This document provides an overview of some issues of contention in contrastive analysis (CA). It discusses criteria for comparing languages, including using surface structure, deep structure, and translation equivalence as potential tertium comparation (TC) or constants for comparison. It also addresses the psychological reality of CA and how linguists and psycholinguists approach the study of language structure differently. The document contains examples analyzing differences in article systems between languages and criticisms of only using deep structure or surface structure for comparisons between languages.
This document discusses the psychological basis of contrastive analysis (CA). It explains that CA draws on linguistics and psychology, specifically transfer theory which states that prior learning affects subsequent learning. It also discusses some problems with defining the stimulus-response model in second language learning, including determining what constitutes a stimulus versus a response in language acquisition. Finally, it notes that CA is more interested in generalizations about language forms rather than analyzing specific utterances.
Contrastive Analysis (CA) compares the linguistic structures of two languages to determine their similarities and differences. The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH) states that similarities between languages will be easy for learners, while differences can cause difficulties. CAH predicts learners will transfer habits from their native language, so similar structures will be easy and different structures hard. CA was used to establish a hierarchy of difficulty to identify where learners may make errors and need instruction. However, CA has limitations as some studies found learners did not struggle most with structures differing from their L1.
This document discusses contrastive analysis, which compares two languages to identify similarities and differences. It covers:
1. The basic assumptions of contrastive analysis, including that interference from a first language causes learning difficulties in a second language, and contrastive analysis can predict and address these issues.
2. The theoretical and applied levels of contrastive analysis - theoretical establishes frameworks for comparison, while applied uses these findings for language teaching.
3. Contrastive analysis can predict about one-third to one-half of learner errors caused by interference from the first language. It cannot predict other error types.
This document discusses issues related to contrastive analysis (CA) between languages. It addresses two main sources of insecurity for CA: 1) Criteria for comparison between languages and 2) whether languages are truly comparable. Regarding criteria, it examines using surface structure, deep structure, and translation equivalence as potential common bases for comparison. However, each approach has advantages and disadvantages. Determining an appropriate universal criterion that captures similarities while also allowing for differences between language systems has proven difficult.
This document provides an introduction to semantics, which is defined as the study of meaning, particularly in human language. It discusses some key concepts in semantics, including the difference between utterances and sentences. Utterances are specific instances of language used in context, while sentences are abstract linguistic forms. It also introduces the idea of propositions, which are the meaningful aspects of declarative sentences that can be either true or false. The document uses examples and practice questions to illustrate these fundamental semantic concepts.
This document discusses different types of sense relations, including oppositeness, antonymy, contradictoriness, and ambiguity. It defines four basic types of antonymy: binary antonyms, converses, multiple incompatibles (systems), and gradable antonymy. It also distinguishes between homonymy and polysemy as two types of ambiguous words. Finally, it discusses lexical ambiguity from ambiguous words and structural (or grammatical) ambiguity in sentences without ambiguous words.
The psychological basis of contrastive analysissara_galastarxy
The psychological basis of contrastive analysis is transfer theory. Transfer theory hypothesizes that prior learning affects subsequent learning. There are three paradigms - A, B, and C - that describe how transfer occurs between a first and second language based on the similarity and differences of stimuli and responses. Paradigm A involves the same formal devices used for different purposes, paradigm B involves different formal devices for the same meaning, and paradigm C has no similarities and is not useful for contrastive analysis. Contrastive analysis uses a behaviorist stimulus-response model of psychology but two cognitivist alternatives are cross-association and the ignorance hypothesis. The ignorance hypothesis has weaknesses as it does not account for learners being exposed to the target language
Contrastive analysis is a method that systematically compares a learner's native language and the target language they are learning to identify similarities and differences. This analysis can then predict areas of difficulty for the learner and inform language pedagogy. The method involves describing both languages, selecting linguistic units for comparison, contrasting the two systems, and predicting how differences may interfere with second language acquisition. Contrastive analysis of Arabic and English has found differences in phonology, grammar, vocabulary and other linguistic units that often cause difficulties for Arabic speakers learning English.
This document discusses the psychological basis of contrastive analysis (CA). It explains that CA draws on linguistics and psychology, specifically transfer theory which states that prior learning affects subsequent learning. It also discusses some problems with defining the stimulus-response model in second language learning, including determining what constitutes a stimulus versus a response in language acquisition. Finally, it notes that CA is more interested in generalizations about language forms rather than analyzing specific utterances.
Contrastive Analysis (CA) compares the linguistic structures of two languages to determine their similarities and differences. The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH) states that similarities between languages will be easy for learners, while differences can cause difficulties. CAH predicts learners will transfer habits from their native language, so similar structures will be easy and different structures hard. CA was used to establish a hierarchy of difficulty to identify where learners may make errors and need instruction. However, CA has limitations as some studies found learners did not struggle most with structures differing from their L1.
This document discusses contrastive analysis, which compares two languages to identify similarities and differences. It covers:
1. The basic assumptions of contrastive analysis, including that interference from a first language causes learning difficulties in a second language, and contrastive analysis can predict and address these issues.
2. The theoretical and applied levels of contrastive analysis - theoretical establishes frameworks for comparison, while applied uses these findings for language teaching.
3. Contrastive analysis can predict about one-third to one-half of learner errors caused by interference from the first language. It cannot predict other error types.
This document discusses issues related to contrastive analysis (CA) between languages. It addresses two main sources of insecurity for CA: 1) Criteria for comparison between languages and 2) whether languages are truly comparable. Regarding criteria, it examines using surface structure, deep structure, and translation equivalence as potential common bases for comparison. However, each approach has advantages and disadvantages. Determining an appropriate universal criterion that captures similarities while also allowing for differences between language systems has proven difficult.
This document provides an introduction to semantics, which is defined as the study of meaning, particularly in human language. It discusses some key concepts in semantics, including the difference between utterances and sentences. Utterances are specific instances of language used in context, while sentences are abstract linguistic forms. It also introduces the idea of propositions, which are the meaningful aspects of declarative sentences that can be either true or false. The document uses examples and practice questions to illustrate these fundamental semantic concepts.
This document discusses different types of sense relations, including oppositeness, antonymy, contradictoriness, and ambiguity. It defines four basic types of antonymy: binary antonyms, converses, multiple incompatibles (systems), and gradable antonymy. It also distinguishes between homonymy and polysemy as two types of ambiguous words. Finally, it discusses lexical ambiguity from ambiguous words and structural (or grammatical) ambiguity in sentences without ambiguous words.
The psychological basis of contrastive analysissara_galastarxy
The psychological basis of contrastive analysis is transfer theory. Transfer theory hypothesizes that prior learning affects subsequent learning. There are three paradigms - A, B, and C - that describe how transfer occurs between a first and second language based on the similarity and differences of stimuli and responses. Paradigm A involves the same formal devices used for different purposes, paradigm B involves different formal devices for the same meaning, and paradigm C has no similarities and is not useful for contrastive analysis. Contrastive analysis uses a behaviorist stimulus-response model of psychology but two cognitivist alternatives are cross-association and the ignorance hypothesis. The ignorance hypothesis has weaknesses as it does not account for learners being exposed to the target language
Contrastive analysis is a method that systematically compares a learner's native language and the target language they are learning to identify similarities and differences. This analysis can then predict areas of difficulty for the learner and inform language pedagogy. The method involves describing both languages, selecting linguistic units for comparison, contrasting the two systems, and predicting how differences may interfere with second language acquisition. Contrastive analysis of Arabic and English has found differences in phonology, grammar, vocabulary and other linguistic units that often cause difficulties for Arabic speakers learning English.
