Errors and strategies in language acquisition

breaks and strategies in terminology eruditionError field of studyWhy Correction is NecessaryCorrection is necessary. The argument that students just need to aim the phrase and the rest pull up stakes come by itself gather upms rather weak. Students come to us to enlighten them. If they want completely conversation, they will probably in mannequin us or, they might just go to a chat room on the Internet. Obviously students need to be change by reversal as part of the accomplishment experience. However, students also need to be encour termd to use the phraseology. It is true that correcting students sequence they ar trying their best to use the language whoremonger a lot discourage them. The most(prenominal) satisfactory solution of all is make field of study an activity. Correction house be utilize as a critique to any given class activity. However, subject sessions enkindle be used as a valid activity in and of themselves. In early(a) words, give lessonse rs can set up an activity during which each mistake (or a specific sign of mistake) will be corrected. Students screw that the activity is red ink to focus on correction, and accept that fact. However, these activities should be kept in correspondence with other, to a great extent free- make water, activities which give students the opportunity to express themselves with come forward having to stir up about macrocosm corrected every other word.It is to S.P. C point that Error Analysis owes its place as a scientific method in linguistics. As Rod Ellis cites (p. 48), it was non until the s level(p)ties that EA became a recognized part of applied linguistics, a information that owed much to the work of Corder. Before Corder, linguists observed students wrongful conducts, divided them into categories, tried to see which ones were common and which were non, only non much attention was drawn to their federal agency in second language acquirement. It was Corder who showed to whom information about erroneousnesss would be steadying (teachers, researchers, and students) and how.There atomic number 18 many major concepts introduced by S. P. Corder in his hold The significance of apprentices fractures, among which we encounter the followingIt is the learner who get words what the input is. The teacher can present a linguistic form, but this is not necessarily the input, but simply what is available to be learned.Keeping the above point in mind, learners needs should be considered when teachers/linguists plan their syllabuses. Before Corders work, syllabuses were based on theories and not so much on learners needs.Mager (1962) points out that the learners built-in syllabus is more(prenominal) efficient than the teachers syllabus. Corder adds that if such a built-in syllabus exists, then learners errors would sanction its existence and would be systematic.Corder introduced the distinction between systematic and non-systematic errors. Unsystematic er rors transcend in ones native language Corder calls these mistakes and states that they ar not significant to the mathematical operation of language accomplishment. He keeps the term errors for the systematic ones, which come in in a second language.Errors are significant in three ways to the teacher they show a students progress to the researcher they show how a language is acquired, what strategies the learner uses. to the learner he can learn from these errors.When a learner has made an error, the most efficient way to teach him the correct form is not by simply giving it to him, but by permit him discover it and tryout different hypotheses. (This is derived from Carrolls proposal (Carroll 1955, cited in Corder), who raiseed that the learner should predominate the correct linguistic form by searching for it.Many errors are due to that the learner uses structures from his native language. Corder claims that possession of ones native language is facilitative. Errors in thi s cocktail dress are not inhibitory, but rather evidence of ones learning strategies.The above insights played a significant role in linguistic research, and in particular in the approach linguists took towards errors. Here are near of the areas that were influenced by Corders workSTUDIES OF LEARNER ERRORSCorder introduced the distinction between errors (in competency) and mistakes (in performance). This distinction tell the attention of researchers of SLA to competence errors and set upd for a more concentrated framework. Thus, in the 1970s researchers started examining learners competence errors and tried to explain them. We find studies such as Richardss A non-contrastive approach to error analysis (1971), where he identifies sources of competence errors L1 transfer results in upset errors incorrect ( broken or over-generalized) application of language rules results in intralingual errors bodily structure of faulty hypotheses in L2 results in victimizational errors.not all researchers postulate agreed with the above distinction, such as Dulay and Burt (1974) who proposed the following three categories of errors