Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Contrastive analysis


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology

Contrastive analysis

  1. 1. Contrastive Analysis A Presentation by Lulud, Nicko, and Novian
  2. 2. Contrastive Analysis: The Definition CA is SLA approach that compares features of L1 and L2 in order to determine the similarities and differences of L1 to L2
  3. 3. Continued… The idea of CA was popular back in the time when structural linguistics (structuralism) and behavioral psychology (behaviorism) were dominant (Yang, 1992). We’ll talk about this later on…
  4. 4. CA: The Transfer In Contrastive Analysis, when students of L1 learn L2, there are two kinds of transfer happening: Negative Transfer Positive Transfer
  5. 5. Positive Transfer refers to the similarity found in both L1 in L2; be it in the grammatical structure, morphology, or pronunciation. These similarities are believed to ease the students in learning the L2
  6. 6. Negative Transfer refers to the differences of grammatical structure, morphology, and pronunciation of the L2 compared to the L1. The negative transfer is said to be the obstacle of the students in learning L2
  7. 7. When do these transfer occur? In the context of Indonesian students learning English, both positive transfer and negative transfer will occur in the process of learning such as in the learning of grammar, morphology, and pronunciation.
  8. 8. Positive Transfer “Saya makan” and “I eat” • Grammar “Pembunuh” and “Murderer” • Morphology • Phonology Car [kar] (English), and /k/amu, /a/dik, and /r/api (Indonesian)
  9. 9. The Negative Transfer • Grammar • Morphology • Phonology There is no verb in There are many Tensed-sentence base form, singularphonemes that do subject-present be “I ate” canL1 easily not exist in form, past form, past as “saya translated (Indonesia) participle form, and makan” dopping or present participle ignoring the tense form in Indonesian information
  10. 10. However  though those three aspects of language can experience both positive and negative transfer, the focus of CA is on the surface forms of both L1 and L2 systems.  It also focuses on describing and comparing the languages one level at a time – generally by contrasting the phonology of L1 and L2 first, then morphology, then syntax, with the lexicon receiving relatively little attention, and discourse still less
  11. 11. Implication in ELT CA only provides WHAT to teach ALM provides HOW to teach
  12. 12. Why ALM? It shares the same theories as the basis Its principles related to Contrastive Analysis Structuralism CA  Comparing L1 & L2 structures ALM  Teaching the new structures Behaviorism CA  Language acquisition essentially involves habit formation ALM  Strengthen habit through drills
  13. 13. Related ALM principles with CA Language is speech, not writing Language is a set of habits Teach the language not about the language Languages are different
  14. 14. Pros and Cons in CA experience research theory
  15. 15. Pros argumentations in CA Klein (1986: 26) stated that “the existence of various forms of transfer is too obvious to be ignored”. Rivers and Temperley (1978: 152) also assume that CA is also still good to analyze the students’ problem Lehn and Slager (1959) compared the L1 and L2 in the process of transfering.
  16. 16. Table about the difficulties/problems Native Language Learner Problems Examples: Arabic speakers learn English /b/ Habit Arabic speakers learn English /v/ have it Indonesian speakers learn English /g/ to /k/ Leg Indonesian speakers learn English /d/ to /t/ Bird Indonesian speakers learn English /b/ to /p/ Cap Indonesian speakers learn English More than two Girls consonants
  17. 17. Cons argumentations in CA Hughes (1980) attributes the reasons for CA’ loss popularity to each lack of success in predicting difficulties. He also argues that CA has undervalued the contribution of the learners and also failed to recognize what has to be learnt.
  18. 18. Cons argumentations in CA Wardhaugh (1970: 125) believes that the strong version of CA was quite unrealistic and impracticable. Lances (1969) reports that one-third to two-third of his adult foreign students English’ errors were not traceable to the first language.
  19. 19. Cons argumentations in CA  James (1985) also made some counter arguments that: Interference from the L1 is not the sole source of error in L2 learning. The predictions of students’ error in L2 made by CA are not reliable.  CA is based on, and perpetuates, a naïve view of language structure. There is not establishing criteria fir comparability. CA only conceives of interference in one direction, from L1 to L2.
  20. 20. Thank You