Introducing Applied Ling

uistics
Contrastive analysis: Comparing
and contrasting two languages
Outline
 Definition of CA
 Theoretical bases and basic assu
mptions
 3 versions of the CA hypothesis
 Procedures
 Applications
What is contrastive analysis (CA)?
Contrastive analysis is an inductive in
vestigative approach based on the dist
inctive elements in a language. It invo
lves the comparison of two or more la
nguages or subsystems of languages i
n order to determine both the differen
ces and similarities between them. It
could also be done within one languag
e. Contrastive analysis can be both th
eoretical and applied according to vari
ed purposes.
Kinds of Contrastive Analysis
 Intralingual
–Analysis of contrastive phonemes
–Feature analysis of morphosyntactic categories
–Analysis of morphemes having grammatical meaning
–Analysis of word order
–Componential analysis of lexemes
–Analysis of lexical relations
 Cross-linguistic
–Comparative analysis of morphosyntactic systems
–Comparative analysis of lexical semantics
–Analysis of translational equivalence
–Study of interference in foreign language learning
CA as a research methodology
Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991, An Introduc
tion to Second Language Acquisition Researc
h. New York: Longman.) claims that the study
of SLA can be said to have passed through a s
eries of phases defined by the modes of inquir
y researchers have utilized in their work: contr
astive analysis→error analysis → performanc
e analysis → discourse analysis (p.81).
See another summary from Brown
Role of CA in SLA Research (1)
Before the SLA field as we know it today was established, fr
om the 1940s to the 1960s, contrastive analyses were condu
cted, in which two languages were systematically compared.
Researchers at that time were motivated by the prospect of b
eing able to identify points of similarity and difference betw
een native languages (NLs) and target languages (TLs). The
re was a strong belief that a more effective pedagogy would
result when these were taken into consideration. Charles Fri
es, one of the leading applied linguists of the day, said: "The
most efficient materials are those that are based upon a scie
ntific description of the language to be learned, carefully co
mpared with a parallel description of the native language of
the learner."(Fries 1945: 9, Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Lang
uage. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.)
Role of CA in SLA Research (2)
Robert Lado, Fries' colleague at the University of Michiga
n, also expressed the importance of contrastive analysis in l
anguage teaching material design:
Individuals tend to transfer the forms and meanings and the
distribution of forms and meanings of their native language
and culture to the foreign language and culture - both prod
uctively when attempting to speak the language and to act i
n the culture and receptively when attempting to grasp and
understand the language and the culture as practiced by na
tives. (Lado 1957, in Larsen-Freeman & Long 1991:52-53, An Introduction to Se
cond Language Acquisition Research. New York: Longman.)
This claim is still quite appealing to anyone who has attemp
ted to learn or teach a foreign language. We encounter so m
any examples of the interfering effects of our NLs.
Contrastive analysis as applied to L
2 teaching
 It emphasizes differences between langua
ges rather than similarities;
 It contrasts L1 and L2 via the learner’s in
terlanguage rather than directly. Therefor
e, some scholars think that contrastive an
alysis belongs to interlanguage study; an
d
 It is pedagogically-oriented, with the aim
to discover and predict learning problems
and difficulties.
Theoretical bases and basic assumptions
Assumptions
 L2 learning involves overcoming difficulties i
n the linguistic systems of the target language;
 The main difficulties in learning a L2 are caus
ed by interference from the L1;
 Contrastive analysis can predict, or at least acc
ount for, difficulties in L2 learning; and
 Teaching materials based on contrastive analys
is can reduce the effects of interference and diff
iculties, and facilitate L2 learning.
Objectives of CA
 Providing insights into similarities
and differences between languages;
 Explaining and predicting problem
s in L2 learning; and
 Developing course materials for la
nguage teaching
Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis
Lado maintained a more controversial position, ho
wever, when he claimed that "those elements that
are similar to his native language will be simple fo
r him, and those elements that are different will be
difficult" (Lado 1957:2, Linguistics Across Cultures: Applied Lin
guistics for Language Teachers).
This conviction that linguistic differences could be
used to predict learning difficulty produced the noti
on of the contrastive analysis hypothesis (CAH):
"Where two languages were similar, positive tran
sfer would occur; where they were different, negat
ive transfer, or interference, would result." (Larsen-
Freeman & Long 1991: 53)
3 versions of the CA hypothesis
 The Strong Version: Fries & Lado
– It (a priori) claimed that prediction of difficulties in learning L
2 could be made based upon a comparison of two languages.
This starts with a crosslinguistic analysis and then attempts to
predict trouble spots.
 The Weak Version: Wardhaugh (1970)
– It (a posteriori) claimed that cross-linguistic comparison could
help to explain learner errors. This starts with learner errors an
d attempts to account for them with cross-grammatical compar
isons.
 The Moderate Version: Oller & Ziahosseiny
– It differs from the above two in that it emphasizes the significa
nce of minimal distinctions, which may actually cause the grea
test interferences and difficulties.
Procedures
2 principles of CA as proposed by Halliday:
1. Describe before comparing
2. Comparing patterns, not whole languages
Steps:
3. The separate description of the relevant fe
atures of each language;
4. The establishment of comparability;
5. The comparison and contrast.
An example of CA between E& C
 The description of the relevant features of each
language (pp.136-7)
 The establishment of comparability (pp. 138-9)
– Principal contextual similarities
– Principal contextual differences
 The comparison and contrast (pp. 139-142)

See the textbook for details.

Applications of CA in SLA
 Prediction
 Diagnosis of errors
 Testing
 Course design
– Selection
– Grading
– Contrastive teaching
 Teaching method
Summary
The theoretical bases, basic assumptions and three version
s of the contrastive analysis hypothesis, as well as the proc
edures of contrastive analysis and its applications are dem
onstrated in this section.
CAH criticized:
1. People produce and understand new sentences all the ti
me.
2. Evidence of overgeneralization of the past tense indicate
d that language is more the application of rules than it is of
mimicry and analogy.
Conclusion: while interference plays a role in SLA, so do
many other factors and thus the role of the first language is
less than what was thought by proponents of CA.
 Discussion questions
1. What is contrastive analysis? What is the difference bet
ween theoretical and applied contrastive analysis?
2. What are the major theoretical bases and basic assumpt
ions of contrastive analysis?
3. What are the claims of the strong version of CAH? Wh
at are its problems?
4. What are the major arguments of the weak version of th
e hypothesis? Which is more applicable, the strong or t
he weak version? Why?
5. What are the major arguments of the moderate version
of the hypothesis? What do you think of it as compared
with the other two versions? Why?
6. Describe and illustrate the procedures of CA.
7. Make a CA of any items or structures of systems betwe
en English and Chinese, and report your findings.