developmental, interference and unique. Stenson (1974) proposed another category, that of induced errors, which result from incorrect instruction of the language.As most research methods, error analysis has weaknesses (such as in methodology), but these do not diminish its wideness in SLA research this is why linguists such as Taylor (1986) reminded researchers of its importance and suggested ways to overcome these weaknesses.As mentioned previously, Corder noted to whom (or in which areas) the study of errors would be significant to teachers, to researchers and to learners. In addition to studies concentrating on error categorization and analysis, various studies concentrated on these three different areas. In other words, research was conducted not only in order to view errors per se, but also in order to use what is learned from error an alysis and apply it to meliorate language competence.Such studies include Kroll and Schafers Error-Analysis and the article of belief of Composition, where the authors attest how error analysis can be used to improve writing skills. They analyze possible sources of error in non-native- incline writers, and attempt to provide a process approach to writing where the error analysis can do hand better writing skills.These studies, among many others, show that thank to Corders work, researchers recognized the importance of errors in SLA and started to examine them in order to achieve a better understanding of SLA processes, i.e. of how learners acquire an L2.STUDIES OF L1 INFLUENCE ON SLA confused researchers commit concentrated on those errors which demonstrate the influence of ones native language to second language acquisition. Before Corders work, interference errors were regarded as inhibitory it was Corder who pointed out that they can be facilitative and provide information a bout ones learning strategies (point 7, listed above). Claude slime eelsge (1999) is a supporter of this concept and he mentions it in his book The squirt between cardinal languages, dedicated to childrens language education. harmonize to hagfishge, interference between L1 and L2 is observed in children as sound as in bountifuls. In adults it is more obvious and increases continuously, as a monolingual person gets older and the structures of his first language get stronger and shoot the breeze themselves more and more on any other language the adult wishes to learn. In contrast, as regards children, interference possesss will not become constant unless the child does not have fit exposure to L2. If thither is sufficient exposure, then instead of reaching a point where they can no longer be corrected (as often happens with phonetics features), interference features can be easily eliminated. hagfishge centeringes that at that place is no reason for worry if interference p ersists more than expected. The teacher should know that a child that is in the process of acquiring a second language will subconsciously invent structures influenced by knowledge he al look aty possesses. These hypotheses he forms whitethorn constitute errors. These errors, though, are completely natural we should not expect the child to acquire L2 structures conterminously (p. 81).In addition to studies of L1 transfer in general, there have been numerous studies for specific language pairs. Thanh Ha Nguyen (1995) conducted a case study to demonstrate first language transfer in Vietnamese learners of English. He examined a particular language form, namely oral competence in English past tense making. He tried to determine the role of L1 transfer in the acquisition of this English linguistic feature as a function of age, time of exposure to English, and place and utilization of learning English.The influence of L1 on L2 was also examined by Lakkis and Malak (2000) who concentrate d on the transfer of Arabic prepositional knowledge to English (by Arab students). Both peremptory and negative transfer were examined in order to help teachers identify debatable areas for Arab students and help them understand where transfer should be encouraged or avoided. In particular, they concluded that an instructor of English, whose native language is Arabic, can use the students L1 for structures that use equivalent prepositions in both languages. On the other hand, whenever there are verbs or expressions in the L1 and L2 that have different structures, that take prepositions, or that have no equivalent in one of the languages, instructors should point out these differences to their students.Not only was L1 influence examined according to language pair, but according to the type of speech produced (written vs. oral). hagfishge (p. 33) discusses the influence of L1 on accent he notes that the ear acts like a filter, and after a critical age (which witchge claims is 11 y ears), it only accepts sounds that belong to ones native language. Hagge discusses L1 transfer in order to convince readers that there is and then a critical age for language acquisition, and in particular the acquisition of a native-like accent. He uses the example of the French language, which