University of Gadarif

Collage of Graduate Studies

English Language Department

Postgraduate Diploma Students –Batch 5-Semester(1)

Error and Contrastive Analysis Course

.Prepared : by Dr. Abu Adam Osman Ahmed M

Year 2025
Course Description

This course explores theories and practices of error analysis and contrastive analysis in
second language learning. It equips students with tools to identify , classify and
analyze learners' errors and compare linguistics systems across language to predict and
.explain difficulties in language acquisition

Course Objectives

: By the end of the course students will be able to

.Understand key concepts in error and contrastive analysis -

.Identify sources and types of language errors -

.Use contrastive analysis to compare linguistics features between L1 and L2 -

.Apply findings in practical languages teaching and assessment -

.Critically evaluate the strengths and limitations of both approaches -

Course Outlines

Error Analysis ( EA) .1

Introduction

Definitions of Error
Development of Error Analysis
Significance of Learners' Errors
Historical Background and uses compared to Contrastive Analysis (CA)
Errors and Mistakes
Sources of Errors
Error Taxonomies

Error Analysis Steps

Error Correction

2. Contrastive Analysis ( CA)

Introduction
Definition of Contrastive Analysis
Terms and Concepts
Principles of Contrastive Analysis :
Positive interference vs. Negative interference

The objectives of Contrastive analysis

The significance of Contrastive Analysis
The branches of Contrastive Analysis
error analysis
Contrastive analysis Hypotheses (CAH)
Modern Contrastive analysis

1. Error Analysis ( EA)

Introduction

As a matter of fact (Error Analysis) (EA) is an opposing field for Contrastive Analysis
(CA). It has been claimed that the way of predicting learners’ errors is not accurate; errors
must be discussed from different points of view and with the use of different methods and
criteria rather than those used by contrastivists. In other words , Error Analysis is a theory
replacing the Contrastive Analysis, which was abandoned by linguists and teachers due to
its ineffectivity and unreliability. EA also belongs to applied linguistics but it has no
interest in explaining the process of L2 acquisition. It is rather “a methodology for dealing
with data" “(Cook 1993: 2 cited in James 1998: 7).

Error Analysis Error analysis is considered as one of the best ways that describes and
explains errors made by the learners who study English language as a second or foreign
language. It reveals the types and sources of these errors.It appeared in the late of 1960s as
an aleterantive of contrastive analysis that failed to account the learners' errors.The term
error analysis has many definitions were given by some of the scholars for many years.
For example, Ubol (1988) says that error analysis is “a systematic description and
explanation of errors made by learners or users in their oral or written production of the
target language” (p.8). James (1998) defines error analysis as “the process of determining
the incidence, nature, causes and consequences of unsuccessful language” (p.1). Another
view of error analysis is given by Richards and Schmidt (2010), when they define error
analysis as “the study and analysis of the errors made by second language learners”.

Definitions of Error

There are a number of definitions of the term 'error' that has been proposed by different
experts. Basically, these definitions share the same meaning. Dulay, Burt, and Krashen
(1982) define error as "the flawed side of learned speech or writing. They are those parts
of speaking or writing that deviate from some selected form of mature language
performance". In addition, Harmer (1998, cited in Andrian, 2015) says that “an error is the
result of an incorrect rule of learning; the language has been stored in the brain
incorrectly”. On the other hand, error is defined as “a noticeable deviation from the adult
grammar of a native speaker reflects the competence of the learner” (Brown, 1994). Carl
James defines Error Analysis as “the process of determining the incidence, nature, causes
and consequences of unsuccessful language” (James 1998: 1). Later he goes on explaining
that EA “involves first independently or ‘objectively’ describing the learners’ IL ... and the
TL itself, followed by a comparison of the two, so as to locate mismatches” (1998: 5).
There is one difference which distinguishes EA from the CA and this is the importance of
the mother tongue: when doing EA the mother tongue does not enter the picture at all and
therefore has no importance. In the CA, mother tongue is of vital importance. However,
this does not mean that EA is not comparative. It is, because it describes errors on the
basis of comparing of the learners’ interlanguage with the target language. It actually
builds on the Interlanguage theory, but the distinction between them is that the IL theory
remains wholly descriptive and avoids comparison (James 1998: 6). At the same time EA
acknowledges L1 transfer as one of the sources of errors, which makes it related to the
CAH. James (1998: 62-63) also refers to Error Analysis as the study of linguistic
ignorance which investigates “what people do not know and how they attempt to cope
with their ignorance”. The fact that learners find ways how to cope with their ignorance
makes a connection between EA and learner strategies, which we divide into learning
strategies and communication strategies.
Corder suggests that Error Analysis can be distinguished from ‘performance analysis’ in
that sense that “performance analysis is the study of the whole performance data from
individual learners, whereas the term EA is reserved for the study of erroneous utterances
produced by groups of learners” (Corder 1975 cited in James 1998).

Development of Error Analysis

Early works in EA dealing with L2 data were taxonomic, i.e. they focused on collecting
and classifying errors. On the other hand, early analyses dealing with native speakers’ data
were mainly interested in searching for the causes of errors (James 1998).
In the 1960s EA was acknowledged as an alternative to the behaviourist CA and in the
1970s it became so popular that Schachter and Celce-Murcia could call it “the darling of
the 70s” (Schachter and Celce-Murcia 1977: )
EA and CA were competing to establish supremacy of one over the other.. George (1972)
published two of the most significant taxonomic works. George concludes that the main
causes of L2 learners’ errors are (a) redundancy of the code, (b) unsuitable presentation in
class, and (c) several sorts of interference.
In The Gooficon by Burt and Kiparsky the authors argue that the learners’ MT has no
effect on the errors they make in the L2. They categorized errors into six groups: (a)
clausal, (b) auxiliary, (c) passive, (d) temporal conjunctions, (e) sentential complements
and (f) psychological predicates (James 1998).
In 1987 J. B. Heaton and N. D. Turton published Longman Dictionary of Common Errors
which lists alphabetically the 1,700 most common errors in English made by foreign
learners. They collected the data from Cambridge First Certificate in English answer
papers (James 1998).

