Applied linguistic: Contrastive Analysis


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Applied linguistic: Contrastive Analysis

  1. 1. • The Definition • Contrastive analysis and language teaching 1 •What the Learner know •Difference & Difficulty2 •Similarity •A basis for syntactic comparison 3 • Comparison of the sound system in contrastive analysis4
  2. 2.  Contrastive analysis is a tool developed for language teaching and learning.  The chief proponent Lado (1957) sees it as a scientific out look into describing a language.  Contrastive analysis (CA) according to Oluikpe (1981:21) is “the one in which the similarities and differences between two (or more) languages at particular levels are explicated in the context of a chosen theoretical framework.”
  3. 3.  Contrastive Analysis has been the first major theory dealing with the relationship between the languages a learner acquires or masters.  Another term, „contrastive analysis‟, can be used interchangeably with the above mentioned terms, but linguists tend to use it to refer to the comparison proper.
  4. 4.  Contrastive analysis provides useful insights to the teacher who has performed a contrastive analysis between the students‟ L1 and L2, and makes him/her aware of the real learning problems and the best way(s) to teach them (Lado,1957)  The most useful contribution that Contrastive Analysis can make to language teaching lies in predicting learning difficulties and helping syllabus designers to produce the most effective materials.
  5. 5.  They assume all students studying one language, who speak the same mother tongue, will make the same mistakes as one another.  It does not factor in the possibility of individual differences. It also does not help students avoid systematic mistakes. The only help for such students is lists of common mistakes.
  6. 6.  Contrastive analysis fails to distinguish between the written rules of formal language and the unwritten rules of informal language. It also fails to take into account differences between dialects.  Studies comparing and contrasting different languages still have a role to play in language formation and history. The production of language family trees and genealogies are useful for explaining how different languages were formed and where they came from. It is also used to connect different languages together.
  7. 7.  A comparison of two languages can be carried out using any of several different models of grammar. Initially the model used was that of structuralist linguists (e.g. Bloomfield 1933; Fries 1952).  Ideally Contrastive Analysis needs to be based on universal categories (i.e. categories that can be found in all natural languages), which differ in the way they are linguistically realized from one language to another.
  8. 8.  However, most of the contrastive studies carried out have been based 40 surface structure characteristics, such as those described by the structuralists.  The procedure followed was: (1) description (i.e. a formal description of the two languages is made) (2) selection (i.e. certain items, which may be entire subsystems such as the auxiliary system or ~areas known through error analysis to present difficulty, are selected for comparison) (3) comparison (i.e. the identification of areas of difference and similarity) (4) prediction (i.e. identifying which areas are likely to
  9. 9.  Here are some of the possibilities that a comparison might reveal: 1. No difference between a feature of the first and second language 2. „Convergent phenomena‟ (i.e. two items in the first language become coalesced into one in the L2) 3. An item in the first language is absent in the target language 4. An item in the first language has a different distribution from the equivalent item in the target language 5. No similarity between first language feature and target language feature 6. „Divergent phenomena‟ (i.e. one item in the first language becomes two items in the target language).
  10. 10.  Most contrastive analyses have compared phonological systems, probably as recognition of the role that the L1 plays in „foreign‟ accents.  The „hierarchy of difficulty‟ was an attempt to solve this problem linguistically, but unless the solution has psychological validity (i.e. corresponds to what learners actually do), it will be inadequate.  Contrastive Analysis constituted a hypothesis, and like all hypotheses was open to empirical investigation.
  11. 11.  Similarities between languages may be very general or abstract on the other hand, or superficial and trivial on the other hand.  For example, the English learners cannot by inspection immediately discover that the number system of German is similar to that of English.
  12. 12.  Plural here refers to the form of a noun or a verb which refers to more than one person or thing. Indonesian Serigala itu binatang. English A wolf is an animal. Wolves are animal. Wolf is animal
  13. 13.  From the example above, we can see that in English, the ideas of plural are expressed in many ways. A final –s or –es is added to a noun to make a noun plural. Sometimes, the changing a (man) to e (men) is also needed to indicate plural. A final –s or –es is added to a verb I when the subject is a singular noun (a wolf, a shark, a pet) or a third a person singular pronoun (she, he, it) (Azar, 1989).
  14. 14.  Syntax means the study of the rules that govern the ways in which word combine to form phrases, the idea of plural, and sentences.  In linguistics, syntax means the study of the rules that govern the ways in which words combine to form phrases, clauses, and sentences.
  15. 15.  In contrasting the syntactic structures of two languages as different as Bahasa Indonesia and English, the former being case-based and the latter word-order- based, we inevitably encounter so many differences that an analysis without our having a particular purpose in mind hardly seems reasonable.
  16. 16.  Phrase In English phrases, adjectives precede nouns. Therefore, the law applied is MD (modifier-determiner) Possessive adjective (my) precedes noun (grandmother), but vice versa in Bahasa which applied DM law. Nenek saya My grandmother
  17. 17. Bahasa  S – P  S – P – O  S – P – Pel  S – P – Ket  S – P – O – Pel  S – P – O – Ket English  SV  SVA  SVC  SVO  SVOO  SVOA  SVOC If we see further, the basic sentences in Indonesia language and English are not much different in patterns. The differences are only in rules.
  18. 18.  Sentence English Bahasa SV=Subject + Intransitive Verb -Someone is sleeping. SP=Subjek + Predikat (verba intransitif) -Saya mahasiswa.
  19. 19.  In this reading, Lado (1957) presents a systematic technique to compare two sound systems. In the tradition of contrastive analysis, Lado predicts that careful analysis of two separate sound systems (of L1 and L2) will allow prediction, detection and correction of pronunciation problems for L2 learners.
  20. 20.  He cautions that analysis must involve many factors related to sounds systems, such as phonetics, phonemics, sequences of phonemes and intonation patterns.  For Lado, the goal of such analyses was to improve foreign language instruction and create better learning materials.
  21. 21. When comparing the sound system of two languages, the contrastive analyst has to go through four basic steps.  Firstly, he should draw up the phonemic inventory (describe and compare vowels and consonants) of the two languages under study.  Secondly, the contrastive analyst should compare the phonemes in the two languages inter-lingualy. At this stage, the contrastive analyst should apply the minimal pair test.  Thirdly, the contrastive analyst should state the allophones of each phoneme of the two languages being compared.  Fourthly, he should state the distribution restrictions of the phonemes and allophones of both languages.
  22. 22. Here is an example of the minimal pair test between the phonemes /k/ and /g/ in English and Arabic:  English: came /Keim/ vs. game /geim/  Arabic: /kelb/ „dog‟ vs. /gelb/ „heart‟
  23. 23. Q&A session