The theory is called “contrastive analysis hypothesis (CAH)”. The CAH claimed that difficult features and items in L2 acquisition can be predicted by contrasting and analyzing in detail the features of L1 and L2 of learners and that learners should learn mainly different points in L2
Reflection on “Error Analysis and Second Language Acquisition” Summary This chapter called “Error Analysis and Second Language Acquisition” written by Ali Akbar Khansir basically explains the concepts of Contrastive Analysis, Error Analysis and Interlanguage in the field of Applied Linguistics. First of all, there is a brief introduction about Applied Linguistics, and deriving its branches called CA and EA. A pinion shows that a more useful evaluation of one’s English language comprehensibility should be based on the judgement of both native and non-native speakers. In addition, the author refers to contrastive linguistics, and the supporters of C.A claimed that the similarities and differences between various languages were enough to deal with the problem of teaching these languages. The various studies based on C.A have attempted to compare the systems of the native and target language either within the structure models or within the transformational generative model.
The individual not only makes mistakes but also commits errors in his or her speaking and writing skills. Hence, error correction is a tool that helps learners to accurately acquire a second language. According to Corder (cited by Amara, 2015, p. 58), error correction is significant in three different ways:
The combination of quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis into one singularanalysis or enquiry (Creswell et al 2003). Mixed methods researchers produce clear cut different philosophical positions, which are mentioned as dialectal stances that bridges the critical realism and general theory, worldviews, practical perspectives and changing viewpoints (Greene, 2007). Researchers with different analytical situations may find mixed methods research to be difficult due to the tensions generated by their divergent beliefs (Greene, 2007). However, mixed methods research also constitutes a possibility of changing the pressures into new understanding through dialectical disclosures. A practical view looks at what works, when utilizing different ways and offering preference to the significance of the research problem and question, cherishing both objective and subjective understanding (Morgan, 2007).
It also gave types of examples of the communication barriers. • What the Barriers of communication consists of In this section it discuss the how the relationship of the sender of the receivers affects the flow of the communication. If the relationship is good the flow will continue. • Types of Barriers In this section it talks about the miscommunication between the two parties through not understanding the message. • Psychological Barriers This section tries to identify the problems we may have or can get into with communication, due to our personal misunderstands on how we see things.
As we can see in the chart，there are countries between two kinds of models, which will contribute doubt and puzzle to readers, to some extent. Therefore, I will give my constructive suggestion here as follows. First, we should use statistics to prove the chart and add additional information to improve it. Even if there are not every countries in the middle of two patterns, we still should classify different ranks or extent for each model. The details are that Lewis is supposed to evaluate three models and do some researches for them.
Generally, as Keshavarz (1999, p. 11) stated, "…there have been two major approaches to the study of learners ' errors, namely Contrastive Analysis and Error Analysis." He further discussed that, "Error Analysis emerged on account of the shortcomings of Contrastive Analysis which was the favoured way of describing learners ' language in the 1950s and 1960s" (p. 42). The process involved in CA is the comparison of learners ' mother tongue and the target language. Based on the similarities or differences between two languages, predictions were made on errors that learners would be likely or disposed to make as a result (Kim, 2001). Unlike CA which tries to describe differences and similarities of L1 and L2, James (1998 cited in Kim, 2001)
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,
Reflection on Ali Akbar Khansir’s Error Analysis and Second Language Acquisition Summary The paper examined mainly three theories about error study in the Second Language Acquisition,such as Contrastive Analysis, Error Analysis and Interlanguage Theory.Besides,the author pointed out the concept of Applied Linguistic and some demerits of the three theories,also some criticism towards them. To begin with,the author explained the development and concept of Applied Linguistic.As defined by Schmitt and Celce-Marcia ,”Applied Linguistic is using what we know about (a) language, (b) how it is learned and (c) how it s used in order to achieve some purpose or solve some problems in the real world”, therefore draw forth the two branches of it:Contrastive Analysis and Error Analysis. And then,the author introduced the development of the Contrastive Analysis,some different versions of Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis and the contribution towards second language acquisition.CA gained many important things about learner errors by comparing the differences between the mother tone and the target language. Supporters all agreed that the L1 would interfere the second language learning,but they attempted to study different aspects of the differences.And there different versions:the strong
The main disadvantage of SCM is that it needs some level of judgment with respect to what trainers identify as critical success factors on the job (Casey, 2006). Dessinger and Moseley (2006) developed the Dessinger-Moseley Full-Scope Evaluation Model (SEM). It aims at integrating formative, summative, confirmative, and meta-evaluation. It helps to formulate judgments about the worth of any performance improvement intervention. However, as pointed out by the authors themselves, the evaluation of