Significance of Learners' Errors

Doubtlessly, errors play a very important part in the process of learning English as a
foreign language. Many scholars have focused on the importance of the learners’ errors.
According to Corder (1967), errors made by learners are beneficial to teachers, learners, as
well as researchers. For teachers, errors are evidence of learners’ progress of the language
learning. Teachers can refer to it in order to help improve learners’ writing skill. For
learners, errors can be served as resources for their language learning. Lastly, errors
provide evidence to researchers on how learners learn and acquire the language. In
addition, Alhaisoni (2012), says that learner' errors are advantageous for both learners and
teachers. It provides information to the teachers on students' errors. This helps the teachers
in three ways, firstly to correct their errors, secondly to improve their teaching and thirdly
to focus on those area that need reinforcement.

James (1998) gives Corder's five crucial points, emphasizing the significance of learner's
errors as follows:
1. L1 acquisition and L2 learning are parallel processes, they are ruled by the same
mechanisms, procedures and strategies. Learning a L2 is probably facilitated by the
knowledge of the L1.
2. Errors reflect the learners’ inbuilt syllabus or what they have taken in, but not what the
teachers have put into them. So there is a difference between ‘input’ and ‘intake’.
3. Errors show that both learners of L1 and L2 develop an independent language system -
a ‘transitional competence’.
4. The terms ‘error’ and ‘mistake’ shouldn't be used interchangeably.
5. Errors are important because they (a) tell the teacher what he or she should teach, (b)
are a source of information for the researcher about how the learning proceeds, and (c)
allow the learners to test their L2 hypotheses.

Error Analysis (EA): Historical Background and uses

compared to Contrastive Analysis (CA)

Basically, (Error Analysis) (EA) deals with general mistakes made by common people. As
a discipline, it comes partially to (Contrastive Analysis) (CA). Error analysts have
questioned the usefulness of (CA). It is important to note that, this field as a (discipline)
has emerged in the 1970s, but as an issue it has started earlier than that More importantly,
error analysts have introduced a number of the objections against contrastivists, yet
introduced a number of alternative methods which can be more effective and useful than
those used by the contrastivists.
 For instance, (CA) is theoretical and the a dependent; whereas (EA) is empirical and
data-based or corpus-based [prospectively]. In spite of this and from among the
drawbacks of (EA) is that it is sometimes biased to the [data]. In other words, the results
may suffer from avoidance, because mistakes made by Indian learners of English are to a
great extent different from those made by Arab learners [prospectively]. Once again, (CA)
is [neutral], a researcher simply compares (contrasts) two languages (features, structures or
whatever), it is theoretically comprehensive. On the other hand, the (EA) is limited to the
corpus (collected-data). As a matter of fact, there are some shared uses between both the
(EA) and the (CA). Namely, the shared uses are: teaching, learning, language testing and
materials preparation and evaluation.

Nevertheless, the (CA) has some special uses which are not used by error analysts,
consider, language universals, translation and lexicography namely (bilingual
dictionaries). Similarly, the (EA) has some special uses which are not used by
contrastivists and they include: 1st language acquisition and 2nd language acquisition. In
detail, an error analyst can notice the types of either mistakes or errors made by children.
Or he or she can ask: what do they can produce early and what do they cannot do so
through observation?

Once again, he or she can interrogatively raise questions like: why does a child insist on
(sheeps) as the plural of (sheep) [sheep], or (swimmed) as the past of (swim) [swum]?
Certainly, all these information and remarks are indicative of the child’s language
development and errors, and the same thing applies to the 2nd language acquisition.
Moreover, the (EA) can be useful for (language therapists); it can help them during the
process of treating language disorders, specifically diagnosis aspects. That is to say, a
[profile] can be opened for a patient to record [document] all types of errors committed by
him or her. Above all, errors of this or that patient must be classified in order to observe
accurately and from one side decide which errors are more serious than others, from
another side which are developed (treated) and which are not developed (treated).

One more thing regarding the language acquisition, namely 2nd language acquisition is
related to the Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH). Actually, it is not to a great extent true,
because a person who wants to acquire a 2nd language has already acquired the system of
language as a human feature, so all that he or she needs is to [download] the system of the
2nd language he or she wants to acquire. One more field wherein the (EA) can be used is
in (Forensic Linguistics). Actually, it was used during the World Wars; consider the
Japanese who were being tested for their inability to differentiate clearly between the
sounds /r/ and /l/. It should be noted here that when talking about (interlanguage) here, it
refers to the temporarily language of the learners in the process of learning, the language
which is under development. It is on the way to become a target language or idiosyncratic
language. Again when talking about (LA) language acquisition, it refers to any language
acquisition rather than the 1st language.

Errors and Mistakes

Errors and mistakes are not the same, so the distinction between the two different concepts
is more significant. Corder (1967). He defines errors as "systematic errors that are errors
of competence". On the other hand, he also defines mistakes as "un systematic errors that
are lapses or slipes of the tongue (errors of performance)". Another distinction between
errors and mistakes is mentioned by Richards and Schmidt (2002) differentiate between
the two important terms .They mentioned that error results from incomplete knowledge,
and a mistake made by a learner when writing or speaking and which is caused by lack of
attention, fatigue, carelessness, or some other aspect of performance. From this
distinction, it can be said that errors are made by the learners because they do not know
what are the correct and mistakes are made by the learners because they do not apply the
rule (s) that they actually know, in other words, errors cannot be self-corrected whereas
mistakes can be self-corrected. On the other hand, Mourtaga (2004) expresses about the
distinction between errors and mistakes by saying, that errors and mistakes are different
from each other because an error cannot be self-corrected and is caused by a learner’s
inadequate knowledge of the target language whereas a mistake can be self-corrected.

James (1998) associates the error vs. mistake distinction to the issue of competence vs.
performance. In this way, errors are seen as failures of competence and mistakes as
failures of performance. Corder argues that „mistakes are of no significance to the process
of language learning since they do not reflect a defect in our knowledge” and “they can
occur in L1 as well as L2” On the other hand, errors “are of significance; they do reflect
knowledge; they are not self-correctable; and only learners of an L2 make them” .