Some issues of contention in contrastive analysisSoraya Ghoddousi
This is a summarise of chapter 7 of Contrastive Analysis book by Carl James in Some Issues of Contention as a Midterm Project of CA course in TEFL at PAYAM NOOR University (Distance Education)
This document discusses different types of sense relations between linguistic expressions, including synonymy, hyponymy, paraphrase, and entailment.
1) Synonymy is defined as the relationship between two predicates that have the same sense. Hyponymy is a sense relation where the meaning of one predicate is included within the meaning of another more general predicate.
2) Paraphrase is the relationship between two sentences that express the same proposition. Entailment is where the truth of one proposition necessarily follows from the truth of another.
3) The relationships are interdependent. Synonymy is a special case of symmetrical hyponymy. Paraphrase is symmetrical entailment. The basic
This document discusses participant roles in language. It defines participant roles as the semantic relationships between a verb's arguments and the situation described by the verb. The main participant roles discussed are agent, affected, instrument, beneficiary, location, and experiencer. Examples are provided to illustrate each role. The relationships between participant roles and grammatical positions like subject, object, and complement are also examined. Finally, the concept of a verb's role frame is introduced as a way to represent the typical participant roles associated with that verb.
The document discusses morphological typology, which is the classification of languages based on how words are formed from morphemes. It defines key concepts like morphology, typology, and morphological processes. Morphological typology categorizes languages into types based on their word formation processes, such as isolating/analytic languages which form words from single morphemes, and polysynthetic languages which express whole ideas within a single word using many bound morphemes. The document also examines morphological processes including concatenative processes like affixation and compounding, and non-concatenative processes like internal modification and conversion.
This document discusses deixis and definiteness in language. It defines deictic words as words that take on meaning based on the context of the utterance, such as pronouns. Definiteness refers to whether a noun phrase assumes the listener can identify its referent based on the context. The use of definite and indefinite articles and expressions helps establish and refer to entities in the conversation context. Deixis allows language to be portable across situations by anchoring word meanings to utterance context.
(1) Deixis refers to the use of words or expressions whose meanings depend on the context of the utterance, such as who is speaking, their location in space and time, gestures, or the topic of discussion. Common deictic expressions include pronouns, demonstratives, temporal adverbs, and articles.
(2) Deixis is important in pragmatics and conversation analysis because it concerns how the structure of language relates to the context in which it is used. Deictic expressions point to elements either in the immediate physical context ("proximal") or not ("distal").
(3) There are different types of deixis, including personal deixis referring to people, temporal
Unit 8 Words and Things - Extensions and PrototypesAshwag Al Hamid
This document discusses the relationships between sense, extension, and reference in determining the meaning of linguistic expressions. It defines extension as the set of all individuals a predicate can be applied to, reference as the thing picked out by a referring expression on a particular occasion, and prototype as the most typical member of a predicate's extension. The document explores how these concepts help explain a speaker's ability to group entities and make descriptive statements using language. However, it also notes limitations, such as the fuzziness of many predicates' extensions and cultural differences in prototypes.
The document discusses different branches and concepts of semantics according to various scholars. It covers the overlap between semantics and pragmatics in determining sentence meaning versus speaker meaning. It also discusses levels of meaning including reference, denotation, sense, functional and content meaning. Contextual meaning is influenced by the context. Metaphor and metonymy are discussed as ways of extending meaning through resemblance or contiguity between concepts.
Discourse analysis by gillian brown & george yuleJohn Ykaz
This document introduces the concepts of transactional and interactional functions of language. Transactional functions involve the expression of "content", aiming to communicate information. Interactional functions involve expressing social relations and personal attitudes. The distinction corresponds to other dichotomies in linguistics such as referential/emotive and ideational/interpersonal. While language often serves multiple functions simultaneously, the introduction focuses on distinguishing these major functions for analytic purposes. It also notes that most linguists adopt a transactional view that language's primary function is communicating information, though it acknowledges language also plays important interactional roles.
The document discusses cooperation and implicature in conversations. It explains that cooperation is the basis for successful conversations, as people try to converse smoothly. Cooperation and implicature are fundamentally linked, as conversations assume people are not trying to confuse or withhold information from each other. Implicature conveys additional meaning beyond what is literally said, which listeners infer. The cooperative principle and Grice's maxims provide guidelines for effective language use. Scalar, particularized, conventional implicatures are discussed as ways additional meanings are communicated.
This document discusses various concepts related to word meaning and semantics. It defines conceptual meaning as the literal meaning indicating the idea or concept referred to by a word. It also discusses semantic components, which are universal semantic categories or concepts. Additionally, it covers semantic fields, which are groups of words arranged based on shared meaning. The document also defines metaphor and metonymy, explaining that metaphors carry meaning from one entity to another, while metonymy involves using an attribute or associated feature to name or designate something. Finally, it touches on connotative meaning, which involves what readers think about when they read a sentence.
Corpus linguistics involves using large collections of natural language texts, known as corpora, to study patterns of language usage. Corpora provide insights into how language varies between spoken and written forms as well as formal and casual contexts. Creating corpora from spoken language through transcription can be time-consuming. Different types of corpora exist for various research topics in linguistics. Important factors in corpus design include size, representativeness, and whether the sample is based on production or reception of language. Compiling corpora, especially from spoken language, requires obtaining and processing text data.
This document discusses translation and politics, specifically the linguistic strategies used in political discourse. It is assumed that a source text exists and certain features are transferred to the target text. Politics involves the distribution of power and governing. Political rhetoric aims to persuade through speech or writing on political themes. Language can influence power relationships. Euphemisms and dyseuphemisms are weighted words used for political purposes, such as referring to relationships, races, or genders. The document examines examples of persuasive or loaded language used in political contexts.
The document discusses coordination, ellipsis, and apposition in English grammar. It covers coordinating phrases and clauses, including types like noun phrases, adverbial phrases, and adjective phrases. It also discusses the syntactic features and semantic implications of coordinators like "and", "or", and "but" when linking clauses. Coordinators are restricted to clause-initial position and link equal units like phrases or clauses. The meaning conveyed can depend on whether the clauses are added, contrasted, or one is conditional on the other.
The document discusses key concepts related to the relationship between language and the world, including sense, reference, extension, and prototype. Sense involves a set of ideas about a word, extension refers to the complete set of all things a word can apply to, and reference picks out a specific instance of a word's use. Prototype refers to a typical member of a word's extension that best represents the category. The document provides examples to illustrate these concepts and their differences. It notes that language connects to the real world through reference, extension, and prototypes.
The document discusses problems of equivalence at the word level when translating between languages. It identifies 11 common problems including culture-specific concepts, words with no direct translation, semantic complexity, different distinctions in meaning, lack of superordinates or specific terms, and differences in frequency or purpose of forms. It then outlines 8 strategies for dealing with non-equivalence, such as using more general, neutral, or paraphrased words, loan words with explanation, translation by omission or illustration.
Pragmatics is concerned with 4 main areas: 1) studying a speaker's intended meaning, 2) how context influences meaning, 3) how listeners infer more from what is said than just the literal words, and 4) how the level of closeness between speakers is expressed. It differs from semantics and syntax in that pragmatics considers the relationships between linguistic forms and the users of those forms, allowing human aspects like intentions and assumptions to be analyzed. Studying language through pragmatics allows us to better understand intended meanings but is more difficult to do in an objective, consistent way compared to semantics or syntax.
