Chapter8CrossLinguisticInfluenceandLearnerlanguage.ppt

Chapter 8. Cross Linguistic Influence and Learner language Chapter 8. (pp. 207-243)Brown, D. H. (2000). Principles of language learning and  teaching. (4th ed.). White Plains, NY: Addison  Wesley Longman, Inc. Prepared by: Aníbal Mu?oz ClaudioCourse: EDUC 8130Professor: Dr. María A. Irizarry Date: March 28, 2006 Preview The contrastive analysis hypothesis ( CAH) From the CAH to CLI (cross-linguistic influence) Markedness and universal grammar Learner language Error analysis Mistakes and errors Errors in error analysis Identifying and describing errors (chart) Sources of errors Interlingual and intralingual transfers Context of learning Stages of learner language development Variability in learner language Fossilization Form-focused instruction Error treatment A model for error treatment (in the classroom) The contrastive analysis hypothesis Deeply rooted in the behavioristic and structuralist approaches, the CAH claimed that the principal barrier to L2 is the interference of L1system with the 2nd system. A scientific- structural analysis will develop a taxonomy of linguistic contrasts between them which will enable the linguist to predict the difficulties a learner would encounter. Clifford Prator (1967) captured the essence of the grammatical hierarchy (Stockwell, Bowen, and Martin, 1965) in six categories of difficulty –it was applicable to both grammatical and phonological features of language. Most of the examples are taken from English and Spanish Six categories of hierarchy of difficulty  (a native English speaker learning Spanish as L2) Level 0. No difference or contrast is present between the two languages. The learner can simply transfer a sound, structure, or lexical item from the native language to the target language. Level 1 –coalescence two items in the native language become coalesced into essentially one item in the target language. Example: English 3rd p. possessives require gender distinction (hi