Edge (1989) uses the term mistake as a cover term for all the wrong instances which
foreign language learners produce and he divides mistakes into three categories:
1. Slips occur, according to Edge, as a consequence of processing problems or
carelessness. The learner is usually able to self-correct if he or she has a chance to do so.
2. Errors refer, in Edge's opinion, to “wrong forms that the pupil could not correct even if
their wrongness were to be pointed out” but it is still evident what the learner wanted to
say (James 1998: 80).
3.Attempts, Edge’s last category, are “almost incomprehensible, and the learner obviously
has no idea how to use the right form” (James 1998: 81). In this situation learners usually
employ their compensatory communication strategies.
Hammerly (1991) divides deviances which learners make in the classroom context into
distortions and faults.
1.Distortions: are, in his opinion, “unavoidable and necessary, occur even with known
TL forms, and should be ignored by the teacher” . He further distinguishes between learner
distortions and mismanagement distortions and this distinction is based on the fact
whether or not the item has been taught in the class. Learner distortions appear when the
item has been “adequately taught ... clearly understood and sufficiently practiced” whereas
mismanagement distortions are consequences of inadequate teaching and practice of the
item in question.

2. faults,: appear when the learners “attempt to express freely ideas that require the use of
structures they haven’t yet learnt”).He again distinguishes between learner faults and
mismanagement faults, the former being consequences of learners’ overextension without
being encouraged by the teacher, and the latter appear when the teacher connives with the
students’ overextension.
As we can see, Hammerly’s view is quite extreme and he has been criticized for his
constant search for someone to blame, either the learners or the teacher. On the other hand,
Edge’s ideology is completely different because he “applauds learners who ... keep trying
and taking risk rather than playing safe or avoiding error” The most recent classification of
deviances is that of James (1998) Slips refer to lapses of the tongue or pen and the author
is able to spot and correct them. The discipline which is engaged in studying them is called
lapsology.
● Mistakes can be corrected by their author only “if their deviance is pointed out to him or
her” (James 1998: 83). James further divides them into first-order mistakes, when simple
indication of the deviance is enough to enable self-correction, and second-order mistakes,
when more information about the nature of the deviance is needed to enable self-
correction.
● Errors occur when the learner is unable to self-correct until further relevant input is
provided, i.e. some more learning has to take place.
●Solecisms are defined by James as “breaches of the rules of correctness as laid down by
purists and usually taught in schools” (1998: 83). A good example is split infinitives.
Once again, (deviation) would refer to the process of not following the usual norms and it
includes errors, mistakes, and slips of tongue and so on and so forth. It should be noted
here also that (ERRORS) are different from (MISTAKES): the former refers to
(competence) and the latter refers to (performance) [Chomsky]. Moreover, errors are
systematic, refer to interlanguage competence, and more importantly they are not or
cannot be dedicated [corrected] by the learner himself or herself. Mistakes, unlike errors,
they are usually self-corrected, irregular and unsystematic. One more term which can be
used in the (EA) is (fossilization). It refers to the cases of the [fossilized] mistakes or
errors wherein a learner is not able to use it correctly however times he or she has been
corrected. The slip of the tongue refers to an international mistake which a learner does not
intend to commit, that is a leaner says something which he or she does not really intend to
say so. Slips have actually some other types which include: slip of the pen and so on.
Correctness, grammaticality and accuracy mean nearly the same thing in terms of (EA).
Appropriateness refers to the relationship between language and situation ( ‫مناسبة الحال‬
‫[ )للمقال‬munasbat alhal lelmaqal]. For example:
• His majesty, the chairman of the Department of English Language and Literature, I want
your permission to set my students for the final exams before the date of starting the final
exams. The use of the word (majesty) here is (inappropriate) when accounted for from a
pragmatic point of view, because the person is not talking to a [king] or a [prince] or
whatever of these positions, so it is an insult-like for the communicated person here. With
reference to the term (appropriateness), two types of errors can be differentiated here:
(overtly erroneous or deviant and covertly erroneous or deviant), the former is
grammatical and the latter is pragmatic (appropriateness).

Sources of Errors
Identifying sources of errors from a cognitive point of view is different from that of
behaviourist point of view. Previously, with the field of contrastive analysis, it was
assumed that the only source of errors is interference. However, error analysis emerged to
replace contrastive analysis and to assert that interference is not the only source of errors.
There are other sources that reflect the learners’ attempts and strategies to learn the target
language. In other words, the learner in this case will not rely on his native language in
learning the target language, he will instead use his experience to build hypothesis about
the target language structure. In trying to identify the sources of errors Richards (1971)
finds three types of errors which are : interference errors, developmental errors and intra
lingual errors.
3.1. Interlingual transfer,( Interference errors) i.e. mother-tongue influence, causes
interlingual errors. In other words They are those caused by the use of the learner’s
native language elements in the target language, yet one must not confuse this with
behaviouristic approach to language transfer. It is worth noting that (EA) does not consider
interference as the result of old habits persistent, but rather as signs that the learners is
investigating the systems of the new language.

3.2.Developmental errors are those caused by building hypotheses about the target
language on the learner’s limited experience, that is to say the strategies used by the
learner to learn a language. This kind of errors is somehow part of the overgeneralizations,
(this later is subtitled into Natural and developmental learning stage errors), D.E are
results of normal pattern of development, such as (come = comed) and (break = breaked),
D.E indicates that the learner has started developing their linguistic knowledge and fail to
reproduce the rules they have lately been exposed to in target language learning.

Induced errors: as known as transfer of training, errors caused by misleading teaching

examples, teachers, sometimes, unconditionally, explain a rule without highlighting the
exceptions or the intended message they would want to convey. J. Richard et al. (2002)
provided an example that occurs at the level of teaching prepositions and particularly ‘’ at
‘’ where the teacher may hold up a box and say ‘’ I am looking at the box ‘’, the students
may understand that ‘’ at ‘’ means ‘’ under ‘’, they may later utter ‘’ the cat is at the table
‘’ instead of the cat is under the table.

Errors of avoidance: these errors occur when the learner fail to apply certain target
language rules just because they are thought of to be too difficult.

Errors of overproduction: in the early stages of language learning, learners are supposed
to have not yet acquired and accumulated a satisfied linguistic knowledge which can
enable them to use the finite rules of the target language in order to produce infinite
structures, most of the time, beginners overproduce, in such a way, they frequently repeat
a particular structure.