1) The document discusses different types of antonyms including complementary terms, contrary terms, and converse terms.
2) Antonyms are classified based on their semantic opposition and can differ in degree of intensity.
3) The use of antonyms enables the expression of opposites for contrast and emphasis in language.
This document discusses two key aspects of meaning proposed by German semanticist Gottlob Frege: sense and reference. [1] Reference refers to the relationship between a linguistic expression and something in the real world. Sense refers to the semantic relationship an expression has within a language. The document provides examples and properties of reference, such as how one expression can have multiple referents depending on context. It also distinguishes between sense, which is the meaning or thought conveyed by an expression, and reference, which is the object represented.
This document discusses three approaches to contrastive analysis for comparing English and French:
1) The structuralist approach compares surface structures but lacks distinction between deep and surface phenomena.
2) Chomsky's approach compares deep grammars but the notion of universals becomes incoherent.
3) The notional approach reflects identity at the deep structure level but requires more reflection on semantic categories. Overall, an adequate approach needs to distinguish between deep and surface structures and consider semantic interpretations.
This document discusses techniques of error analysis in language teaching. It outlines two main approaches to error analysis: 1) using pre-selected categories of common errors, and 2) letting the errors themselves determine the categories. It also discusses uses of error analysis like contrastive analysis and investigating communicative strategies. Finally, it provides examples of procedures for remedial teaching after identifying errors through analysis, such as demonstrating errors, substitution tables, and sentence completion activities.
Some issues of contention in contrastive analysisSoraya Ghoddousi
This is a summarise of chapter 7 of Contrastive Analysis book by Carl James in Some Issues of Contention as a Midterm Project of CA course in TEFL at PAYAM NOOR University (Distance Education)
This document discusses different types of sense relations between linguistic expressions, including synonymy, hyponymy, paraphrase, and entailment.
1) Synonymy is defined as the relationship between two predicates that have the same sense. Hyponymy is a sense relation where the meaning of one predicate is included within the meaning of another more general predicate.
2) Paraphrase is the relationship between two sentences that express the same proposition. Entailment is where the truth of one proposition necessarily follows from the truth of another.
3) The relationships are interdependent. Synonymy is a special case of symmetrical hyponymy. Paraphrase is symmetrical entailment. The basic
This document discusses participant roles in language. It defines participant roles as the semantic relationships between a verb's arguments and the situation described by the verb. The main participant roles discussed are agent, affected, instrument, beneficiary, location, and experiencer. Examples are provided to illustrate each role. The relationships between participant roles and grammatical positions like subject, object, and complement are also examined. Finally, the concept of a verb's role frame is introduced as a way to represent the typical participant roles associated with that verb.
The document discusses morphological typology, which is the classification of languages based on how words are formed from morphemes. It defines key concepts like morphology, typology, and morphological processes. Morphological typology categorizes languages into types based on their word formation processes, such as isolating/analytic languages which form words from single morphemes, and polysynthetic languages which express whole ideas within a single word using many bound morphemes. The document also examines morphological processes including concatenative processes like affixation and compounding, and non-concatenative processes like internal modification and conversion.
This document discusses deixis and definiteness in language. It defines deictic words as words that take on meaning based on the context of the utterance, such as pronouns. Definiteness refers to whether a noun phrase assumes the listener can identify its referent based on the context. The use of definite and indefinite articles and expressions helps establish and refer to entities in the conversation context. Deixis allows language to be portable across situations by anchoring word meanings to utterance context.
(1) Deixis refers to the use of words or expressions whose meanings depend on the context of the utterance, such as who is speaking, their location in space and time, gestures, or the topic of discussion. Common deictic expressions include pronouns, demonstratives, temporal adverbs, and articles.
(2) Deixis is important in pragmatics and conversation analysis because it concerns how the structure of language relates to the context in which it is used. Deictic expressions point to elements either in the immediate physical context ("proximal") or not ("distal").
(3) There are different types of deixis, including personal deixis referring to people, temporal
Unit 8 Words and Things - Extensions and PrototypesAshwag Al Hamid
This document discusses the relationships between sense, extension, and reference in determining the meaning of linguistic expressions. It defines extension as the set of all individuals a predicate can be applied to, reference as the thing picked out by a referring expression on a particular occasion, and prototype as the most typical member of a predicate's extension. The document explores how these concepts help explain a speaker's ability to group entities and make descriptive statements using language. However, it also notes limitations, such as the fuzziness of many predicates' extensions and cultural differences in prototypes.
The document discusses different branches and concepts of semantics according to various scholars. It covers the overlap between semantics and pragmatics in determining sentence meaning versus speaker meaning. It also discusses levels of meaning including reference, denotation, sense, functional and content meaning. Contextual meaning is influenced by the context. Metaphor and metonymy are discussed as ways of extending meaning through resemblance or contiguity between concepts.
Discourse analysis by gillian brown & george yuleJohn Ykaz
This document introduces the concepts of transactional and interactional functions of language. Transactional functions involve the expression of "content", aiming to communicate information. Interactional functions involve expressing social relations and personal attitudes. The distinction corresponds to other dichotomies in linguistics such as referential/emotive and ideational/interpersonal. While language often serves multiple functions simultaneously, the introduction focuses on distinguishing these major functions for analytic purposes. It also notes that most linguists adopt a transactional view that language's primary function is communicating information, though it acknowledges language also plays important interactional roles.
The document discusses cooperation and implicature in conversations. It explains that cooperation is the basis for successful conversations, as people try to converse smoothly. Cooperation and implicature are fundamentally linked, as conversations assume people are not trying to confuse or withhold information from each other. Implicature conveys additional meaning beyond what is literally said, which listeners infer. The cooperative principle and Grice's maxims provide guidelines for effective language use. Scalar, particularized, conventional implicatures are discussed as ways additional meanings are communicated.
This document discusses various concepts related to word meaning and semantics. It defines conceptual meaning as the literal meaning indicating the idea or concept referred to by a word. It also discusses semantic components, which are universal semantic categories or concepts. Additionally, it covers semantic fields, which are groups of words arranged based on shared meaning. The document also defines metaphor and metonymy, explaining that metaphors carry meaning from one entity to another, while metonymy involves using an attribute or associated feature to name or designate something. Finally, it touches on connotative meaning, which involves what readers think about when they read a sentence.
Corpus linguistics involves using large collections of natural language texts, known as corpora, to study patterns of language usage. Corpora provide insights into how language varies between spoken and written forms as well as formal and casual contexts. Creating corpora from spoken language through transcription can be time-consuming. Different types of corpora exist for various research topics in linguistics. Important factors in corpus design include size, representativeness, and whether the sample is based on production or reception of language. Compiling corpora, especially from spoken language, requires obtaining and processing text data.
This document discusses translation and politics, specifically the linguistic strategies used in political discourse. It is assumed that a source text exists and certain features are transferred to the target text. Politics involves the distribution of power and governing. Political rhetoric aims to persuade through speech or writing on political themes. Language can influence power relationships. Euphemisms and dyseuphemisms are weighted words used for political purposes, such as referring to relationships, races, or genders. The document examines examples of persuasive or loaded language used in political contexts.
The document discusses coordination, ellipsis, and apposition in English grammar. It covers coordinating phrases and clauses, including types like noun phrases, adverbial phrases, and adjective phrases. It also discusses the syntactic features and semantic implications of coordinators like "and", "or", and "but" when linking clauses. Coordinators are restricted to clause-initial position and link equal units like phrases or clauses. The meaning conveyed can depend on whether the clauses are added, contrasted, or one is conditional on the other.