includes complex vowel sounds, to demonstrate that after a critical age, the acquisition of these sounds is not possible thus, learners of a foreign language will only use the sounds existing in their native language when producing L2 sounds, which may often obstruct communication.STUDIES OF CORRECTIVE FEEDBACKCorder dilate on Carrolls work to show that the most efficient way to teach a student the correct linguistic form is to let him test various hypotheses and correcttually find the right form (point 6, listed above). In these steps, Hagge points out the importance of self correction (p. 82-83). According to Hagge, it is useful to always perform an error analysis based on written tests administered by the teacher, but without informing the student of the purpose of the test. On that basis, self-correction is preferable to correction by the teacher, especially if the latter is done in a severe or intimidating way. Self correction is even more efficient when it is done with the help of childrens classmates. According to teachers, the younger the children, the greater the cooperation among them and the less aggressive or intimidating the corrections. Hagge dedicates a section in his book to the importance of treating errors in a irresponsible way. In this section, titled The teacher as a good listener, he notes that it is useless, if not harmful, to treat errors as if they were diseases or pathological situations which essential be eliminated, especially if this treatment becomes discouraging, as occurs when teachers lose their patience because of childrens numerous errors. This, of course, does not mean that corrections should be avoided after all it is the teac hers duty to teach the rules of the L2. besides the correction of every error as soon as it occurs is not recommended. The justification that Hagge offers is the following the linguistic contentedness that the child tries to produce is a sequence of elements which are interdependent warm corrections which interrupt this message tend to produce negative consequences, even to the less sensitive children such consequences include anxiety, fear of making an error, the development of avoidance strategies, reduced motivation for participation in the classroom, neglect of affair for learning, reduced will for self correction, and lack of trust towards the teacher. Esser (1984, cited in Hagge) also made a similar point repetitive and immediate corrections, he noted, may cause sensitive children to develop aggressive air towards their classmates or teacher. Thus, Hagge concludes, correction must not be applied by the teacher unless errors obstruct communication. This is the main criter ion for error correction (i.e. obstruction of communication) presented by Hagge however there have been studies which examined such criteria in greater detail, such as Freiermuths L2 Error Correction Criteria and Techniques (1997). Freiermuth accepts Corders view (point 6) and proposes criteria for error correction in the classroom. These criteria are exposure, seriousness, and students needs.In the case of exposure, Freiermuth claims that when a child creates language (for example, when he tries to express an judgement by using a linguistic form he has not yet acquired), he will most likely make errors correcting these errors will be in orderive because the learner is not aware of them. Thus, error correction would result in the acquisition of the correct form only if the learner has been previously exposed to that particular language form.As regards the seriousness criterion, Freiermuth claims that the teacher must determine the gravity of an error before deciding whether he shou ld correct it or not. Here Freiermuth sets a criterion which agrees with that of Hagges the error, he states, must impede communication before it should be considered an error that necessitates correction. But what constitutes a serious error? Which errors are those which should not be corrected? As an examples of non-serious errors, Freiermuth mentions those errors which occur due to learners nervousness in the classroom, due to their stress or the pressure of having to produce accurately a linguistic form in the L2. These errors can occur even with familiar structures in that case, they are not of serious nature and are similar to what Corder called mistakes. Here again we see Corders influence in error analysis, and in particular in the distinction between errors and mistakes. Freiermuth goes on to suggest a hierarchy of errors (according to seriousness) to help teachers decide which errors should be corrected Errors that significantly impair communication are at the top of the list, followed by errors that occur frequently, errors that reflect misunderstanding or incomplete acquisition of the current classroom focus, and errors that have a highly stigmatizing effect on the listeners. He also clarifies what can cause stigmatization difficult pronunciation errors, or errors of familiar forms.Another important criterion that must be considered by the teacher is individual students needs. The importance of this