3.3.Intralingual errors are those which originate within the structure of the target
language itself ; they are subdivided into errors due to overgeneralization, incomplete
application of rules, ignorance of rule restrictions and false concepts hypothesized. These
four major types of intra lingual errors are explained in the article ‘’a non – contrastive
approach to error analysis’’ written by Richards (1970).

3.3.1 Overgeneralization

Overgeneralization occurs when the learner learns a rule and then uses it in new
situation where it does not fit. Richards claims that ‘‘overgeneralization’’ covers instances
where the learner creates a deviant structure on the basis of his experience of other
structures in the target language …’’ (1974, p.174). For example, producing sentences
such as ‘’he can sings’’ and ‘’he can plays’’ instead of ‘’he can sing’’ and ‘’ he can play’’
is due to false generalization. That is, the learner here uses a wrong form after a model
verb (can) as a result of his attempt to apply a rule in a context where is does not
apply ,i.e., to add the – s of the third person singular after a model verb. Oldin (1989 :18)
writes ‘’ …overgeneralization …often appears to be due to the inappropriate application of
a target language rule…’’.

Overgeneralization, as argued by Richards (1974), can be the result of simplification ,i.e.,

leaving out elements of a sentence by the learner in order to reduce his ‘’linguistic
burden’’.

In linguistics, overgeneralizations error occur when the speaker applies a grammatical

rule in cases where it doesn’t apply. Richard et al, (2002) mentioned that they are caused
‘’by extension of target language rules to inappropriate context.’’ , this kind of errors have
been committed while dealing with regular and irregular verbs, as well as the application
of plural forms. E.g. (Tooth == Tooths rather than teeth) and (he goes == he goed rather
than went).

On the other hand, simplification as Oldin (ibid) claims are errors that have nothing to do
with the learner’s mother tongue. He writes ‘’errors such as omitting articles, copulas, and
other forms often seem to involve simplification rather than transfer.’’ Thus, using the
same form of the verb regardless of person, number, or tense as in saying ‘’she go’’ is not
transfer from the learner’s mother tongue but rather a simplification.

Since simplifications errors result from learners producing simpler linguistic forms than
those found in the target language, in other words, learners attempt to be linguistically
creative and produce their own poetic sentences/utterances, they may actually be
successful in doing it, but it is not necessary the case, Corder (as cited in Mahmoud 2014)
mentioned that learners do not have the complex system which they could simplify. This
kind of errors is committed through both of Omission and addition of some linguistic
elements at the level of either the Spelling or grammar. A. Mahmoud (2014) provided
examples based on a research conducted on written English of Arabic-speaking second
year University students:

1.Spelling: omission of silent letters:

no (= know) * dout (= doubt) * weit (weight)

2.Grammar:

1.Omission:

e.g. We wait ^ the bus all the time.

He was ^ clever and has ^ understanding father.

2.Addition:

e.g. Students are do their researches every semester.

Both the boys and the girls they can study together.

3.3.2 Ignorance of Rule Restrictions

Generalization of deviant structures is usually the result of learners’ ignorance of

rule restrictions, Richads (ibid) argues that ‘‘ Closely related to the generalization of
deviant structures is failure to observe the restrictions of existing structures, that is, the
application of rules to context where they do not apply.’’ For example, a novice learner of
English who ignores the limitation on subject in structures with « who » will erroneously
produce « The girl who I met her » instead of « The girl who I met. » This type of error
can also be explained by analogy with a previously learned rule. That is, the learner who
learned previously that the English sentence contains : Subject + Verb + Object, will add
« her » by analogy since he supposes that the sentence without the object « her » is not
complete. Many other examples of rule restrictions errors made by analogy can be found
with the use of prepositions. A learner who used previously a preposition with a particular
verb will try to use it with another similar verb. Thus, a learner who produced previously
« He said to me. » will try by analogy to use the same preposition with the verb ‘to ask’,
and so he will wrongly produce « He asked to me » instead of « He asked me. »

3.3.3 Incomplete Application of Rules

According to Richards (1974), deviant structures under this type show the degree of
development of the rules needed by the learner to produce acceptable sentences. Richards
gives the example of question forms where learners just add a question word at the
beginning of a statement to ask a question. Thus, there was a failure from the part of the
learners to produce grammatical questions despite the fact that question forms are
extensively used by teachers in classroom. This can be explained by the learner’s interest
in communication rather than in producing grammatical sentences. For them, efficient
communication can be achieved without the need of using grammatical question forms.

3.3.4 False Concepts Hypothesized

Lack of teaching items gradation often leads the learner to produce errors deriving
from the confusion between those items. A famous example here, explained by Richards
(1974), is the confusion between the use of the simple present and the present continuous
in describing a succession of events in the present. For many learners such events are best
described by using the present continuous, while the simple present is the appropriate
tense here. Thus, those learners will produce wrongly « I am taking the eggs, now I am
adding the flour » where « I take the eggs, now I add the flour » is the correct form.

This confusion made by learners is usually the result of finding this type of errors in some
textbooks that use the contrastive approach. Richards (1974, p.179) writes ‘’the reason for
the occurrence of untypical verb-uses in many course books appears to be related to a
contrastive approach of language teaching … it is often felt that a considerable amount of
time should be devoted to the continious form, since it does not exist in most learner’s
mother tongue.’’ So, giving less attention to the structure of the foreign language as a
whole will lead to many intra lingual errors. For this reason, it was argued that courses
based on contrast within the same language are very important for learners

Identifying sources of errors can be, in fact, considered a part of error classification. Error
Analysis is innovatory in respect to the CAH in the sense that it examines errors
attributable to all possible sources, not just negative L1 transfer (Brown). Among the most
frequent sources of errors Brown counts (1) interlingual transfer, (2) intralingual transfer,
(3) context of learning, and (4) various communication strategies the learners use. James
(1998: 178-179) similarly classifies errors according to their source into four diagnosis-
based categories with the difference that he terms category (3) induced errors.