The document discusses key concepts related to the relationship between language and the world, including sense, reference, extension, and prototype. Sense involves a set of ideas about a word, extension refers to the complete set of all things a word can apply to, and reference picks out a specific instance of a word's use. Prototype refers to a typical member of a word's extension that best represents the category. The document provides examples to illustrate these concepts and their differences. It notes that language connects to the real world through reference, extension, and prototypes.
The document discusses problems of equivalence at the word level when translating between languages. It identifies 11 common problems including culture-specific concepts, words with no direct translation, semantic complexity, different distinctions in meaning, lack of superordinates or specific terms, and differences in frequency or purpose of forms. It then outlines 8 strategies for dealing with non-equivalence, such as using more general, neutral, or paraphrased words, loan words with explanation, translation by omission or illustration.
Pragmatics is concerned with 4 main areas: 1) studying a speaker's intended meaning, 2) how context influences meaning, 3) how listeners infer more from what is said than just the literal words, and 4) how the level of closeness between speakers is expressed. It differs from semantics and syntax in that pragmatics considers the relationships between linguistic forms and the users of those forms, allowing human aspects like intentions and assumptions to be analyzed. Studying language through pragmatics allows us to better understand intended meanings but is more difficult to do in an objective, consistent way compared to semantics or syntax.
1) The document discusses different types of antonyms including complementary terms, contrary terms, and converse terms.
2) Antonyms are classified based on their semantic opposition and can differ in degree of intensity.
3) The use of antonyms enables the expression of opposites for contrast and emphasis in language.
This document discusses two key aspects of meaning proposed by German semanticist Gottlob Frege: sense and reference. [1] Reference refers to the relationship between a linguistic expression and something in the real world. Sense refers to the semantic relationship an expression has within a language. The document provides examples and properties of reference, such as how one expression can have multiple referents depending on context. It also distinguishes between sense, which is the meaning or thought conveyed by an expression, and reference, which is the object represented.
This document discusses three approaches to contrastive analysis for comparing English and French:
1) The structuralist approach compares surface structures but lacks distinction between deep and surface phenomena.
2) Chomsky's approach compares deep grammars but the notion of universals becomes incoherent.
3) The notional approach reflects identity at the deep structure level but requires more reflection on semantic categories. Overall, an adequate approach needs to distinguish between deep and surface structures and consider semantic interpretations.
This document discusses techniques of error analysis in language teaching. It outlines two main approaches to error analysis: 1) using pre-selected categories of common errors, and 2) letting the errors themselves determine the categories. It also discusses uses of error analysis like contrastive analysis and investigating communicative strategies. Finally, it provides examples of procedures for remedial teaching after identifying errors through analysis, such as demonstrating errors, substitution tables, and sentence completion activities.
The document discusses contrastive analysis and its implications for teaching English as a second language. Contrastive analysis compares two languages by examining their differences and similarities. It is helpful for teachers and students to understand how the first language differs from the target language. This allows students to learn the target language properly without transferring rules from their first language. The document provides examples of differences in phonology, syntax, sentence structure and tenses between English and Bahasa Indonesia to illustrate how contrastive analysis can be applied in language teaching.
This document discusses contrastive analysis as a tool for comparing two languages to identify similarities and differences. It can be used to predict difficulties for language learners by examining differences between their first language (L1) and the target second language (L2). The document outlines the basic steps of contrastive analysis, including describing the phonemic inventories and comparing sounds, syntax, and other linguistic features between L1 and L2. Contrastive analysis was an early and influential theory for predicting language learning difficulties but has limitations and has been supplemented by other approaches.
The document discusses contrastive analysis and error analysis in language learning. It covers:
1) The weak, moderate, and strong versions of contrastive analysis hypothesis (CAH) and their limitations in predicting learner errors.
2) Factors like language transfer, both positive and negative, that can facilitate or hinder second language acquisition.
3) Problems with CAH predictions and the finding that many errors are not due to language differences.
4) Procedures for comparing languages in a contrastive analysis, including selecting areas, describing languages, comparing features, predicting difficulties, and verifying predictions.
5) Hierarchies of difficulty proposed to formalize predictions, including six categories ranging from
Contrastive analysis is the systematic study of two languages to identify their structural differences and similarities. It was originally used to establish language families but was later applied to second language acquisition in the 1960s. The contrastive analysis hypothesis claimed that elements similar between a learner's first and second language would be easier to acquire, while differences would be more difficult. However, empirical evidence showed this could not predict all errors, and some uniform errors occurred regardless of first language. This led to the development of error analysis and the concept of interlanguage, seeing second language acquisition as its own rule-governed linguistic system rather than an imperfect version of the target language.
The Linguistic Components ofContrastive Analysiszahraa Aamir
This document discusses the linguistic components of contrastive analysis, including levels of language, categories of grammar, and language models used for contrastive analysis at the grammatical level. It describes the traditional levels of language as phonology, lexis, morphology, and syntax. Grammatical categories are defined as units, structures, classes, and systems. Two common language models for contrastive analysis - the structural/taxonomic model and transformational generative grammar - are also outlined. The document advocates for a contrastive generative grammar approach that generates the structures of both languages from a common base for comparison.
This document discusses open issues in object-oriented programming from the perspective of researcher Ole Lehrmann Madsen. It outlines five main open issues: 1) the balance between modeling and code reuse, 2) the need for an explicit conceptual framework separate from programming languages, 3) the relationship between class-based and prototype-based languages, 4) differences in abstraction mechanisms between languages, and 5) the lack of consensus around concurrency models with the Simula approach being a good option. The document also notes there are additional open issues beyond these five areas.
A CORPUS-DRIVEN DESIGN OF A TEST FOR ASSESSING THE ESL COLLOCATIONAL COMPETEN...Lori Moore
This document summarizes a study that assessed the collocational competence of English linguistics students at the University of Granada. The study aimed to develop a reliable, corpus-driven test to evaluate students' receptive and productive knowledge of collocations. An 80-item test was designed using examples from corpora. Results showed students had poor collocational competence, scoring lower on productive items as expected. The study provided a framework for future research on collocational testing.
This document summarizes advances in language testing over the past decade in three areas: theoretical understanding of language ability, effects of test method and test taker characteristics, and methodological tools. It discusses how a multifaceted view of language ability and understanding of test complexity can inform test design to make tests more suitable and useful. Specifically, it outlines how a model of language ability and approach to characterizing task authenticity can help conceptualize abilities and design more effective instructional and research tasks.
Communicative competence A pedagogically motivated model with content specif...ssuser2c6554
The document proposes a new pedagogically motivated model of communicative competence with five components: 1) discourse competence, 2) linguistic competence, 3) actional competence, 4) sociocultural competence, and 5) strategic competence. It discusses existing models, particularly those by Canale & Swain and Bachman & Palmer. The proposed model aims to provide more detailed content specifications for language teaching by elaborating on sociolinguistic competence and separating it into actional competence. It places discourse at the center with the other competencies interacting with and shaping discourse.
ANNOTATED GUIDELINES AND BUILDING REFERENCE CORPUS FOR MYANMAR-ENGLISH WORD A...ijnlc
The document discusses guidelines and building a reference corpus for Myanmar-English word alignment. It presents annotated guidelines for aligning words between sentences in Myanmar and English texts. The guidelines cover various categories like nouns, verbs, punctuation etc. and provide examples of linking words with "sure" and "possible" labels. The researchers created a reference corpus of 500 aligned sentence pairs from an existing Myanmar-English parallel treebank, following the newly defined annotation guidelines. This corpus aims to help evaluate word alignment tasks and improve statistical machine translation between Myanmar and English.
