The document summarizes key aspects of error analysis as applied to the study of second language acquisition. It discusses error analysis as the first approach to SLA, focusing on learners' creative abilities and systematic errors. It then describes the main stages of conducting an error analysis - recognition, description and explanation of errors. Various error classification frameworks are also summarized, including analyzing errors based on linguistic category, surface strategy, comparisons to first language acquisition, and communicative effect.

1. By Naning Tri Wahyuni
Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta
2015

2. Introduction
 According to Saville –Troike
(2006: 38), Error Analysis
(EA) is the first approach to
the study of Second language
Acquisition (SLA) which
includes an internal focus on
learner’s creative ability to
construct language
 a method used to document the
systematic errors that appear
in learner language (Carla ,
University of Minnesota.
2013)
Error Documentation

3. EA provides evidence for:
 The system of language which a learner is using at any particular point in the
course of L2 development,
 Learner’s strategies on discovering of the language
Therefore, The errors which emerge from that learning process could:

 tell the teacher what needs to be taught
 tell the researcher how learning proceeds,
are a means whereby learners test their hypotheses about the L2 (James 1998;
12)

EA provides a validation for the classical contrastive analysis (CA) of which the
goal is to find out something about the (1) psycholinguistic process and or (2)
cognitive mechanism of second language learning.

4. The primary focus on EA is  Learner Errors
 Learner errors could provide an
understanding of the underlying
processes of second language
learning/acquisition

 Learner errors are “windows into
the language learner’s mind”
(Saville-Troike 2006: 39)

5. The learning processes can be inferred from:
 An examination of learner language protocol
 Studies of learner introspections
 Case studies
 Diary studies
 Classroom observation
 Experimental studies
(Long 1990)

6. Error Analysis on SLL and SLA
The main Aspects of Error analysis include:
 Algorithm for conducting EA
 Error description and classification
 Error correction.

The concept of Error Analysis has been applied to both of SLL and SLA
Sharwood Smith (1994), Gass and Selinker (1994) and Selinker (1997)
mentioned that the terms second language learning (SLL) and second
language acquisition (SLA) are used interchangeably as umbrella terms for
the learning and acquisition of an additional language.

7. THE ALGORITHM FOR CONDUCTING ERROR ANALYSIS
 In order to reach the intended goals the researchers can
employ a set of procedures to carry out in Error Analysis
(EA)
 According to Corder (1978: 126), the procedure basically
consist of three major stages;
(a) Recognition
(b) Description
(c) Explanation of errors.

8. Sridhar (1980: 103) subsequently elaborated these stages into
more following steps:
 Collection of data (e.g. From students’ compositions,
examination answers)
 Identification of errors (labelling the errors with varying
degrees of precision, e.g., dangling preposition, anomalous
sequences of tenses, etc.)
 Classification into errors types (e.g. errors of agreement,
articles, verb forms, etc.)
 Statement of relative frequency of error types
 Identification of the areas of difficulty in the target language
 Remedial lesson therapy

9. Duskova and Rossipal (in Sridhar, 1980: 103) proposed 2 more
stages to complete the procedures which had been set by Sridhar
above, namely:
 Analysis of the source of error (e.g. mother tongue interference,
intralingual error, developmental error, etc.)
 Determination of the degree of disturbance caused by the error (the
seriousness impact of the error in terms of communication, norm,
etc.)

Currently, The set of procedures above still applies for EA practices,
and for this purpose, James (1998: 269) sets up the more applicative
procedures shown below;

10. Sample learner language

Register each utterance of sample and its context

Is utterance x normal? (Wholly or in part?)

(a) in some plausible context? (b) in this context?
If both of (a) and (b) are “yes”, it means “acceptable/non-deviant”
If both of (a) and (b) are “No”, or one of them “No”, it means “Ungrammatical” or “Unacceptable”

Reconstruct intended form (Target Language/TL form) and note the mis-correspondence(s);

Describe the error in terms of :
 Level and unit of TL system
 Learner modification of the TL

Can the learner self-correct?
Yes  mistakes (han1)
No  Error (han2)

 Carry out a back – translation of deviant form into learner’s L1

Is the translation good?
Yes  Interlingual/interference/transfer
No  Alternative diagnosis (intralingual, induced, etc.)

