Researchers dealing with second language acquisition (Corder, 1974, Scovel, 2001) agree that one of the major causes of errors is language transfer. Yet, we can mention other related errors’ sources as follow: 1. Language transfer or inter lingual interference. In this type, errors are caused by mother tongue interference. Intra lingual interference: this kind of errors occurs during the learning process of the second language at a stage when the learners have not really acquired the knowledge.
b) Introducing types of corrective feedback There are different types of corrective feedback which are being used for EFL learners’ efficiency (Types of corrective feedback). Explicit Correction: Here, the professor will clearly indicate the mistake of students’ utterance and provide feedback with corrective form (R.Ferris, 2001) (carla.umn.edu). Recasts: As it is difficult to learn and write the second language, the professor will not explicitly tell the mistake, rather they correct students by actually reformulating the sentence in an indirect way (Ellis). Clarification request: The professor will give a sign for repeating the sentence in correct form by using paraphrase like Excuse Me!!? Or Come Again or I don’t
Mother Tongue Interference Recently, learning or having another language besides the native language is important. As learners begin to study second or foreign language, they may face some difficulties and problems. Firstly, language acquisition refers to the ways by which persons own the ability to perceive and understand language, also to make and use words and sentences to communicate (Lightbown& Spada, 2013). According to Yule (2010) “it is the gradual development of ability in a language by communicating with the native speaker of this language” p.187. While the second language refers to the added language, so it may be the third, fourth or tenth to be received (Torike,2006).
For instance the main source that can be controlled by teachers is errors introduced by teaching methodology and materials. In this context Corder (1981) claimed that “if we attempt to teach a learner something before he is ready for it, the result will be confusion, false hypotheses, and what we could call redundant errors” (p 58). Therefore teachers should take into consideration their learners’interlanguage
Brown (2001) asserted that there is a significant difference between mistakes and error where mistakes is the results of performance while errors is the result of competence due to lack of understanding the required knowledge or a gap in the learner competence. Furthermore, errors is considered or deemed an acceptable by the native speaker of such a language. Mistakes may caused by the strain, lack of attention, or laziness, but the learner can easily self-correct them if he detects them (Erdogan,
With all this conflicts we’re still searching for ways to teach pronunciation. Many researchers suggest to use dialogues during pronunciation, and not just reading them, giving students time to think how to say the words in the context. Another way is called shadow reading. In this activity learner reads along with a competent reader (Scrivener, 2005). Using and saying the word in the context (in its natural place) and letting the learners to repeat is a useful way as well.
• The systematic occurrences in the second language compared to the correct use of the native language. Burt and Kiparsky (1972) divided errors into local and global errors. Global errors they cause miscommunication while local errors don’t affect the meaning or the message delivered. Breaking down the errors helps the teacher to deal with them separately. The teacher should first identify the error and then create a task that includes the sound the learner needs to work on and put it in context that has a meaning.
Hopefully, the findings of this study would help teacher trainers and educators to prepare would-be teachers for their future jobs. Providing teachers with sufficient knowledge about what they are going to teach can facilitate both the teaching and learning processes. A linguistically aware teacher understands how language works, anticipates and understands the student’s problems with language, pays attention to errors and other interlanguage features, can promote language learning by designing appropriate tasks in his/her classes. The language achieved by the students can show the relationship between the L2 teacher’s language awareness and the effectiveness of that teacher (Andrews, 2007). The following research question was posed to conduct the current
Which is the best approach to be implemented? This question relates to a long-standing debate among language teachers in the context of EFL/ESL, since the two had their own significances for Particular learner progress. On one side, deductive approach can be effective with students of a lower level, who are beginning to learn the basic structures of the language, or with students who are accustomed to a more traditional style of learning (Goner, Philips, and Walters,1995,p.134). Also, Deductive approach goes straightforwardly to the point and can, therefore, be time-saving for the teacher and the class. Robinson (1996) proved that learners performed grammatical tasks better and reacted faster in deductive rather than inductive teaching.
This is supported by Wentzel and Looney (2007) who views that having language disorders may stray the real essence of a message. For instance, a teacher may have problems in phonating or pronouncing words appropriately. This is likely to affect the learning process of subjects such as languages since learners have a tendency of capturing more information through imitating. Instead of focusing on the ideal concept being learnt, the learners are strayed by poor phonation and articulation of words by the teacher. In addition to that, the teacher may speak or read too fast for the level of the learner`s understanding.