This document describes research on unsupervised methods to improve aspect-based sentiment analysis in Czech. It presents experiments using labeled and unlabeled corpora for Czech and English to train models incorporating distributional semantics features. The models achieve new state-of-the-art results for aspect-based sentiment analysis in Czech. Additionally, the researchers created new labeled and unlabeled corpora for Czech to support this task.
This document discusses microlinguistic contrastive analysis focusing on phonology, lexis, and grammar. It explains that microlinguistic analysis studies language at a granular level but remains controversial. The document also discusses the principles of contrastive analysis, including describing languages and comparing them, as well as analyzing selected areas rather than entire languages. It provides examples of contrastive analysis approaches for phonology, lexis, and grammar.
Word2vec on the italian language: first experimentsVincenzo Lomonaco
Word2vec model and application by Mikolov et al. have attracted a great amount of attention in recent years. The vector representations of words learned by word2vec models have been proven to be able to carry semantic meanings and are useful in various NLP tasks. In this work I try to reproduce the previously obtained results for the English language and to explore the possibility of doing the same for the Italian language.
The assessment of deep word knowledge in young learnersCindy Shen
The document summarizes a study that assessed deep word knowledge in young first and second language learners. The study developed a Word Association Task (WAT) to measure productive lexical knowledge. 795 Dutch-learning third and fifth graders completed the WAT and a definition task. Results showed the WAT had acceptable reliability and validity, though it measured a slightly different construct than the definition task. While easy to administer, the WAT only partially overlapped with definition scores, suggesting it provides a different perspective on deep word knowledge.
The LSA breaks downanalyzes what constitutes a good and bad a.docxarnoldmeredith47041
The LSA breaks down/analyzes what constitutes a good and bad abstract.
http://www.linguisticsociety.org/resource/model-abstracts
Matthew Adams. Poetic correspondence in Welsh
Whether poetic forms are constrained by the same principles as prose and speech is a long-standing question in metrics. I present evidence from Welsh poetry that bears directly on this question, and argue that Long-Distance Consonantal Agreement (LDCA) is instantiated by the alliterative cynghanedd verse form. LDCA is a non-local phonological process visible in many languages in the form of consonantal harmony (Rose & Walker 2004, Hansson 2001, 2004) or vowel harmony (Rhodes 2009). I demonstrate that Agreement by Correspondence (ABC, Rose & Walker 2004), a formalization of LDCA, can be extended to analyze Welsh cynghanedd meter. ABC introduces output-output and input- output identity constraints that enforce long-distance similarity between segments sharing a specified subset of phonological features.
In the first two sentences of the introduction, the author introduces the theoretical context of the discussion and the language-specific phenomenon that will address an aspect of the relationship between prose and speech. The rest of the paragraph is devoted to spelling out in more detail the method by which the author will examine the relationship, primarily by providing citations of work within the broader theoretical context. The last sentence clearly states why the chosen framework, Agreement by Correspondence, is relevant to alliterative poetry: because it has been used to analyze cases of long-distance agreement in spoken language production, it also has value in providing an analysis for constrained, conventionalized language use. In sum, the paragraph makes clear the theoretical issue at hand, the literature that bears on this, and the way the author proposes to approach the issue.
The following example illustrates salient characteristics of this verse form:
Ifor, aur o | faerwriaethIfor, a fair golden stewardship
Deg, yw’rfau, | diegr o faethis mine, sweet nurture
(Lake et al. 2007)
For expository clarity, a bar (|) marks the division into half-lines. Within each line, the bolded consonants to the left of the bar correspond absolutely with the bolded consonants to the right of the bar; their linear order and segmental identity are preserved. Any consonants following the last vowel of each half-line (au and ae, in the second line) are not repeated. Thus, the final italicized ‘th’ sequence has no correspondent in the left-hand side of its line. Line division is determined by a pitch-accent prominence that falls on the ultima of some non-final word (indicated by underlining). Cynghanedd does not require that consonants in the left half occupy the same syllabic position as their counterparts in the right half (viz., the ‘r’ segments in the first line are first codas, then onsets).
This paragraph clearly but succinctly demonstrates how the alliterative form works .
Guidance, Please! Towards a Framework for RDF-based Constraint Languages.Kai Eckert
Presentation held at the DCMI Conference 2015 in Sao Paulo.
http://dcevents.dublincore.org/IntConf/dc-2015/paper/view/386
In the context of the DCMI RDF Application Profile task group and the W3C Data Shapes Working Group solutions for the proper formulation of constraints and validation of RDF data on these constraints are being developed. Several approaches and constraint languages exist but there is no clear favorite and none of the languages is able to meet all requirements raised by data practitioners. To support the work, a comprehensive, community-driven database has been created where case studies, use cases, requirements and solutions are collected. Based on this database, we have hitherto published 81 types of constraints that are required by various stakeholders for data applications. We are using this collection of constraint types to gain a better understanding of the expressiveness of existing solutions and gaps that still need to be filled. Regarding the implementation of constraint languages, we have already proposed to use high-level languages to describe the constraints, but map them to SPARQL queries in order to execute the actual validation; we have demonstrated this approach for the Web Ontology Language in its current version 2 and Description Set Profiles. In this paper, we generalize from the experience of implementing OWL 2 and DSP by introducing an abstraction layer that is able to describe constraints of any constraint type in a way that mappings from high-level constraint languages to this intermediate representation can be created more or less straight-forwardly. We demonstrate that using another layer on top of SPARQL helps to implement validation consistently accross constraint languages, simplifies the actual implementation of new languages, and supports the transformation of semantically equivalent constraints across constraint languages.
ClassifierSelectionTendenciesinMandarinAlphabeticalWords-CLSW2022.pptxMingyu WAN
The document outlines an agenda to study Mandarin Alphabetical Words (MAWs), which are code-mixed words containing Chinese characters and letters. Two research questions are posed regarding the classifier distribution of MAWs. Several MAWs are selected for analysis based on criteria such as part of speech and frequency. Corpus data is extracted from two large Chinese corpora. Results show the classifier distributions of selected MAWs and their Mandarin equivalents. Discussion indicates MAWs co-occur with more classifier types than Mandarin words, revealing MAWs are more productive and dynamic semantically. In conclusion, classifier distribution of MAWs generally follows Mandarin rules, and MAWs are more popular due to allowing more classifiers and richer lexical
TALC 2008 - What do annotators annotate? An analysis of language teachers’ co...Pascual Pérez-Paredes
This study analyzed how two language teachers annotated a corpus text for pedagogical purposes. The teachers were given training on corpus annotation and then annotated the same text segment. The researchers found that the two teachers annotated the text quite differently, with one teacher providing more categories, keywords, and denser annotation. This shows that pedagogical annotation is subjective and influenced by the individual teacher's approach. However, the study also found some agreement between the teachers. Analyzing patterns in a teacher's annotation behavior, such as through measures of category and keyword density, can provide insight into how they approach mediating corpus resources for language learners.
Sub-skills in reading comprehension testsCindy Shen
The document summarizes a study that examined teachers' perceptions of reading subskills and the relationship between subskills and test items. 5 experienced English teachers participated in rating the difficulty of reading subskills and identifying the subskills required to answer test items. There was strong agreement among teachers on the hierarchy of subskill difficulty and the subskills tested by each item. A correlation was found between teachers' ratings of subskill difficulty and results from Rasch analysis, providing empirical validation of teachers' judgments. The study provides support for using teacher judgments in test development and examining reading test content in relation to subskills.
