PSYCHOLINGUISTIC ASPECTS OFINTERLANGUAGE Second Language Acquisition By Rod Ellis Chapter 6: Psycholinguistic aspects of interlanguage Page 51 - 61 Yayuk Fitriani 2201410004 Rega Giyang Girana Z 2201410088 Annisa Mustikanthi 2201410094
L1 TRANSFER L1 transfer refers to the influence that thelearner’s L1 exerts over the acquisition of an L2. The learner’s L1 is one of the sources of error in learner language (negative transfer) The learner’s L1 can facilitate L2 acquisition (positive transfer)
Errors were largely the result of interference(another term for negative transfer) in theheyday of behaviourism.
Behaviourist theories led to two developments: Some theorist, espousing strong mentalist accounts of L2 acquisition, sought to play down the role of the L1. Reconceptualize transfer within a cognitive framework.
Transfer errors do not always occur when theyare predicted to occur. Differences between thetarget and native language do not always result inlearning difficulty.
According to Eric Kellerman, learnerstreat some linguistic features as potentiallytransferable and non-transferable. Kellerman found that advanced Dutchlearners of English had clear perceptionsabout which meanings of ‘breken’ (‘break’)were basic in their L1 .
He also found that they were prepared to translate asentence like: Hij brak zijin been. (He broke his leg.)directly into English, using ‘broke’ for ‘brak’ butwere not prepared to give a direct translation of asentence like: Het ondergrondse verset werd gebroken. (the underground resistance was broken.)
Other researchers have found that the transfer of someL1 grammatical features is tied to the learners of English.
When language transfer takes place there is usuallyno loss of L1 knowledge. This obvious fact has led to thesuggestion that a better term for referring to the effects ofthe L1 might be ‘cross-linguistic influence.’
THE ROLE OF CONSCIOUSNESS IN L2 ACQUISITION Adults seem to have work hard and to study the language consciously in order to succeed when they acquire L2. in contrast, children seem to do so without conscious effort when they acquire their L1.
TWO OPPOSING POSITION CAN BE IDENTIFIED. Stephen Krashen has argued the need to distinguish ‘acquired’ L2 knowledge (i.e. implicite knowledge of language) and ‘learned’ L2 knowledge (i.e. explicit knowledge about language).
Richard Schmidt has poinyed out that the term‘consciousness’ is often used very loosely in SLA andargues that there is a need to standardize the conceptthat underlie its use. For example, he distinguihes betweenconsciousness as ‘intentionality’ and consciousness as‘attantion’.
‘Intentionality’ that refers to whether a learner makesan conscious and deliberate decition to learn some L2knowledge. He failed to recognize that ‘incidental’acquisition might in fact still involving some degree ofconscious ‘attention’ to input. In the other words, learningincidentally is not the same as learning without consciousattention.
Irrespective of whether learners learn implicitly orexplicitly, it is widely accepted that they can acquiredifferent kind of knowledge. Explicit knowledge may help learners to move fromintake to acquisition by helping to notice the gap betweenwhat they have observed in the input and the currentstate of their interlanguage as manifested in their ownoutput.
Another way of identifying the processes responsiblefor interlanguage development is to deduce theoperations that learners perform from a close inspectionof their output. We shall examine two of them here;operating prinsiples and processing constrains.
OPERATING PRINCIPLES Operating principles is the study of the L1 acquisition of many different language has led to the identification of a number of general strategies which children use to extract and segment linguistic information from the language they hear.
PROCESSING CONSTRAINS Processing constrains sought to account for both why learners acquire the grammar of a language in a definite order and also why some learners only develop very simple interlanguage grammar.
Later they develop the ‘initialization/finalization strategy’ Later they Later, learners achieve which enables them to move develop thethe end of a elements at access to the ‘subordinate ‘initialization/finalization and structure to the beginning clause strategy’, which strategy’ which enables them vice versa but prevents moving elements within a premits movement ofthem to move elements at structure. elements within mainthe end of a structure to the clauses but blocks them in beginning and vice versa subordinate clauses. but prevents them moving Later, learners achieve access to the ‘subordinate clause strategy’,elements within a structure. which premits movement of elements within main clauses but blocks them in subordinate clauses.
COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES Communication strategies When learners experience some kind of problem with an initial plan which prevents them Communication strategies from executing it. They can either abandon the initial plan and develop an entirely different one byWhen learners experience some kind of problem with an initial plan whichprevents them from executing it. They can either abandon maintain means of a reducation strategy or try to the initial plan anddevelop an entirely different one by means of a reducation strategy or try tomaintainoriginal communicative goal by adopting some kind of their their original communicative goal by adopting someachievement strategy. kind of achievement strategy.
TWO TYPES OF COMPUTATIONAL MODEL Two types of computational model Serial processing That is, imformation is processed in a series of serial processing sequential step and results in the representation of what has been learned as some kind of ‘rule’ or ‘strategy’. That is, imformation is processed in a series of sequential step and results in the representation of what has been learned as some kind of ‘rule’ or ‘strategy’.
PARALLEL DISTRIBUTED PROCESSING Thisparallel distributed credits the learner with the ability to perform a processing number of mental tasks at the same thing. Models based on paralled distributed processing reject the whole This credits the learner with the ability to perform a number of notion of ‘rule’. the same thing. Models based on paralled mental tasks at distributed processing reject the whole notion of ‘rule’.