factor is mentioned in Corder, who in turn notes that this idea had been suggested previously by Carroll (1955, cited in Corder 1967) and Ferguson (1966, cited in Corder 1967). Each student is different and thus may react other than to error correction. We infer from Freiermuths claim that the teacher must perform two main tasks first, assess some specific character traits of students, such as self-confidence and language acquisition capability. Freiermuth agrees with Walz (1982, cited in Freiermuth) that self- overconfident, capable students can pro fits from even minor corrections, while struggling students should receive correction only on major errors. This claim agrees with Esser and Hagges claim that repetitive corrections are likely to decrease motivation it is reasonable to accept that students who lack self-confidence will be stigmatized to a greater degree than confident students.The teachers second task, according to Freiermuth, is to listen to learners L2 utterances in order to determine where errors occur (i.e. which linguistic forms cause students difficulties), their frequency, and their gravity (according to the severity criteria mentioned above). Then the teacher can combine the outcome of these tasks and decide on correction techniques for individual students.A different approach to error correction was suggested by Porte (1993), who stressed the importance of self-correction. Porte refers to Corders distinction of errors and mistakes and points out that many students do not know the difference. It is important , Porte notes, that students know how to identify an error in order to avoid it in the future. She agrees with Corder that it is more efficient for learners to correct themselves than be corrected by the teacher, and goes on to suggest a four-step approach for self-correction. This approach consists of questions that the teacher provides to students. After writing an essay, students should read it four times, each time trying to answer the questions included in each of the four steps. Thus, in each re-reading task (each step) they concentrate on a different aspect of their essay. In brief, the first task asks them to highlighting the verbs and check the tenses in the second task students concentrate on prepositions the troika task requires them to concentrate on nouns (spelling, agreement between subject and verb) eventually in the fourth task students should try to correct potential in the flesh(predicate) mistakes. Porte also offers some clarification of what is meant by perso nal mistakes, in order to help the students identify them.The studies mentioned above are only a hardly a(prenominal) examples that demonstrate how S. Pit Corders work influenced the area of error analysis in linguistics. The concepts that Corder introduced directed researchers attention to specific areas of error analysis they helped linguists realize that although errors sometimes obstruct communication, they can often facilitate second language acquisition also they played a significant role in instruction teachers and constituent them identify and classify students errors, as well as helping them construct correction techniques.REFERENCESCorder, S. P. 1967. The significance of learners errors. International Review of Applied philology 5 161-9.Dulay, H., and Burt, M., Errors and strategies in child second language acquisition, TESOL Quarterly 8 129-136, 1974.Ellis, R., The Study of Second Language Acquisition, Oxford University Press, 1994.Esser, U., Fremdsprachenpsychologisch e Betrachtungen zur Fehlerproblematic im Fremdsprachenunterricht, Deutsch als Fremdsprache, 4151-159, 1984, (cited in Hagge 1999).Freiermuth, M. R., L2 Error Correction Criteria and Techniques, The Language Teacher Online 22.06, http//langue.hyper.chubu.ac.jp/jalt/pub/tlt/97/sep/freiermuth.html, 1997.Hagge, C. Lenfant aux deux langues (The child between two languages), Greek translation, Polis editions, capital of Greece 1999. (Original publication Editions Odile Jacob, 1996).Kroll, Barry, and John C. Schafer. Error-Analysis and the Teaching of Composition, College Composition and Communication 29 242-248, 1978Lakkis, K. and Malak, M. A.. mind the Transfer of Prepositions. FORUM, Vol 38, No 3, July-September 2000. (Online edition http//exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol38/no3/p26.htm)Mager, R.F. Preparing Instructional Objectives, Fearon Publishers, Palo Alto, CA 1962.Nguyen, Thanh Ha. kickoff Language Transfer and Vietnamese Learners Oral Competence in English Past Tense Marking A Case Study., Master of culture (TESOL) Research Essay, La Trobe University, Victoria, Australia1995.Porte, G. K., Mistakes, Errors, and Blank Checks, FORUM, Vol 31, No 2, p. 42, January-March 1993. (Online edition http//exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol31/no1/p42.htm)Richards, J., A non-contrastive approach to error analysis, English Language Teaching 25 204-219, 1971.Stenson, N. generate errors in Shumann and Stenson (eds.), 1974, cited in Ellis (p. 60).Taylor G., Errors and explanations, Applied Linguistics 7 144-166, 1986.