The document discusses the principles and parameters framework for language acquisition proposed by Chomsky and Lasnik. It explains that universal grammar consists of a finite set of principles common to all languages and a finite set of parameters that determine variation between languages. Children acquire language by learning the parameter settings of their native language based on innate linguistic principles. The document provides examples of parameters like head directionality and the pro-drop parameter. It also discusses how phrase structure rules and lexical subcategorization frames realize principles within syntactic structure.
V. Malykh presents an approach for creating robust word vectors for the Russian language that does not rely on a predefined vocabulary or word co-occurrence matrices. The approach uses a LSTM neural network and BME representations of words at the character level to learn word embeddings. Experiments on Russian corpora for paraphrase identification and plagiarism detection show the approach outperforms standard word2vec models, especially in noisy conditions with character substitutions and additions/deletions.
The Missing Link. A Vocabulary Mapping Effort in Economics NKOS Workshop 2015Andreas Oskar Kempf
The document describes a mapping effort between the STW Thesaurus for Economics and the JEL Classification System. It conducted two iterative mapping runs using a semantic alignment tool called AMALGAME. In the second run, it enriched the subject categories and classes with additional descriptors, synonyms, and mappings to other vocabularies, which increased the number of potential mappings found. The approach demonstrated that vocabulary enrichment can facilitate mappings between structurally different knowledge organization systems in economics. Future work could designate STW as the access vocabulary to JEL classes.
Similar to Some Issues of Contention in Contrastive Analysis (20)
The Missing Link. A Vocabulary Mapping Effort in Economics NKOS Workshop 2015
Some Issues of Contention in Contrastive Analysis
1. Midterm Project of CA
Power pointed by: Soraya Ghoddousi
Instructor :Dr Farzaneh Khodabandeh
Saturday, April 09, 2016
4/26/2016 1
7
Some Issues of Contention
2. 7
Some Issues of Contention
problematic and argumentative faces of CA
CA is both problematic and argumentative. So living
with a ‘crisis of confidence’ is an inseparable part of
its proponents. CA is either insecure or vigorous Its
vigor shows its self in the number of CA Projects have
funded in recent years, which proves its high ‘face
validity’. CA is a conceptual practice in search of a
conceptual theory.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 2
3. 7.1
Criteria for Comparison
Two facets of the issue:
1. Whether different languages are comparable ?
2. What criterion is used for comparing, if they are
comparable ?
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 3
4. 7.1
Criteria for Comparison
Problem and objection of Structuralists:
Problem : Comparability of different languages
became the major problem of Structuralists , since
they insisted on uniqueness of each language.
Objection : The Structuralists objected to the
traditional practices of superimposing descriptive
categories of the prestigious classical languages on to
modern vernaculars .
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 4
5. 7.1
Criteria for Comparison
Insistences:
The insistence on defining phonological and
grammatical categories in terms of individual
languages made detailed contrastive statement
laborious, if not theoretically impossible ,to phrase.
The insistence that each language has its own
uniqueness reflects Saussure’s word that a system
defined by the sum of its constituent terms.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 5
6. 7.1
Criteria for Comparison
Difference in grammatical values
Labels ‘tense’ or ‘articles’ which refer to a certain
grammatical category in two different languages ,
have not the same value in such languages. For
example ‘ masculine’ in French is in contrast with ‘
feminine but in German contrast with ‘neuter’ and
‘feminine’ in three-term system.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 6
7. 7.1
Criteria for Comparison
Defense
Defense of the position that languages are comparable is
done in two ways:
1-Article system
2-Principle
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 7
8. 7.1
Criteria for Comparison
Dangers of comparison:
Difference in number of article systems in English
and German show the danger of regarding entities as
comparable for they are called by the same name
,but German and English (and not Russian) have
different number of article system : German has
three-terms: definite, indefinite, and ‘zero’ , where
English has two terms :definite and indefinite
Difference in combination and consequently values.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 8
9. 7.1
Criteria for Comparison
1-Article systems:
German articles: English articles:
Der Lehrer the teacher
Ein Lehrer a teacher
Ø Lehrer (pl) teachers
Ø Bier(sing) beer
Russian has articles, though it has means of
definiteness and indefiniteness
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 9
10. 7.1
Criteria for Comparison
Combination and values:
Certain article + noun combination occur in one of
the languages not the others. Foe example German
uses the definite article with a singular mass noun
with a human proper noun.
Consequently Ø and the have different values in the
these two languages.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 10
11. 7.1
Criteria for Comparison
Criteria of equation :
Bilinguals as language learners equate entities across
languages , and interlingual identifications .
The criteria of language learners for equation are
rather superficial such as articulatory , acoustic
similarity, and distribution.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 11
12. 7.1
Criteria for Comparison
2- Principles:
o Function words which occur in prenominal
position and indicate the specificness and
genericness of the noun are sufficient for
comparison of the languages
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 12
13. 7.1
Criteria for Comparison
o Interlingual identification
o it shows what two languages categories have in
common and distinguishes them as the departure
of CA.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 13
14. 7.1
Criteria for Comparison
How to set about the task?
The two or more entities to be compared ,while differing
in some respect, must share certain attributes.
Contrasting mean looking for differences , in a
background of sameness (or constant) that
differences(variables) are significant.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 14
15. 7.1
Criteria for Comparison
What is tertium comparatation (TC)
In the theory of CA the constant has traditionally
been known as the tertium comparatation (TC).
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention
15
16. 7.1
Criteria for Comparison
Available Tertium comparatations
Comparatations (TC)s are available for
A: phonological CA: IPA chart and vowel diagram
B: lexical CA : Universal set of semantic
components
C: grammatical CA: Surface structure, deep
structure, translation equivalence.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 16
17. 7-1-1
Surface Structure
Surface grammar
It describes the overt signals or ‘devices of form and
arrangements which a language exploits.
Four such devices are: 1)word order, 2)intonation,
3)function words and 4)affixation.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 17
18. 7-1-1
Surface Structure
Two main dimensions of grammar
CA s that use surface structure categories as the TC are
possible when two languages have a common
grammatical category by similar internal
composition (constituency) and distribution,
which are two main dimensions of grammar.
Similarity in these dimensions will the surface
structure contrastivist refer to them by the same
labels: ‘attribute’, ‘NP’, ‘fall-rise contour’ or
‘passive’
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 18
19. 7-1-1
Surface Structure
Criteria of constituency and distribution for
linguistic relevance
If there is a recurrence of combination ,therefor the
criteria of constituency and distribution are
satisfied . This is a common but risky practice ,
because there is always the possibility that X and Y in
two languages share a label simply .This is for they
have the prestigious categories of Latin imposed
on them such as English and German .So we ought
not to equate two grammatical categories
interlingually merely because they go by the same
name, but the two categories may have different
values in X and Y anyway. .
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 19
20. 7-1-1
Surface Structure
Equating of categories:
In equating of items if two language descriptions
antecedent to the CA were conducted independently
,and constituency and distribution were the only
criteria for linguistic relevance, then equating a
category like ‘Perfect’ of two languages would be as
well as equating the categories of ‘Auxiliary’ and
‘Participle’.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 20
21. 7-1-1
Surface Structure
When does interlingual identification occur?