4. Context of learning refers to the setting where a language is learnt, e.g. a classroom or
a social situation, and also to the teacher and materials used in the lessons. All these
factors can cause induced errors (Brown 1980: 174). As Brown explains, “students often
make errors because a misleading explanation from the teacher, faulty presentation of a
structure or word in a textbook, or even because of a patent that was rotely memorized in a
drill but not properly contextualized”. James (1998: 191-200) divides induced errors into
the following subcategories:
- materials-induced errors
- teacher-talk induced errors
- exercise-based induced errors
- errors induced by pedagogical priorities
- look-up errors
I don’t think it is necessary to discuss them further because the nature of these errors is
evident from their names. However, I will supply an example Last time when I *have been
there ... (SK speaker) in which the incorrect application of present perfect probably reflects
deficient explanation of the use of present perfect on the part of the teacher.

5. Communication strategies are consciously used by the learners to get amessage across
to the hearer. They can involve both verbal and non-verbal communication mechanisms
(Brown 1980: 178). We distinguish among the following communication strategies:
- Avoidance arises when a learner consciously avoids certain language item because he
feels uncertain about it and prefers avoiding to comitting and error. There are several kinds
of avoidance, e.g. syntactic, lexical, phonological or topic avoidance (Brown 1980 ).

●Prefabricated patterns are memorized phrases or sentences, as in ‘tourist survival’

language or a pocket bilingual phrasebook, and the learner who memorized them usually
doesn't understand the components of the phrase However, their advantage is, as Hakuta
(1976) notes, that they “enable learners to express functions which they are yet unable to
construct from their linguistic system, simply storing them in a sense like large lexical
items”.
● Cognitive and personality styles can also cause errors. For instance, Brown (1980)
suggests that “a person with high self-esteem may be willing to risk more errors, in the
interest of communication, since he does not feel as threatened by
committing errors as a person with low self-esteem”.

 Appeal to authority is a strategy when the learner, because of his uncertainty about
some structure, directly asks a native speaker, a teacher or looks up the structure in a
bilingual dictionary (Brown 1980).

 Language switch is applied by the learner when all the other strategies have failed to
help him or her. So the learner uses his or her native language to get the message
across, regardless of the fact that the hearer may not know the native language.

Error Taxonomies
Although error taxonomies are part of the EA, . According to Dulay et al.(1982), the most
commonly used taxonomies are based on (1) linguistic category, (2) surface strategy, (3)
comparative analysis, and (4) communicative effect.
James (1998) drew on the New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1993), which defines
‘taxonomy’ as “the branch of science which deals with classification”. He also argues that
“a taxonomy must be organized according to certain constitutive criteria. These criteria
should as far as possible reflect observable objective facts about the entities to be
classified”. However, he notes, the criteria are not mutually exclusive: we classify errors
simultaneously according to more criteria at the same time.

Dulay et al. (1982) in their discussion about taxonomies “focused on error taxonomies that
classify errors according to some observable surface feature of the error itself, without
reference to its underlying cause or source” and they call these ‘descriptive taxonomies’.

1. Errors Based on Linguistic Category

These taxonomies classify errors according to the language component or linguistic
constituent (or both of them) which is affected by the error. Among language components
we count phonology, syntax and morphology, semantics and lexicon, and discourse (Dulay
et al. 1982: 146). Researchers use the linguistic category taxonomy as either the only one
or combined with some other taxonomy. This taxonomy is also useful for organizing the
collected data.

Dulay et al. (1982 ) gives as examples two error analyses that used this taxonomies for
primary classification of the collected data. The first one was carried out by Burt and
Kiparsky (1972) and the other by Politzer and Ramirez (1973). Both of them classified
errors made by students of English as L2, just the background of the analyses was
different. The former contains the following main categories:
A. The skeleton of English clauses, containing missing parts and mis ordered parts
B. The auxiliary system
C. Passive sentences
D. Temporal conjunctions
E. Sentential complements
F. Psychological predicates

2. Surface Strategy Taxonomy

This taxonomy concentrates on the ways in which surface structures are altered. Using this
taxonomy Dulay et al. (1982 ) divide errors into the following categories: (1) omission,
(2) additions, (3) misformation, and (4) misordering. Omission is typical for the early stages
of L2 acquisition, whereas in the intermediate stages misformation, misordering, or
overuse are much more common.
(1) Omission means that an item which must be present in a well-formed utterance is
absent. There is an evidence that grammatical morphemes (e.g. noun and verb inflections,
articles, prepositions) are omitted more often that content morphemes which carry the
meaning (Dulay et al. 1982: 154-155). For instance, in the sentence *My father plumber
the grammatical morphemes is and a are omitted.
(2) Additions are the second category of Surface strategy taxonomy and also the opposite
of omission. The presence of an extra item which mustn't be present in a well formed
utterance is characteristic for additions are divided them into three categories:
(a) double markings, as in *Did you went there?,
(b) regularization, e.g.* sheeps, *cutted, and
(c) simple addition, which contains the rest of additions .

(3) Misformation refers to “the use of the wrong form of the morpheme or structure”
There are three types as well:
(a) In regularizations an irregular marker is replaced by a regular one, as in *sheeps for
sheep.
(b) Archi-forms refer to the use of one member of a class of forms instead of using all the
members, e.g. using this in the situations when either this or these should be used.
(c) Alternating forms are represented by “free alternation of various members of a class
with each other”, as in *those dog and this cat used by the same learner The following
examples of misformation are taken from my own data collection:

Do all the *childs go through all the stages? (GR) regularization I have *take one packet of
*tissue. (FR) archi-form and omission
(4) We talk about misordering when we come across an utterance where a morpheme or a
group of them is incorrectly placed, as in *I get up at 6 o'clock always, where always is
misordered.

3. Comparative Taxonomy
The Comparative taxonomy classifies errors on the basis of comparing the structure of L2
errors to other types of constructions, most commonly to errors made by children during
their L1 acquisition of the language in question. In this taxonomy, we work with two main
error categories: (1) developmental errors, and (2) interlingual errors, and, of course, (3)
ambiguous errors, and (4) the ‘grab bag category’ of other errors :

(1) Developmental errors refer to errors which are similar to those made by children who
are acquiring the target language in question as their mother tongue. They are the opposite
of interlingual errors, i.e. those caused by L1 interference. The research has shown that
most of the errors committed by L2 learners are developmental. They are called
developmental because they are characteristic for both L1 and L2 development.The
following are my examples of developmental errors:
I have *take one packet of *tissue. (FR)
Let’s *close the light. (GR)
On the *opposite we have several studies ... (ES)
... *on the centre of the page ... (GR)

(2) Interlingual errors are, as Dulay et al. (1982: 171) argue, “similar in structure to a
semantically equivalent phrase or sentence in the learner’s native language”, e.g. *the man
skinny said by a Spanish speaker of English reflects the word order of the Spanish.