Determine gravity

Remedial work/modify syllabus

11. Error Identification
 Error can be identified by comparing what the learner actually
said with what he ought to have said to express what he intended
to say, his erroneous utterances are compared with what a native
speaker would have said to express that meaning.
 The sentences can be judged as free from errors when they fulfil 2
criteria: (a) grammatically and (b) acceptability.
 Grammaticality has something to do with the language code
(well-formedness), while Acceptability has something to do
with the proper use of the code.
 Acceptability deals with actualization procedure (James 1989:
66). Therefore, it is judged not by linguistic factors, but by the
users, in here means “native speakers”

12. Examples:
Student: “How are you today, Mr Sheehan?”
(Grammatically correct, acceptable)
Student: “How are you today, old man?”
(Grammatically correct, socially unacceptable)
Student: “How are you today, Dude?”
(Ungrammatical, social unacceptable)
In the daily life, addressing “dude” among
friends often acceptable, for the example:
Peter and Steve are old friends. They haven’t
met each other for years. One day they met in
City centre’s theatre, and they started greeting
each other:
Peter: ”wow, Steve! Is that you, bro?”
Steve: “Yes, I remember you as well, Dude!
Peter the flower boy in high school, ha-ha…”
(ungrammatical, certain social acceptable)
In general:
It seems easy to recognize the learner’s errors if they
exhibit omission, additions, wrong selections, wrong
ordering…etc. (grammatically error), however, even
well-formed sentence still could be done erroneous in
context, ambiguous in meaning, unusual/bizarre
nature of the idea expressed, or reference to an
inconceivable situation (unacceptability).

13. Error Description and Classification
  Errors are usually classified according to language components (e.g.
phonological, morphological, syntactic, etc.). Within syntax errors are
classifiable into auxiliary system, passive sentences, negative
construction, articles, proposition, verbs, nouns, etc.
  Richards (1977), Dulay-Burt-Krashen (1982), and James (1998)
present the most useful and commonly used bases for descriptive
classification of errors by describing errors using different kinds of
taxonomy, namely: (1) Linguistic category, )2) Surface strategy,
(3) Comparative taxonomy and (4) Communicative effect.

14. (1) Linguistic Category

 Carries out errors in terms of where the error is located in the
overall system of the TL based on the linguistic item which is
affected by the error (James 1998; 105).
 It indicates in which component of language the error is
located. E.g. Phonology (pronunciation), syntax and
morphology (clause, noun phrase, verb phrase, auxiliaries,
preposition, adjectives, etc.)
 This framework is useful and applicable to handle the errors
of relatively advanced learners.

15. (2) Surface Strategy Taxonomy/target modification taxonomy (James 1998)
 This classification based on the ways in which the learner’s
erroneous version is different from the presumed target version
(James 1998: 106).
 It highlights the ways the surface structures deviate. For example;
learners may omit necessary items (omission) or add unnecessary ones
(addition), they may misform items (misformation) or misorder them
(misordering) (an3)
 This classification can give a clear description about cognitive
processes that underlie the learner’s reconstruction of the new
language being learned.
 This classification also explains that learner’s errors result from
their active way in using the interim principles to produce the TL.

16. (3) Comparative Taxonomy (Dulay, Burt and Krashen, 1982: 164)

 This is comparison between the structures of second language
errors and certain other type of constructions. For example, we
might compare the structure of Indonesian student’s error in
English learning to those of errors reported for student
acquiring English as a first language.
 These comparisons have resulted the 2 major error categories
within this taxonomy:

17.   Developmental errors are errors which are similar to those made by children
learning the TL as L1. Example: “The dog eat it”. The omission of the past
tense marker can be classified as developmental error because they also found in
the speech of children learning English as L1.
  Interlingual errors are defined as errors that reflect native language structure
regardless of internal processes or external condition that spawn them (Dulay,
Burt and Krashen,1982: 171). The similar type of error is interference or
transfer, it means that the learner’s native language somehow interferes with
the learning of L2, or transfer into the learner’s developing L2 system  “the
man skinny” (orang itu kurus), “the boy fat” (anak itu gemuk).
 An additional for the two major errors above, there is “ambiguous error”,
which could be classified equally as developmental or Interlingual errors. This
error reflect to both the learner’s L1 and the type of errors in the speech of
children acquiring English as their first language such as in; “I no have a car” (
Saya tidak mempunyai mobil). This (-) construction reflects to the learner’s native
language (Indonesian) and also the characteristic of the speech of children
learning English as first language.

18. Communicative Effect Taxonomy 
 It based on the perspective of their effect on the listener and reader (Dulay, Burt and
Krashen,1982: 189)
 It deals much with distinguishing between errors that seem to cause
miscommunication and those that do not. Errors that reflect the overall organization
of the sentence usually do not hinder communication.
According to Dulay, Burt and Krashen, this type of taxonomy is categorized errors into
“Global errors” and “Local errors” (An4)
  Global errors are errors that affect overall sentence organization and they
significantly hinder communication (Dulay, Burt, and Krashen 1982: 191). The
errors include wrong order, Missing, wrong or misplaced the sentence connectors,
missing cues to signal obligatory exceptions to pervasive syntactic rules (an4).
  Local errors are those that effect single elements (constituent in a sentence, and do
not usually hinder communication significantly (Dulay, Burt and Krashen 1982:
191). These include error in noun and verb inflections, articles, auxiliaries etc.