At the time of:
Similarity in shape and distribution or both cause
speakers equate item in one language with items in
another.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 21
22. 7-1-1
Surface Structure
Advantages an disadvantages of surface structure
Advantages:
There are surface structures which L2 learners
confronted with to communicate.
Failures are reflected in surface feature of erroneous
FL utterances.
Similarities and differences of surface features may be
more relevant for the operation transfer effects in
second language than deep structure relation .
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 22
23. 7-1-1
Surface Structure
Disadvantages :
Surface grammar tells us little or nothing about the
way in which the sentences are formed .
The main objection of using surface structure as TC
is led to interlingual equation that are superficial
and insignificant
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 23
24. 7-1-2
Deep Structure
What do paraphrases convey?
Superficially dissimilar sentences of a language to be
paraphrases of one another convey the same
ideational content to share the same deep
structure.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 24
25. 7-1-2
Deep Structure
Types of paraphrases and role of deep structure in
them
1. Interlingual paraphrases: are pairs of sentences
from two different languages having the same
ideational content, derived from a common deep
structure and implies that is language-
independent .
2. Intralingual paraphrases: implies that deep
structure is language-specific.
So the deep structure ought to serve as a viable TC.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 25
26. 7-1-2
Deep Structure
Constant and variable in form of universal
structures
• Deep structure is counted as constant
• Surface structure is counted as variable
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 26
27. 7-1-2
Deep Structure
Relation of deep and surface structures
• Relation of deep and surface structure is made explicit
in a Chomsky type – grammar by transformations
involved in converting the former in to the latter .
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 27
28. 7-1-2
Deep Structure
Conversion of structures’ levels
If shared deep structure is converted in to language specific
surface structure by the sequential application of
transformations, then the points in their transformational
derivations at which equated deep structure representations of
two languages begin to diverge, can be taken as a measure (or
‘metric’) of their differences :
“the differences between languages must come at various level of
intermediate structure”.
The earlier they diverge , the greater the difference, the ‘later’ the
less.
Degrees of equivalence between languages are described in
terms of correspondence between the rules of their respective
grammar : we gain the double advantage of quantification and
explicitness.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 28
29. 7-1-2
Deep Structure
Advantages of deep structures:
• universality to see how convenient a TC it becomes
in CA
• learning by disregarding semi-redundant and
transformationally introduced features of surface
structures as articles , inflections and the copula.
• equating interlingually superficially very different
structures.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 29
30. 7-1-2
Deep Structure
Disadvantages of deep structures:
The relevance of deep structure in CA are limited to its
use as a criterion for comparison
Interference errors are reflection of the surface
structure differences between L1 and L2, but it is on
the basis of deep structure identity that learners
associate certain L1 patterns with certain
communicative intentions in the first place
Superficial structural L1:L2 contrasts explain the form
of interference errors , not the sets transfer into
motion
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 30
31. 7-1-3
Translation Equivalence
Translation Equivalence
• A standard practice in grammar CA to compare the
formal features of translationally paired sentences : “
one constant in grammatical comparison is
presumably the meaning of a pair of sentences .
• Synonymous with sameness of meaning
• To equate pairs of sentences of L1 and L2 which ‘mean
the same’.
• Equivalent construction have identical deep
structure ,even if the surface they are markedly
different
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 31
32. 7-1-3
Translation Equivalence
Krzeszowsi’s thesis:
• Paraphrase is a special case of (intralingual)
translation , and translation equivalence implies deep
structure identity.
Bouton’s criticism:
• Verbal aspect is an integral part of deep structure
representation, and in surface structure a choice must
be made between two morphologically differentiated
forms of perfective and imperfective.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 32
33. 7-1-3
Translation Equivalence
Negative polarity
Negative polarity questions in two languages causes
for example“ the English yes and Korea no are
translation equivalent” .
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 33
34. 7-1-3
Translation Equivalence
Inability of deep structure identity to guarantee
translation equivalence
• Meaning and equivalence of meaning are of several
types , but deep structure is predicated on one of
these, to the exclusion of the others .
• Deep structure is concerned with propositional or
ideational that single isolated sentence convey.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 34
35. 7-1-3
Translation Equivalence
Kinds of meaning:
• There are three kinds of meaning contained in
sentences : ideational, interpersonal and textual , that
should be conveyed and translationally equivalent in
different languages
1. Interpersonal meaning determines what kind of
speech act it performs for its user.
2. Textual meaning determines what information it
contributes to the message , and how it helps
cohesion and coherence
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 35
36. 7-1-3
Translation Equivalence
Levels of translation and their importance in CA :
Levels of translation
Semantic
Pragmatic
Equation of languages
For CA we ought to equate L1 and L2 forms which , no
matter how far they diverge superficially ,are
semantically and pragmatically equivalent.
Translation equivalence
It is the best available TC for CA
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 36
37. 7-2
The Psychological Reality of CA
Language structure and language scholars:
A contrastivist is a linguist concerning with structure
to draw conclusions about a mode of human behaviour
, learning.
A psychologist of language suggests two aspects of
structure from psychological reality view by two
groups of scholars:
Linguists
Psycholinguists
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention
37
38. 7-1-3
Translation Equivalence
Scholarships related to linguists and
psycholinguists
What the structure is like that it is the task of linguistic
science .It involves in linguistic competence.
How the structure functions and how it is acquired that it
is the task of psycholinguistics. It involves in linguistic
performance.
What the grammars are is they are accounts of linguistic
knowledge , that is of competence not of performance ,not
the processes which deploy that knowledge.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 38
39. 7-1-3
Translation Equivalence
‘Psychological reality’ and ‘mental reality’:
Since :
Mental reality refers to the grammar and linguistic knowledge , and
consequently the Competence . Grammars are structural statements
they describe the principles on which languages must be organised and
stored in the mind. A grammar describes the dynamic processes.
Psychological reality refers to behavioural processes manipulated
linguistically defined structures , but do not simulate grammatical
processes and consequently the performance. The utterances are
coded ( synthesised ) ,and decoded and (analysed )
Distinction between ‘mental’ reality and ‘psychological’ reality is the
same the two modes of : knowing that and how ,formal and efficient
causes.
So
psycholinguistic fallacy , that says the formal processes used by the
grammar represent the productive and perceptive of language
behaviour has no right base.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 39
40. 7-1-3
Translation Equivalence
Reasons of interferences:
Interference from L1 can be viewed as resulting from
conflict set up between the mental organisational
disposition imposed by L1 and the mental
organisational demands of L2.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 40
41. 7-1-3
Translation Equivalence
3 important sequences of basing CAs on
competence accounts of language
Competence is
1. a property of the individual
2. neutral between speaker and hearer
3. idealised to the point of disregarding the
constraints of time and memory that competence
is bounded by
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 41
42. 7-1-3
Translation Equivalence
1. Competence as a property of the individual
• CA is for practical purposes ,necessarily concerned
with groups:
A. one produces CAs with representative population of
L2 learners in mind
B. one cannot do a separate CA for each individual
learners.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 42
43. 7-1-3
Translation Equivalence
2-Competence as a neutral fact between speaker
and hearer
A. Grammars of the form are neutral between speaker
and hearer, between synthesis and analysis of
utterances
B. This neutrality carries the implication that the
predictions emanating from CAs should be equally
valid for productive and receptive control of the
L2.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 43
44. 7-1-3
Translation Equivalence
3-Competence as an idealised fact
A. Competence is an idealised to the point of
disregarding the constraints of time and memory
that competence is bounded by
B. Part of this idealisation is detachment of competence
from time
C. the arbitrariness of this assumption is the concept of
CA objected in abstracto
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 44
45. 7-1-3
Translation Equivalence
Contact analysis
• Performance based alternative CA is called
‘contact analysis’ –the analysis of the phenomena
that arise ,in the learner himself ,from the contact of
the two linguistic systems involved in the process of
foreign language learning .
