1. LEARNER ERRORS
Describing Learner Language
An important area in the study of second language (L2)
acquisition is the language that learners produce at different
stages of their development. Learner language can provide the
researcher with insights into the process of acquisition.
For many researchers, although not all, it constitutes the most
important source of information about how learners learn an L2.
Ellis (1997), provides a number of different approaches to the
description of learner language which can be identified as:
• the study of learners’ errors;
• the study of developmental patterns;
• the study of variability; and
• the study of pragmatic features.
2. Describing Learner Language
Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis:
Learners were strongly influenced by their L1. Where the L1
matched the L2, learning was facilitated; where it
differed, learning was impeded. In the view of some
(Lado, 1957), errors were mainly, if not entirely, the result of
transfer of L1 ‘habits’.
This theory of learning was challenged both by Chomsky’s
(1958), attack on behaviourism and also by research on L1
acquisition, which showed that children did not seem to learn
their mother tongue as a set of ‘habits’ but rather seemed to
construct mental ‘rules’, which often bore no resemblance to
those evident in their caretakers’ speech.
3. LEARNER ERRORS
TASK
In groups discuss the following questions :
Are learners‟ errors the result of L1 transfer?
Do L2 learners, like L1 learners, construct unique mental „rules‟?
4. LEARNER ERRORS
One of the first ways in which researchers tried to investigate L2
acquisition was through the analysis of learner errors.
Much of the early work on learner errors focused on determining
the extent to which L2 acquisition was the result of L1 transfer or
of creative construction (the construction of unique rules similar
to those which children form in the course of acquiring their
mother tongue).
The presence of errors that mirrored L1 structures was taken as
evidence of transfer, while the presence of errors similar to those
observed in L1 acquisition was indicative of creative construction.
5. LEARNER ERRORS
The results of error analyses were used to refute behaviourist
views of L2 learning, which were dominant at the time. According
to them, L2 learning took place in the same way as any other kind
of learning, it involved procedures such as imitation, repetition, and
reinforcement, which enabled learners to develop „habits‟ of the L2.
The study of learner errors showed that although many errors
were caused by transferring L1 „habits‟, many more were not;
learners often contributed creatively to the process of learning.
They also indicated that learners appeared to go through stages of
acquisition, as the nature of the errors they made varied according
to their level of development.
7. LEARNERERRORS
(a) Collection of a Sample of Learner Language
The starting point in EA is deciding what samples of learner
language to use for the analysis and how to collect these samples.
A massive sample involves collecting several samples of
language use from a large number of learners in order to compile a
comprehensive list of errors, representative of the entire
population.
A specific sample consists of one sample of language use
collected from a limited number of learners.
Incidental sample involves only one sample of language use
produced by a single learner.
9. LEARNER ERRORS
(b) Identification of Errors
Firstly a corpus of learner language is collected; the errors in the
corpus are identified. It is necessary to decide, therefore, what
constitutes an „error‟ and to establish a procedure for recognising one.
An error can be defined as a deviation from the norms of the target
language, however this definition raises a number of questions.
Firstly, the question of which variety of the target language should
serve as the norm or standard.
A second question concerns the distinction between errors and
mistake.
An error (in this technical sense) takes place when the deviation
arises as a result of lack of knowledge. It represents a lack of
competence. A mistake occurs when learners fail to perform their
competence.
10. LEARNER ERRORS
(b) Identification of Errors
A third question concerns whether the error is overt or covert .
An overt error is easy to identify because there is a clear
deviation in form, as when a learner says:
“I runned all the way.”
A covert error occurs in utterances that are superficially well-
formed but which do not mean what the learner intended them to
mean. For example, the utterance from (Corder, 1971 a):
“It was stopped.”
is apparently grammatical until it becomes clear that “it” refers to
“the wind”.
11. LEARNER ERRORS
(b) Identification of Errors
A fourth question concerns whether the analysis should
examine only deviations in correctness or also deviations
in appropriateness.
The former involves rules of usage and is illustrated in
the two examples mentioned.
The latter involves rules of language use. For
example, a learner who invites a relative stranger by
saying “ I want you to come to the cinema with me” has
succeeded in using the code correctly but has failed to use
it appropriately.
12. LEARNER ERRORS
(c) Description of Errors
The description of learner errors involves a comparison
of the learner’s idiosyncratic utterances with a
reconstruction of those utterances in the target
language.
It requires, therefore, attention to the surface
properties of the learners’ utterances (i.e. it does not
attempt, at this stage, to identify the sources of the
errors).
13. LEARNER ERRORS
(c) Description of Errors
Corder distinguishes three types of errors according to
their systematicity:
(i) Pre-systematic errors occur when the learner is
unaware of the existence of a particular rule in the target
language. These are random.
(ii) Systematic errors occur when the learner has
discovered a rule but it is the wrong one.
(ii) Post-systematic errors occur when the learner knows
the correct target language rule but uses it inconsistently
(i.e. makes a mistake).
14. LEARNER ERRORS
(d) Explanation of Errors
Explanation is concerned with establishing the source of the error, i.e.
accounting for why it was made. This stage is the most important for SLA
research as it involves an attempt to establish the processes responsible
for L2 acquisition.
Taylor (1986), points out that, the error source may be
psycholinguistic, sociolinguistic, epistemic, or may reside in the
discourse structure.
Psycholinguistic sources concern the nature of the L2 knowledge
system and the difficulties learners have in using it in production.
Sociolinguistic sources involve such matters as the learners‟ ability to
adjust their language in accordance with the social context. Epistemic
sources concern the learners‟ lack of world knowledge, while discourse
sources involve problems in the organisation of information into a
coherent „text‟.
15. LEARNER ERRORS
(e) Evaluating Errors
The design of error evaluation studies involves decisions on who
the addressees (i.e. the judges) will be, what errors they will be
asked to judge, and how they will be asked to judge them.
The judges can vary according to whether they are native
speakers (NS) or non-native speakers (NNS), and also according to
whether they are „expert‟ (i.e. language teachers) or „non-expert‟.
Error evaluation studies have addressed three main research
questions:
(i) Are some errors judged to be more problematic than others?
(ii) Are there differences in the evaluations made by NS and NNS?
(iii) What criteria do judges use in evaluating learners‟ errors?
16. LEARNER ERRORS
Error analysis, however, as practised in the sixties and
seventies, was an imperfect research tool. It could not show when
learners resorted to avoidance and, as it ignored what learners
could do correctly, it only looked at part of learner language.
Also, the methodology of error analysis was vague in a number
of respects. For example, it was not entirely clear what constituted
an „error‟ and it proved difficult to prepare rigorous descriptions of
errors. As a result, many studies were unreliable and difficult to
replicate.
It is not surprising, perhaps, that error analysis has fallen out of
favour with many researchers.
However, the study of learner errors can still serve as a useful
tool and is still undertaken, often as a means of investigating a
specific research question.