19. -
Non-Contrastive Approach to Error Analysis
Richards (1977) gives specific attention to several types of errors,
observed in the English acquisition as a L2, which do not derive from
transfer or interference from another language (L1). He classified errors
into 2; (a) intralingual errors and (b) developmental errors.
  Intralingual errors are those which reflect the general
characteristics of rule learning (Richards, 1977: 174). Errors of this
type include faulty generalization, incomplete application of rules,
and failure to learn conditions under which rules are applied.
  Developmental errors are those which illustrate the learner’s
attempting to build up hypotheses about English language from his
own limited experience of it in the classroom or textbook (Richards
1977: 174). This type of errors includes overgeneralization,
ignorance of rule restrictions, incomplete application of rule and
false concept hypothesized.

20. Error Correction
 One of the purposes of conducting error analysis is “to identify
the principles which should guide effective error correction (James,
1998: 235).
 EA’s supposed to help teachers to devise remedial lessons and
exercises. Therefore, error corrections or treatments can help learners
better learn the TL/develop their interlanguage system. With this
method, it’s expected that the learners will produce fewer and fewer
errors until they disappear completely after a certain period of time
in learning

Direct error correction  Audio-lingual approach  It
emphasizes the formal accuracy (Proper pronunciation, spelling,
grammar, diction)

Indirect error correction  Current communicative approach
 it emphasizes less formal accuracy and more importance to
fluency

21. Example:
Indirect error correction  Current communicative approach
Student: “I was in pub.”
Teacher: “In the pub?”
Student: “Yeah, and I was drinking beer with my friend.”
Teacher: “Which pub did you go to?”
(Ellis, Basturkmen, and Loewen 2001: 299)

22. Feedback from error corrections
According to Lyster and Ranta (1997: 38), there are 6 types of feedback from
teacher (error correction), namely;
 Explicit correction, the teacher supplies the correct form and clearly indicates
that what student said was incorrect.
 Recast, the teacher implicitly reformulates all or part of the student’s
utterances.
 Clarification request, the teacher uses phrases such as “Pardon?”
 Metalinguistic feedback, the teacher provides comments or questions related to
the well-formedness of the student’s utterances.
 Elicitation, the teacher directly elicits a reformulation from the students.
 Repetition. The teacher repeats the student’s ill –formed utterance, adjusting
intonation to highlight the error

23.  James (1998: 236-237) summarized the use of the term error
correction in 3 senses:
 Informing the learner that there is an error, and leaving them to
correct it and repair it themselves. James calls this feedback. That
is telling people whether their utterance or understanding is right
or wrong.
 Providing treatment or information that leads to the revision
and correction of the specific instance of error (the error token)
without aiming to prevent the same error from recurring later.
 Providing learners with information that allows them to revise
or reject the wrong rule they were operating with when they
produced the error token.

24. Controversies
Despite the serious study about how far error corrections give significant
impact on learner process, there are still some conflicting views as
mentioned below;
Krashen (1982) believed that error correction has unconvinced value
for second language acquisition . His view derived from possibility
parallels between children’s acquisition of their L1 and adult’s L2. He
claims that children do not generally receive explicit negative feedback
on the accuracy of their language. Even they do, it often does not give
good effect.

His view is strengthened by O’Grady, Dobrovolsky nd Katamba (1996)
with the given example from parent and their children relationship,
below the sample of the conversation;

25. (1) Child: “Want other one spoon. Daddy”.
Father: ”You mean, you want the other spoon?”
Child: “Yes, I want other one spoon, please Daddy”.
Father: “Can you say “The other spoon?”
Child: “Other…..one…..spoon”
Father: “Say “other”
Child: “Other”.
Father: “spoon”
Child: “spoon”
Father: “Other spoon”
Child: “Other …..spoon. Now give me other one spoon!”
In this case, Krashen claims that adults do not require constant correction in useful ways. It
will be the role of the teacher to provide comprehensive inputs which learners can work on in
order to refine their understanding and move to the next stage of IL.

