Universidad Nacional de Catamarca Facultad de Humanidades Contrastive Grammar Psychological Basis of Contrastive Analysis

Mara Gabriela Villa May, 2012

SET III: THE PSYCHOLOGICAL BASIS OF CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS CA is a hybrid drawing between

Psychology Learning processes TRANSFER

Linguistics Formal properties of language

considered within two different theories of language, two approaches

Behaviourism * S-R Theory

Cognitivism *Cross-Association *Ignorance Hypothesis

Transfer Theory Ellis The hypothesis that the learning of language A will affect the subsequent learning of language B, i.e., the psychological foundation of CA is transfer theory, by means of which gains made in one skill will always be relevant for subsequent gains made in other skills. Most of the experimental investigations of transfer involved learning sets of nonsense-syllables. But, even though the observations came from simplified settings and types of learning in comparison with real-life learning they can serve a theory of real language-learning since it is on this basis that progress is made in science. Moreover, there were experimental findings of transfer effects in bilingualism. Thus, Weinreich (1935) proposes INTERFERENCE as those instances of deviation from the norms of either language which occur in the speech of bilinguals as a result of their familiarity with more than one language. Behaviourism In psychology, associationism is the idea that mental processes operate by the association of one entity with another. For example, identifying pictograms with what they really represent is a mental process developed through association.

Restaurant

Escalators

Hospital

Car Park

In the process of learning, those entities are a stimulus and a response. The Stimulus-Response Theory is based in the reception of stimuli, be it linguistic, non-linguistic or pre-linguistic, which leads to the production of responses, either natural or learnt.

Universidad Nacional de Catamarca Facultad de Humanidades Contrastive Grammar Psychological Basis of Contrastive Analysis

Mara Gabriela Villa May, 2012

Following this concept. It can be said that the psychological basis of CA is transfer theory, elaborated and formulated within a Stimulus-Response (behaviourist) theory of psychology. SOME PROBLEMS IN DEFINING S-R IN SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING 1. In non-verbal learning, the learner doesn't have to learn the responses but their associations with a particular stimulus, i.e., the L2 utterances, which are the responses, have to be learnt jointly with which stimuli they are to be associated. S: Yes/ No Questions R: Yes, I do / No, I don't. 2. CA is more concerned with teaching rather than learning since teaching involves the predetermination and conventionalization of which stimuli and responses are to be associated. In other words, CA is interested in how learners are taught to appropriately associate a certain response to its stimulus. S: emphasis R: (Cleft Sentence) It was JOHN who did it! 3. Jakobovits (1970) and Bloomfield (1933) S pre-linguistic definition: The environmental conditions that are antecedent to linguistic utterances. S: Feeling cold (pre-linguistic) R: Could you please shut the window? S R: Of course. Richterich (1974) S Communicative need which is prior to the interaction. The stimulus reception is unavoidable while the response is a choice. S: Sadness (Communicative need) R: I miss him so much. S R: Yes, I miss him too. Richterich disregards the stimulus's conception as purely linguistic and also finds it contradictory because language behaviour is a two-way process a R may become in turn a S . 4. The response in language behaviour is the utterance, which is Linguistics object of study. However, linguistic descriptions only account for language as a system, and as such, they deal with sentences and not with utterances. Utterances undergo a process of abstraction to be studied as sentences; and since one sentence may underlay many concrete utterances, predictions can only be made as regards the form and not the substance. As a result, CA is more interested in generalizations rather than in the utterances themselves. CA AND COGNITIVIST LEARNING THEORY Individuals tend to transfer the forms and meanings of their native language and culture as well as their distributions to the foreign language and culture. Lado (1957)

Universidad Nacional de Catamarca Facultad de Humanidades Contrastive Grammar Psychological Basis of Contrastive Analysis

Mara Gabriela Villa May, 2012

From this idea, it is stated that CA is founded on the assumption that L2 learners will tend to transfer the formal features of their L1 to their L2 utterances. However, in the 60's, this transfer theory so far explained through the behaviourist perspective was supplanted by explanations from cognitive psychology. As far as theories of language are concerned, the turning point is marked by Chomsky's review of Skinner's Verbal Behaviour, which suggested that language which could be acquired like a habit by a programme of S-R and reinforcement was a form of conditioned behaviour. Based on cognitivism, CA considers as L1 transfer H. V. George's mechanism of Crossassociation as well as Newmark and Reibel's Ignorance Hypothesis. Cross-association H. V. George (1972) Cross-association underlies what is usually meant by Mother-Tongue interference. George presents the concept of redundancy as a type of interference which occurs when one term with different associations in L1 splits up in different terms in L2 producing instances of errors when transferring it inappropriately to L2. Cielo Sky Heaven E.g. *My grandmother is in the sky. Therefore, L1 Spanish learner of L2 (English) says the incorrect because English is more redundant than his/her own language. Ignorance Hypothesis Newmark and Reibel (1968) The errors of L2 learners are explained through a cognitivist alternative to L1 transfer. The L2 learner may want to say something he/she doesn't yet know how to say in the L2 and uses whatever means at disposal. Selinker (1972) proposes ignorance as a precondition for learning since the learner realizes he/she has no linguistic competence with regard to some aspect of L2; as well as a precondition for interference, which predicts that if a learner is called upon to produce some L2 form which he/she has not learnt, he will tend to produce an erroneous form having its origin in L1. When L1 and L2 formal devices are identical, learners will transfer them successfully; but it is when they differ greatly that interference arises and learners transfer the L1 item erroneously. However, ignorance and interference refer to different phenomena and one doesn't necessarily imply the other. Duskova (1969) explains this distinction: Ignorance without interference Learners who have experienced difficulty in using some L2 structure will prefer to make use of paraphrasing or some near equivalent. This is known as the avoidance strategy. E.g. tag questions, collocations, phrasal verbs, idioms Interference without ignorance The learning of a certain structure in L2 becomes error-free, i.e., there is no longer ignorance about it. However, mistakes can still be made. E.g. people IS, news ARE

Universidad Nacional de Catamarca Facultad de Humanidades Contrastive Grammar Psychological Basis of Contrastive Analysis

Mara Gabriela Villa May, 2012

Kellerman (1977) describes weaknesses associated with ignorance hypothesis i. Ignorance by self-evaluation implies a personal auto-evaluation that the learner makes about a feature in his/her own knowledge which he/she finds lacking; so he/she thinks himself/herself incapable of producing it. Now, how does the learner evaluate the presence of such structure in his/her knowledge if he/she is ignorant of it? ii. Different L1 learners may have the same ignorance of a L2 structure; however, it doesn't imply committing the same mistakes. L2 (English) Structure: Where do you come from? L1 Russian Speaker: ? (Lit. Where you from?) L1 Spanish Speaker: De donde es usted? (Lit. From where are you?) The learning of the L2 structure can be influenced by one's first language, and therefore a L1 Russian learner of L2 English and a L1 Spanish learner of L2 English may produce different mistakes when dealing with the same structure. iii. Learners are said to use whatever means at disposal when they want to produce something they don't yet know how to. However, they cannot be asked to perform specific L2 items before being given access and exposure to the items in question. Kellerman is concerned with L2 acquisition but not L2 learning. Krashen (1976)

Acquisition Learning process which takes place in a natural setting without professional or tutored instruction.

Learning It implies teaching