3.3 第二语言习得概论（Rod Ellis)：Interlanguage an

Error Analysis

(1) traditional Error Analysis

①impressionistic collections of ‘common’  errors and their linguistic classification

② pedagogic goal: to sequence items for teaching or to devise remedial lessons

③ no serious attempt to define ‘error’ or to account for it in psychological terms

④ the prevention of errors was more important than the identification of errors(like Behaviorist learning theory)

(2) Procedure

① A corpus of language is selected.

size of the sample, the medium to be sampled, homogeneity of the sample

② The errors in the corpus are identified.

1) distinguish ‘lapses’ from ‘errors’

processing limitations v.s. lack of competences

2) ‘overtly idiosyncratic’  v.s. ‘covertly idiosyncratic’

ill formed according to TL rules v.s. superficially well formed but ungrammatical in context

③ The errors are classified.

a grammatical description to each error

④ The errors are explained.

to identify the psycholinguistic cause of the errors

⑤ The errors are evaluated.

assessing the seriousness of each error to take principled teaching decisions

(3) Error Analysis in SLA

① sequence of development (the interlanguage continuum)

1) linguistic type of errors: idiosyncratic forms

2) Error Analysis present an incomplete picture of SLA

a. focuses only on idiosyncratic forms instead of what the learner can do in toto

b. provides a synchronic description while SLA is a continuous process

3) Conclusion

Analysis of the linguistic types of errors does not tell much about the sequence of development

② learner strategies

1) psycholinguistic type of errors

2) there is no single or prime cause of errors

3) strategies: employed to simplify the task of learning a L2

a. overgeneralization

b. ignorance of rule restrictions

c. incomplete application of rules

d. false concepts hypothesized(Richards)

4) errors → the learner’s need to exploit the redundancy of language by omitting elements that are non-essential for the communication of meaning(George)

5) conclusion

some of the causes of errors are universal and Error Analysis can be used in SLA

(4) conclusion

① contribution of Error Analysis

1) the reassessment of the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis

2) elevating the status of errors:

from undesirability to the learner’s active contribution to SLA

② Errors appeared to be broadly the same irrespective of learner differences

③ The human faculty for language may structure and define the learning task, so that the way of SLA and FLA was universal in nature