26. Corder (1982) proposed the opposite view, he believed that error correction has a
significant role in second language learning (SLL). According to Corder, some strategies
used by the L2 learner are the same as those which L1 acquisition takes place. Making
errors is strategy in order to test out certain hypothesis about the nature of the language
they are learning, also it is becoming evidence of their internal processing. Corder then
gave other example from the study record of mother-child interaction, below:
Mother: “Did Billy have his egg cut up for him at breakfast?”
Child: “Yes, I showds him.”
Mother: “You what?”
Child: “I showed him”
Mother: “You showed him?”
Child: “I seed him”
Mother: “Ah, you saw him”
Child: “ Yes, I saw him”

27. Between controversies
If Krashen supported by O’Grady, Dobrovolsky and Katamba disbelieve the
value of error correction in the SLL process by giving the evidence of the case
of children acquiring L1, on the contrary, the opposite view explained that the
case happened because the children have too little language awareness to
benefit.
 James (1998: 244) was following Corder’s view by mentioning that “Such
argument above (Krashen and friends) is irrelevant to the classroom practice
of error correction, where the effect upon learning is considerable”.
 Eventually, it is obvious that there are substantial supports for a claim that
error correction does aid SLL. For a teacher, of course , they have to provide
their learners with corrections which is needed to modify their hypothesis
about the functions and linguistic form they use. Presumably, by giving error
corrections will help learners to alter their output in constructive ways.

28. To sum up

 Error analysis can function as an analytical tool for
better understanding Of the learner‘s problem in
learning the L2.
 By conducting EA, Teachers/researchers can
identify the principles for effective error corrections,
and eventually It can help teachers to devise
remedial lessons which can help learners better learn
the TL and develop their interlanguage system
THE END AND THANK YOU


29. Hyperlink additional notes number 1&2 (an1& an2)
The differences between “error” and “mistake”
Error  the learner unintentionally to commit one
 Error is always systematic and consistent deviance which is characteristic of the
learner’s linguistic system at a given stage of learning.
 Error are typically produced by learners who do not yet fully command some
institutionalized language system. They arise due to the imperfect competence in the
target language (TL)
Mistake  The form the learner selected was not the one intended (fault)
 Mistake are deviation due to performance factors such as memory limitation,
fatigue, and emotional strain.
 They are typically irregular and can be readily corrected by the learners themselves
when their attention is drawn to them (James, 1998: 78).
 Mistake is a kind of error which is not the result from deficiency in “competence”,
but the result of the imperfection in the process of encoding and articulating speech.
 These mistakes seem to increase in frequency under the conditions of stress,
indecision, and fatigue.

30. Hyperlink additional note number 3 (an3)
Surface strategy taxonomy classified errors into 4 types:
 Omission is a type of error which is characterized by the absence of an item that must appear in a well-
formed utterance. Example:
John a new student (correct one should be “John is a new student”)
He speak English well ( it should be “He speaks English well”)
 Addition is a type of errors which is characterized by the presence of an unnecessary item in a well-
formed utterance. Example; double marking, regularization and simple addition. It often occurs in the
later stages of SLA where the learners usually have already acquired some target language rules, only
they are too faithful in using certain rules which result in errors.
 Misformation is errors which characterized by the use of the wrong form of structure or morpheme
(James 1998: 108). There are 3 types of this error which have been frequently reported in the literature,
namely: (1) regularization, is overlooking exception and spreading rules to domains where they do not
apply such as runned, womans, hitted . They should be run, women and hit. (2) archi-forms, is selection
of one member of a class of forms to represent others in the class, for example, out of the set
this/that/those/these, the learner might use only that. (3) alternating form, is derivate from the use of
archi-forms which gives way to the apparently fairly free alteration of various members of a class with
each other, For example, the learner uses he for she, him for he, they for it, her for she…etc.
 Misordering, is error which is characterized by the incorrect placement of a morpheme or group of
morpheme in an utterance: “What Daddy is doing? “ (should be “What is Daddy doing?”), “I don’t
know what is it?” (should be “I don’t know what it is”)

31. Hyperlink additional note number 4 (an4)
Communicative Effect Taxonomy
 Global Errors. The most systematic global errors include the following errors:
 Wrong order of major constituents such as in, “English language use many people”,
it should be “English language is used by many people” or “Many people use
English language”
 Missing, wrong or misplaced the sentence connectors such as in, “Not take this bus,
we late for school” (missing connector). “He will be rich until he marry” (wrong
connector). “He started to go to school since he studied very hard” (misplaced
connector).
 Missing cues to signal obligatory exceptions to pervasive syntactic rules, such in,
“The student’s proposal looked into the principle”.
 Regulation of pervasive syntactic rules to exception, such as in, “He amused that
movie very much”.
 Local Errors, these include errors in noun and verbs inflection, articles, auxiliaries etc.
These errors are labelled local because they are limited to a single part of the sentence
such in, “Why we like each other?”