(3) Ambiguous errors could be classified as both developmental and interlingual

errors. Such erroneous utterances usually reflect the learner’s L1 and, at the same time, are
similar to errors produced by children during their L1 acquisition .
E.g. I don't have *nothing (SK), as well as They are speaking *before toilet doors (CZ)
could be considered both interlingual and developmental error.

(4) Other errors are those which simply do not fit in any of the above mentioned
categories of this taxonomy.

4 Communicative Effect Taxonomy

This taxonomy focuses on the effect the errors have on the listener or reader. Dulayet
(1982) argue that “errors that affect the overall organization of the sentence hinder
successful communication, while errors that affect a single element of the sentence usually
do not hinder communication”. They call the former (1) global errors and the latter (2)
local errors.

(1) Among global errors they include:

Global errors influence interpretation of a sentence as a whole, containing :
- wrong order of major constituents
·- missing, wrong, or misplaced sentence connectors
-missing cues to signal obligatory exceptions to pervasive syntactic rules
-regularization of pervasive syntactic rules to exceptions
- wrong psychological predicate constructions (i.e. predicates describing how a
person feels)
- improper selection of complement types (i.e. subordinate clauses)

(2) Local errors affect part, clause, phrase of a sentence, including , according to Dulay
errors in noun and verb inflections, articles, auxiliaries, formation of quantifiers, etc.

Classification of Errors

According to Corder (1973) and Haryono (2011), there are four main types of errors based
on the surface taxonomy. They are omission, addition, misformation and disordering

1-Omission Errors Omission errors refer to non-occurrence of necessary structures; that

is, the absence of an item that should appear in a well formed sentence. Examples:
1.She a student.
2) It is orange.
In the above sentences, the learner omitted the verb to be (is) in sentence 1 and the
indefinite article (an) in sentence 2.
The correct forms of these sentences are: 1) She is a student. 2) It is an orange.

2-Addition Errors
Addition errors mean addition of some unnecessary or incorrect elements that should not
appear. that mean the learner presents an item that should appear in a well-formed
sentence.
Examples:
1) There are two mens in the car.
2) He did not played football yesterdaty.

In the first sentence, the learner added the letter (s) to irregular plural noun (men) and
added the marker (ed) to the verb (play) that referred to the past in the negative sentence 2.
The correct forms of these sentences are: 1) There are two men in the car. 2) He did not
play football yesterday

3.Misformation Errors
Mis formation errors refer to the supplement of the wrong morpheme; that is, the use of
the wrong form of grammatical element. Examples:
1) These pen is mine.
2) Me play game every day.
In the first sentence, the learner use the wrong form of plural demonstrative (these) before
a singular noun (pen) and use the object pronoun (me) as the subject in the second
sentence.
The correct forms of these sentences are:
1) This pen is mine.
2) I play game every day.

4.Misordering Errors
Misordering errors refer to the wrong position of morphemes in a sentence. That means
that the words in the sentence are putting in wrong order. Examples:
1) read they a story.
2) I bought a car black.
In the above sentences, the learner put the words in the wrong order, for example, in the
first sentence, the learner put the verb (read) before the subject (they) and the second
sentence, the learner also put the adjective (black) after the noun (car). The correct order
of these sentences is:
1) They read a story.
2) I bought a black car.

Error Analysis Steps

Some scholars suggest some steps helping the researchers during analyzing students'
errors. For instance, Corder in (1974) mentions five steps, they are Selection,
identification, classification, explanation and evaluation. In (1997), Ellis proposes four
main steps, identification, description, explanation, and evaluation. After Corder and Ellis
came Gass and Selinker and suggest six steps in order to analyze students' errors, collect
data, identify errors, classify errors, quantify errors, analyze source and remediate
(2008,). Generally speaking, when talking about (data collection) it should be clarified
whether it is written, oral, or it is (elicited) or spontaneous and so on. Similarly, in the
case of the (identification of errors), they must be carefully identified, consider the
following example:
Yesterday, I will go to the market.
Here, the error could be either (grammatical) or (lexical). Put another way, a researcher
need to make sure before deciding on the error; one way of doing this is asking the source
itself, that is the student or whoever written this sentence and ask him or her: do you want
to say that or this:
● Tomorrow, I will go to the market.
● Yesterday, I went to the market.

Having done this, then we can decide, if he or she means the first choice, then it is a
(lexical error), and if it is the second choice, then it is a (grammatical error). In the next
step which is the (classification of errors) on the bases of: aspect, morphology, punctuation
marks, spelling and so on and so forth. More importantly, errors can be classified
according to the degree of their seriousness, consider the following examples:
• I missed the train.≡‫) فاتني القطار‬
• I liked English.≡‫تعجبني االنجليزية‬

We can notice here the position change of the (subjects) between the two languages:
(Standard Arabic and Standard English). To make it clear, in the Standard Arabic the
subjects are (‫[ القطار‬alqetar: the train] and ‫[ ) االنجليزية‬alengliziah: English]; whereas in
the Standard English it is (I) in both sentences [1st person pronoun]. More importantly,
what are subjects in the Standard Arabic language are objects in the Standard English
language. In the last step, the researcher has to explain: why does this or that learner tend
to make this or that particular error/ mistake? Consider, for example, the sound /p/ to be
pronounced as /b/ by an Arab learner, it could be explained as that because of the different
pronunciation systems in the two languages mainly in consonants wherein the sound /p/ is
available in the English language but not in the opposed language n(Standard Arabic). It
is important to note here that terms such as (interlanguage) and (intralnguage): the former
refers to the learner language (limited within the same language) like problems with
irregular plurals of English, and the latter is between two languages, for example (the new
book, the book new).

