Contrastive linguistics: Approaches and methods theoretical foundations
tải về 25.4 Kb.
|
| Steps for Contrastive Analysis
As mentioned earlier, CA can be used to understand the differences as well as the similarities between the learner's NL and the TL. Knowledge of the similarities and differences can be of great help in understanding L2 errors. Therefore, following the CA gives a great systemic description to the both languages (L1 & L2). CA can be broken down to a set of component procedures. The five steps for making a systematic comparison and contrast of any two languages are: Selection - description - comparison - prediction - verification. The first step is to select or take the two languages, L1 and L2, and writing formal descriptions of them (or choosing descriptions of them). Writing a formal description needs choosing a special theoretical model which can be traditional, structural or transformational. In this step, there is a need to decide what is to be contrasted/compared with what. That is because it is quite difficult to compare everything (sound, word, structure...etc) so the analysis should be limited to a speciϐic category. Once the selection is done, the selected linguistic units/structures can be described. This step is called 'description'. The two languages should be linguistically described within the same theory which is CA. The main focus should be on the differences. Third, having described the linguistic-selected units, it is crucial to compare the structures with each other. This step is called 'comparison'. In this step, the differences and similarities can be compared in form or meaning. Here, the term 'form' refers to any linguistic unit of any size. It is impossible to clearly compare the two languages without giving a full description. Step four is 'prediction'. It is about making a prediction of difϐiculty through the contrast. The CA can noticeably predict for the similarities and differences of the two compared languages. Based on the researcher's knowledge, he/she can judge if the differences and similarities are problematic or not. To clearly describe the prediction step, Stockwell et al. (I965) proposed a 'hierarchy of difϐiculty' based on the notions of transfer (positive, negative, and zero) and of optional and obligatory choices of certain linguistic units in the two languages in contrast. When the structures of the given two languages are similar, positive transfer will occur whilst with those that are different, a negative transfer will take place. Where there is no relation between those structures of the two languages, zero transfer will occur. The following criteria can be used to establish the 'preferred pedagogical sequence': (1) hierarchy of difϐiculty (2) functional load (3) potential mishearing (4) pattern congruity. Finally, the last step of CA is 'verification'. Here, the researcher should ϐind out whether the predictions given in the previous step (prediction) are true or not. Methods of analysis in CA Whitman (1970 in Byung-gon, 1992) has mentioned four steps to analyze languages. First, the researcher writes description of the two languages, second, forms are selected from the two descriptions; then the two selected forms are compared and finally features of difficulty are predicted. Comparison of the two language subsystems should be through the same model of description. Nevertheless, a dilemma still can occur as the model used can be of favor of one language rather than the other. One proposed solution for this dilemma was to use the translation theory whereby each language can be described by its favorite model then translated into an artificial „etalon language‟ (Melchuk, 1963) that can enhance the features of L1 and L2 constructions. Another solution was applying description bias to the second language and how it is used by the second language learner more than the focus on understanding L1. Comparing the two language subsystems involves several steps: First, the gathering of data of the system to be compared in the two languages. CA uses translations of the two languages without worrying about the bias of different meanings due to its focus on general rules or systems rather than the focus on the translated meaning. CA aims at generalizing its findings on the grammatical systems of compared languages. Second, description of the realizations of each grammatical category in each of the two contrasted languages, such as, for instance, determining the realization or the context of using the indefinite article in English and Russian. Third step is the addition of new data with their translation to the corpus and then modifying the rules to include the new data. Finally in step four, a formulation of the found results of the contrasted data is determined either in the form of equations or operations. The formulation was either in the form of a set of instructions that can be applied to both language grammars (Harris, 1954 in James, 1980) transfer rules or equations which differ from transfer rules in that they do not show which language is being converted to the other and hence lack the directionality of the transfer rules. Moreover, equational statements show the phonological representations of the category which helps to reveal the variety of forms for a specific category in contrast to transfer rules which focuses only on structural or syntactic depiction tải về 25.4 Kb. Chia sẻ với bạn bè của bạn:
|