Selinker Approach To Interlanguage Analysis

In the chapter the author argues that the relationship between both L1 and L2, defines the second language. That is why SLA (Second Language Acquisition) research has taken ideas and research techniques from L1 research such as the independent grammar assumption, which claims that the child’s language, constitutes an independent system of its own, and is not a poor version of the adult’s one. And techniques, being the most obviously borrowed those

As defined by Gass and Selinker, Second Language Acquisition “refers to the learning of nonnative language after learning of the native language” (2008: 7). Two main problems are often discussed when defining SLA: the distinction between second and third, fourth, etc. language acquisition, and second versus foreign language acquisition. According to Ellis, in many communities it is quite common to speak more than one language, therefore some learners acquire “more than one ‘second’ language” (Ellis 2015: 6). For this reason, the term Second Language Acquisition is used as an all-inclusive term “for learning any language after the first” (Ellis 2015: 6). Kees de Bot, Lowie and Verspoor note that in some definitions it is indicated that second language acquisition “typically takes place in a setting in which the language to be learned is the language spoken in the local community” and usually in a natural, non-instructed environment. As a contrast, foreign language acquisition occurs when the learner is not a part of the local community of the target language and the setting is controlled (de Bot et al. 2005: 7). However, in the paper I will not be making a distinction between second and foreign language acquisition as the difference has not been indicated in any of the theories chosen for

Since, the second language is an additional language after we acquire the first language, the L2 learning process can be influenced by the L1 learning process This essay will demonstrate the similarities and differences in L1 and L2 acquisition by discussing various theories. Then, draw a conclusion based on the evidence provided and my own experience.

Guidelines to teaching a foreign language highlight all of these elements. Listening, reading, writing, and speaking are all taught and tested at beginner, intermediate, advanced, and superior levels so that these different learning methods are highlighted and executed at varying levels. Children also learn and are shown new ways of looking at the world through the varying strategies. In fact, correlation studies have shown that “students who have had several years of foreign language do better on SATs, particularly the verbal part” (WALKER). As root words, prefixes, suffixes, conjugation, and noun agreements are taught in new languages, it is easier to see connections to the structure of one’s first language. The knowledge of a language one is raised speaking and understanding is simply obtained through experience. However, learning a second language emphasizes the parts of language that come naturally in the first. It takes self-motivated work and dedication to learn a second language later in life, so the outcome of attaining a comprehensive grasp on a foreign language early on pays off in multiple ways.

Many second language acquisition theories have been developed over the years. These theories examine the avenues in which second language is acquired and the avenues in which they are

To elaborate on this hypothesis, Brown (2000) argues that …the CAH claims that the principal barrier to second language acquisition is that the interference of the first language system with the second language system, and that a scientific, structural analysis of the two languages in question would yield a taxonomy of linguistic contrast between them which in turn would enable the linguist to predict the difficulties a learner

It is argued that the target language should be the only Language present or available during the process of acquiring a second language. This argues for Krashen’s (1982) comprehensible input hypothesis that learners should be exposed to a flood of comprehensible target-language input in order to ensure the mastery of the target language. However, no evidence from existing studies can support the argument that the maximum use of the target language can facilitate learners to learn the second language better.

According to Houmanfar, Hayes, and Herbst (2005), the first and second languages are interrelated and the history of the first language is a participatory factor in the acquisition of the second language (L2) and its maintenance. The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis indicates that the structure and shape of the L1 of an individual are different from those the L2 that could create errors in speaking, reading and writing (Dulay et al., 1982). Similarities and differences between L1 and L2 acquisition will be outlined in terms of various theories.

Some linguistic models try to explain the development of second language acquisition. The three most common models are (1) the Universal Grammar Model, (2) the Competition Model, and (3) the Monitor Model. The Universal Grammar Model refers to the system of principles, conditions, and rules that are properties or elements of all human languages. At the same time, each language has grammatical rules that vary from one language to another. Thus, Chomky states that different languages have a limited possibility of different grammatical structures (1975). Therefore, second language learners base their second language acquisition on universal principles common to all languages, and on the force of the particular rules of each language. All of those can be concluded that as a human, especially as children, we have vary form of rules in language, in this case is second language.

In terms of learning grammar, it can be said that most students or maybe almost every student of English language tend to have some difficulties in understanding the rules and also in using the appropriate patterns in sentences, especially when it comes to different given contexts. On many occasions, different given contexts can mean different rules and it may lead to different patterns. However, when it comes to grammar rules, many students find that it is not so easy to internalize many of those rules that even though they have learned it intensively, they still do not understand it well. In many different cases, it happens because choosing and knowing the appropriate rules itself sometimes can be a problem which is quite hard to solve if the students do not understand the contexts. Thus, the students have to understand the given contexts first in order to know which rule is the most

There are many different languages spoken across the world and thus, the possibility of misunderstanding is great. “It is important to appreciate that long with language, significant communication

All languages are inherited sets of information. From this perspective, English language is a set of inherited information. This explains why languages, including English, play important roles in shaping our minds and cultures. There are many plausible arguments which support this thesis, leading the way for its acceptance.

Language is the system by which people express their perceptions of the world using symbols, gestures and sounds that are shared and understood in their specific groups or locations. The way people communicate those ideas is totally influenced by the culture. The concept of culture encompasses all the characteristics that define a specific group in terms of values, traditions, beliefs, history, etc. expressed through language. Culture and language are, therefore, two concepts whose interconnection cannot be denied or neglected, even more when one is learning a new language. Over the years, researchers have concluded that foreign languages are learned considering the grammar structures and/or the linguistic skills that students have to develop to be effective when communicating. However, Widdowson (1978) argued that “Someone knowing a language knows more than how to understand, speak, read and write sentences. He also knows how sentences are used to communicative effect” (p.1). In this sense, the development of cultural understanding in language learning also remains to be essential for the acquisition of it.

Teaching a second language has constantly been a challenge and a topic of many elaborative discussions in the field of language teaching. There have been different trends in language teaching which led to the introduction of different language teaching approaches. Whereupon, language teaching theorists and second language teaching practitioners have found those to be stimulus with many practical issues and shortcomings in terms of mastering the target language among the second language learners. Each method focused on key set of learning outcomes and defined the position or the role of the teacher accordingly. In contrast, linguists of eras following introduced their own mechanisms in language teaching and learning process which in

Around 40 years ago, the transfer concept was first introduced in the contrastive analysis (CAH) hypothesis, which assumes that certain elements in the first language hinder second language acquisition through negative interference. Therefore, linguists assumed that by contrasting L1 and L2 they could predict those areas in which the learners would have difficulties. However, after 1960 the role of the native language in learning a second language started to be regarded as facilitative because of the underlying similarities of languages. These similarities emanate from “language universals” (Koda 1988; Smith 1978).