James, appears to be an
important factor that was overlooked. The reader is merely referred to Corder's thorough
account of the subject to take the opposing view as follows: "The application of linguistic
knowledge to some object-or applied linguistics, as its name implies- is an activity. This
is not to say that the differences between these two cannot be understood. It is not a
theoretical investigation. Theoretical studies are used in it. The applied linguist does not
produce theories; rather, they consume or employ them. [Corder, 1973:10] Additionally,
James claims that he would like to use his opposing viewpoint to argue that there is a
science of applied linguistics, and that is why endorsing (giving one's official approval or
support to a claim or statement. The quote from Malmberg below: "The applications of
linguistics can, and should be regarded as sciences in their own rights. We must be very
careful to distinguish between purely scientific research and practical applications. (")
(Malmberg. James, 1980, citing 1971:3 One more slightly paradoxical reason why James
believes it is necessary to postulate—accept something as true, especially as the
foundation for reasoning or argument—the existence of a science known as applied
linguistics is that it is a hybrid field that includes linguistics as well as psychology and
sociology. The applied linguist must evaluate a statement's linguistic validity as well as
its psychological and/or sociological validity in order to determine its relevance.
According to James, there isn't a single area of applied linguistics that only uses linguists.
For James, and obviously for us, the answer to the question "Is contrastive analysis a
form of pure or of applied linguistics?" is both. Although pure contrastive analysis is a
peripheral (of secondary or minor importance) endeavor in pure linguistics, it is a primary
concern of applied linguistics. Every time we refer to contrastive analysis moving
forward, we'll mean applied contrastive analysis. And last I have learned about
Contrastive analysis and bilingualism. According to some descriptions (cited by James,
1980), contrastive analysis is a type of interlingual study or interlinguistics. As a result,
and in some other ways, it shares many similarities with the study of bilingualism, which
is defined as the possession of two languages rather than the study of a single language or
of languages in general. Community bilingualism refers to a single community's use of
two languages. If we examine a bilingual individual, we are dealing with individual
bilingualism. The second category is the focus of contrastive analysis. Contrastive
analysis is concerned with how a monolingual becomes bilingual, whereas bilingualism
refers to the possession of two languages by an individual or society. Here, we could
refer to the distinction between the two as a worry about extant (still existing)
bilingualism on the one hand, and with incipient (in its early stages) bilingualism on the
other (James, 1980:8). It is for this reason that contrastive analysis is crucial in language
instruction and/or training in general. And that is the main point of chapter 1 that I have
learned, there are still a lot of information that I still don’t understand and I didn’t
mention in this reflection but I think this is enough for me to understand the CA.
 References
Nguyễn Huy Kỷ (2016) Giáo Trình Ngôn Ngữ Học Đối Chiếu(Contrastive Linguistics)