The explanations of the five phases for Error Analysis (EA) :

1. Data-collection
2. Identification of errors
3. Classification of errors
4. Explanation of errors
5. Evaluation of errors

1.Data-collection
To start with (data-collection) or (corpus), it is important to note that the major purpose of
(EA) is (correction of errors). Certainly, whatever a researcher collects or notes down is
called (corpus) and the first phase is more important than other phases, because the whole
process of this research in (EA) is based on it. There are actually two types or two ways
for data collection:

A. Spontaneous data
B. Induced data
a. Elicited data
b. Experimented data

Spontaneous-data is natural and it includes collection of: exam papers, recording learners.
It is actually informal way of collecting data, direct and more importantly not specifically
meant. The collected-data is something produced by the learners under different
circumstances. In this type or way of data-collection, a researcher has to start with
specifying the level of the students and their 1st language. It should be noted here and in
general the more the data is the more confidential it is. Hence, one of the problems of this
type of data is (error avoidance), consider in the Arabic case ‫[ )) واصل بن عطاء‬wasel ibn
atta’a] who had a problem with pronouncing the sound /r/ and used to preach with using
synonymous words whenever he met a word consists of the sound /r/.

The second way or type is (induced-data) which can be used in translation wherein
learners tend to make mistakes when translating from his or her native tongue language
(L1) to the learned language or foreign language. Yet, there are two ways: one is called
(elicited data) or (clinical-data) and another is called experimented-data. In comparison,
the (elicited-data) usually has emphasis on CONTENT; whereas the (experimented-data)
has an emphasis on FORM using test-like procedures. As a matter of fact, by asking the
students to do something like writing a summary of (200ws) for a certain passage, the data
is no more spontaneous. It is induced clinically data instead, because it is intended and the
focus is on ideas (content) for example the past simple tense. In the case of (experimental-
data), it may include test(s) in the form of: multiple choices, word formation, verbs form.
Thus, as far as the learners are informed and the researcher as well has intended this task,
so it is induced-data whether be it (clinically-induced data), focusing on (content) [ideas]
or (experimentally-induced data) focusing on (form) [use of suitable words to complete
sentences]. One more important point regarding (data collection) is that to decide whether
it is oral or written data. If it is oral, then transcription must be added (included). Again, if
it is written, then a number of aspects must be taken into consideration: is the researcher
discussing, debating, describing or comparing?

By and bye, we very often combine both spontaneous and induced datum for the purpose
of verifying the hypothesis. To make it clear, a researcher after analyzing spontaneous data
starts to have some suspensions and so he or she refers to induced-data to make sure from
those suspensions. Actually, spontaneous-data research is conducted for purposes rather
than research, it is done naturally, but once a researcher asks for data, then it is induced. In
the case of induced-data, however, a researcher makes his or her learners produce
something and causes them to produce errors and mistakes. Or, he or she and in order to
verify his or her suspensions after analyzing the spontaneous data, makes use of
experimented-data. Finally, in the case of spontaneous-data, a researcher needs for a large
amount of data [not centred]. Dissimilarly, in the case of elicited data, the researcher is
focusing on a certain area or problem like (future tense), it is [centred]. It has been
mentioned that (induced-data) has two types or two ways to be collected: (clinically-
elicited data and experimentally-induced data), the former is subjective and focuses on
(content), the researcher knows about its purpose, but the learners do not know; they are
only asked to write or produce something such as a report. As a result, they (learners) will
focus on ideas (content), for that matter this type if data is called (meaning-oriented data).
Unlike this is in the case of (experimental-data), it is test-like, objective and it includes
tests like:
􀂾 True and false questions
􀂾 Multiple choices
􀂾 Filling blanks
􀂾 Joining
􀂾 Transforming
􀂾 Correcting
􀂾 Matching
􀂾 Scrambled sentences
􀂾 Substitute

It should be noted here that we need (experimented-data) because we meet error avoidance
risk in (clinical-data) sometimes and in (spontaneous-data), it is always there. We also
need it when not finding enough material on a specific area we are searching on. The
differences between data-collection ways can be mentioned briefly here: (spontaneous-
data) is more natural than other types, and the other is artificial. Moreover, in the former
case learners may avoid some certain structures, but in the latter, they are forced to use
certain structures. Thus, (elicited-data) leads to error inducing through translation for
example, consider the following example:
􀂾 The journalist was met by the minister. ‫الصحف قوبل من قبل الوزير‬
‫قابل الصحف الوزير‬
We can notice the influence of the source text in the first translation. It is as a result of the
procedure we used and which leads to inducement. It should be noted here that the
majority of the error analysts make use of (production) what is produced, but not
(comprehension), because the former is [concrete] and the latter is [abstract]. Thus,
concrete data is easier to deal with than abstract data.

2.The Identification of Errors

The second step for conducting a research on (EA) is the (identification of errors). There
are actually two types:
1. Overtly erroneous (grammatical)
2. Covertly erroneous (usually pragmatic) Procedures for identifying errors:
1. Understanding the intention of the error or the error itself
2. Finding a plausible (acceptable) interpretation
3. Providing the learner’s utterance (LU)
4. Providing the correct utterance (CU)
5. Comparing the produced utterance of the learner (LU) to the produced utterance (CU)
6. Reaching the error (identifying the error) In order to explain the above mentioned
procedures, consider the following example:
􀀸 Yesterday, I go to school.
􀀹 Yesterday, I went to school.
􀀹 Tomorrow, I go to school.
􀀹 Today, I go to school.

So we need first to understand the intention of the producer of the sentence in order to
reach a plausible interpretation for the sentence. If he or she wants to talk about the past,
then it is grammatical (use went instead of [go]), if about the future then it is lexical (use
tomorrow instead of yesterday).
􀀸 I went tomorrow to school. (LU)
􀀹 I go tomorrow to school. (CU)

After that, the researcher compares the two produced sentences, items or whatever to find
(identify) the error(s). Thus, the error here is grammatical because the student wanted to
talk about the future. Other forms of errors would include:
o Phonological like: /zis/ instead of /ðis/ by most of the Egyptians [prospectively]
o I am going to the library to buy a book. (bookshop) [lexical error]

3.The Description of Errors

The third step for conducting a research on (EA) is the (description of errors) wherein two
things are important:
􀂾 Description
􀂾 Classification
For instance, in the case of description and with reference to the above given example
(lexical error), it can be described as: this student used the word (library) instead of the
word (bookshop) or (bookstore) and he or she has committed a lexical error. Again, in the
case of classification, two aspects have to be taken into consideration:
􀂾 Linguistic aspect
􀂾 Process aspect