• Performance based and process oriented
approach to learning problems is more properly part
of Error analysis than CA .
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 45
46. 7-3
The Predictive Power of CAs
Predict definition:
1. Is to transcend observation and predict the
unobserved in general.
2. The assumption that we can guess and describe the
patterns that will cause and will not cause the
difficulties in language learning .
3. ‘Predict’ is here as the simplest sense of ‘identify’
not in the sense of ‘prognosticate’
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 46
47. 7-3
The Predictive Power of CAs
Techniques and scopes of descriptive linguistics:
Possible bases for prediction of CAs are:
1. Generalisation from observed instances , which is selected
by the error analysts.
2. Prediction of one phenomenon on the basis of observation
some other phenomenon , which the contrastivists prefer this
path on the basis of an analysis of two related linguistic system
to predict learner’s behaviour .
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 47
48. 7-3
The Predictive Power of CAs
How is CAs supposed to identify or predict?
1. By closest to Lado’s view that is psychological reality , the CAs
identify the conditions conductive to two kinds of transfer ,positive
and negative.
2. Since negative transfer is the manifest in errors ,so CAs predict
errors
3. Since errors signal inadequate learning , CAs predict difficulty.
4. Reliability of the predictions which can fail in two possible ways:
A. Being indeterminate: that means unability to specify which of
two or more structurally likely substitutions the learner will select.
B. Being wrong : that the cases of false CA predictions are again 2
kinds :
B-1)errors failing to materialise
B-2)Fail to predict those which do
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 48
49. 7-3
The Predictive Power of CAs
Degree of adequacy of CA
This degree in predicting and explaining learners’
difficulties are:
1. SPD – Students’ Perception of Difficulty
2. Counting learners’ errors
3. Looking for correlation between CA prediction ,
difficulty and error incidence
4. Testing the gross capacity of a CA to predict
difficulty , a variable E was derived from the mean
percentage of grammatical response , P, to represent
gross occurrence of error ,which indicates CAs have
hardly any predictive power at all.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 49
50. 7-3
The Predictive Power of CAs
Difficulty and error should be correlated to one
another and to CA predictions.
A highly erroneous sentence may cause the learner no
difficulty at all. And conversely, we may find a low
incidence of error in conditions where the learner is
experiencing great difficulty, as an ‘avoidance strategy’.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 50
51. 7-4
Contrastive Analysis versus Error
Analysis
CA Hypothesis
CA Hypothesis exists in two versions :
1. Strong version
2. Weak version
While these 2 versions are equally based on L1
interference , the strong/priori has predictive power ,
and the weak/ ex post facto version has less ,so it is to
diagnose the errors .
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 51
52. 7-4
Contrastive Analysis versus Error Analysis
Different opinions in predictability of CA
‘According to pseudo-procedure predictive CA can
never help a contrastivist to predict solely on the basis
of CA , but relied on teachers’ knowledge of errors.
CA is always predictive and the job of diagnosis
belong to Error Analysis (EA)
According to Wardhaugh using the weak version of CA
means that “ reference is made to the two systems only
in order to explain observed interference phenomena.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 52
53. 7-4
Contrastive Analysis versus Error Analysis
Non-contrastive approach
Non-contrastive approach to error analysis is the same
error identification without prior CA.
Is recognising that some errors are the result of L1
interference which caused by 1)overgeneralisation,
2)ignorance of the rule restrictions,3) incomplete
application of rules ,4) and the building of false
systems or concepts.
Discusses that if the errors are ‘universal’ ,they
cannot be interlingual that the 4 error types listed
exclude reference to L1.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 53
54. 7-4
Contrastive Analysis versus Error Analysis
Problems of error identification:
• An error is committed by learners with many different L1s
is no proof that it is non-contrastive error , and that it is
not the result of idiosyncrasy of the ‘genius’ of English that
it contrast with so many other language ,but interference of
L1 can happen.
• If CAs can predict errors which fail to materialise ,so EA
can equally fail to recognise errors which have materialised.
• Evidence from linguistic typology shows that apparently
‘universal’ errors can indeed be plausible instance s of
interference errors.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 54
55. 7-4
Contrastive Analysis versus Error Analysis
Covert errors:
These errors are the forms produced by learners
that are grammatical by the standards of the target
language, but do not mean to a native speaker what
they mean to the learner.
Agreement between different items such as possessive
pronoun and possessed headnoun caused covert
errors.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention
55
56. 7-5
Scale of difficulty
Scale of difficulty
Since difficulty and difference are being directly and
proportionally related , so the some idioms related to
difficulty are needed to be introduced :
Learning time which is a valid measure of difficulty.
Exotic that is a relative term since it means ‘very
different’.
Positive disagreement that is a semantically
difficult category.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 56
57. 7-5
Scale of difficulty
Levels of difficulty:
Relative similarity ,rather than difference is directly
related to levels of difficulty .
‘Similarity paradox’ in human learning links to all
forms of learning –not only L2 learning –when one
learning task is followed by another.
If interference increase with the similarity of the two
learning tasks ,then when the two tasks of identical
,interference ought to be at its most potent.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention
57
58. 7-5
Scale of difficulty
Ordinary learning
‘Ordinary learning’ is at the theoretical condition for
maximal interference , but the practical condition for
maximal facilitation.
‘Ordinary learning’ occurs with task identity.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 58
59. 7-5
Scale of difficulty
Facilitation is greatest when the successive task are
identical (ordinary learning)
1. Interference is maximal and difficulty greatest when
there is a certain degree of similarity.
2. There is moderate ease of learning when the tasks
have what ‘neutral resemblance .
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 59
60. 7-5
Scale of difficulty
Relationship between L1.and L2
1. The scale is based on 3 types of relationship existing
between comparable rules of L1 and L2:
A. L1 has a rule and L2 an equivalent one.
B. L1 has a rule but L2 has no equivalent.
C. L2 has a rule not matched by L1.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 60
61. 7-5
Scale of difficulty
Types of choices
Two languages are matched for the choices they offer
their respective speakers for the expression of
meaning:
1. Optional
2. Obligatory
3. Zero(Ø) which shows the absence of a category in
one of the languages which is present in the other.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 61
62. 7-5
Scale of difficulty
Availability of choices:
These different available choices or nonchoices can be
ranged in pairs(L1:L2) to identify 8 possible types of
cross-language relationship on the level of phonology.
This 8- point scales becomes a 16-point scale of
grammar ,where there are semantic congruity or lack
of it between pairs adds another dimension .
Finally the eight possibilities can be ordered in
difficulty. The scale is for facility reduced to three
point scale of difficulty by mixing categories.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 62
63. 7-5
Scale of difficulty
Order of difficulty MOST Comparison
L1 L2
1 Ø Ob
1- 2 Ø Op
3 Op Ob
4 Ob Op
2- 5 Ob Ø
6 Op Ø
3- 7 Op Op
8 Ob Ob
LEAST
Absent categories carry a relatively low error index.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 63
64. 7-5
Scale of difficulty
Performance issue
Divergence is more important for the language
learner as speaker in encoding the utterance
Convergence is more critical for hearer as decoding
the utterance.
4/26/2016
7
Some Issues of Contention 64