Consider the following example:

􀀸 My friend go to school every morning.
􀀹 My friend goes to school every morning.
􀀹 My friends go to school every morning.
The student has omitted the (s/es) [3rd person singular] (process= omission). One more
example for process is:
􀀸 All students goes to school every morning.
􀀹 All students go to school every morning. As a matter of fact, (process) aspect can be
classified into the following types:
Omission (consider: s/es 3rd person singular)
Addition (consider: s/es 3rd person singular)
Substitution (library instead of bookshop or bookstore)

Sometimes a combination of two of the above types (lexical plus grammatical)

Furthermore, (linguistic aspect) can be also classified into:
●ORAL
Pronunciation
Phonological
● Segmental
o Consonants
o Vowels
● Supra-segmental
o Stress
o Pitch
o Juncture
● WRITTEN
Spelling
● Graphic (consider writing the letter p as q)
Structural
● Morphological
● Syntactic
Lexical
●Lexical items
● Compound words
Discourse
● Linkers
Anything beyond sentence level It should be noted here that the syntactic level is very
broad compared to other levels, for example the morphological level is very restricted.
Actually, this kind of classification makes the researcher’s description more accurate and
exact, yet the description is just saying what happened. Well, what will happen after that
is making a (pre classified list) wherein potential problems are coded (identified/
determined or generally named) [forward classification]. The researcher then will classify
the errors according to the results, or he or she can follow the step that errors will decide
the classification [backward classification]. One more method is using a check list:
predefined errors) in the form of tables or table-like; the researcher will put a check mark
on the table each time this or that particular error is repeated, to see which is more frequent
than other(s) and which is less frequent than other(s). Thus, such a step and methodology
is very useful and effective in the diagnosis process and for classroom use.
4.The Classification of Errors
Having described the errors, then we move to the next step classifying errors. There are
actually a number of procedures (approaches) for the classification of errors:
1. Pre-selected list
􀂾 Based on syllabus
􀂾 Or general comprehensive list (Norrish, 1983)
2. Error determine classes
3. Check list

In the first procedure, the researcher can make use of the topics mentioned in the syllabus,
or and in the case of grammar books, he or she can depend on the list of contents in any
grammar book or language book. It should be noted here that (Data-based Management)
(DBM) can be used during the process of classifying errors (sorting errors), they help to a
great extent in producing an accurate classification for errors. From among the
programmes which can be used are: (Excel, Access, SPSS and other programmes). If not
following the first procedure (approach), then the second one wherein a researcher may be
not interested in all types of errors, instead he or she is interested in some types of errors.
Consider for example, punctuation marks, tense and aspect, simple sentence, etc. In this
way, however, a researcher is able to limit his or her research to a certain area or type of
errors. It is important to note here that the largest international collected data (corpus) is
that by Oxford University. In the 3rd procedure (approach), a researcher can make use of a
(check list) which is usually designed for classroom use. It is used in this way: whenever a
particular type of errors occurs, it is marked and then the teacher (researcher) finds the
suitable solution(s) for such problems (errors) to be minimized or treated/ reduced.
5.The Explanation of Errors

Having collected the data, described errors and classified them, then we move to the step
of the (explanation of errors). In this step, a researcher made his or her best to find out the
possible causes for such errors. There are actually two main types or errors:
• Linguistic errors
• Non-linguistic errors

The linguistic errors would include interlingual errors (language interference from source
language (L1). Or it can be intralingual errors from the target language (TL) itself,
consider the irregular plurals like (children) for singular (child) instead of (childs) just like
(book pluralized as books). One more example for the same case is the past form of the
verb (irregular verbs) again, where in one can find some learners who use (goed) instead
of (went) as the past of the verb (go), just like (played for the verb play). Actually, all the
above mentioned errors have no relation to the 1st language; to a great extent they are
related to the target language (TL) itself. It should be noted that such types of errors are
usually known as (false analogy) or more accurately (overgeneralization) [most common
errors prospectively]. Other types of errors would include: (incomplete use of rules) such
as (subject verb agreement) [He go to school every morning.]; hyper-correction for
example in the case of Arabic (‫[ )هزل وهذل‬hazal, hathal], or as a translation for the word
(Philips) (‫ ;)فيليس‬general order of difficulty for example, (in language acquisition,
morpheme theory: certain morphemes are learned first by all children in all languages
(plural (s) before 3rd person (s)); redundancy reduction, consider the following:
examples: (‫[ )انا يروح‬anaa yerouh], (‫[ ) انت تذهب‬anta tathahb: you go] instead of (‫)اروح‬
[arouh: I go] and (‫[ )تذهب‬tathhab: you go], or (‫[ )اكل الولد الحم‬akala alwaladu allahmu:
The boy ate the meat.] and (‫[ ) اكل الولد اللحم‬akala alwalada allahma], using wrong case
markers here is redundant as it doesn’t change the communicating meaning of the
sentence(s). The second main type of errors is (non-linguistic sources). Consider the
following nonlinguistic sources:
􀂾 Teacher: if the teacher is pronouncing something wrongly or teaching it wrongly then
the students will do so, /zis/ instead of /ðis/ for the word (this)
􀂾 Teacher material: if the teacher brings his or her students something wrong in the
syllabus such as in printing, then they will follow it wrongly, for example the way the
book is organized such as starting with the present continuous before the present simple
tense; learners will continue using the present continuous
􀂾 Teaching methodology
􀂾 Translation especially [literal]: expressions such as (it rains cats and dogs), (do not or
does not ring the bell) when translated literally are very problematic; the former means (it
rains heavily) and the latter means (it does not remind me)
􀂾 Learning strategy: some learners prefer visual strategy (visual-oriented learners) and
some others prefer audio strategy (audio-oriented learners)
􀂾 Communication strategy
􀂾 Language creativity: some learners attempt to do something using their own
knowledge (creativity) use their own efforts, consider (The door was opened.)
instead of (The door was open.), it is an attempt to form a sentence like (The door was
closed.), or (holied places) instead of (holy places) as a translation for ( ‫)االماكن المقدسة‬
[ala’maken almuqadasah]
􀂾 Telegraphic style: omission of function words
􀂾 Learners’ age: children at a certain age can produce some sounds and cannot produce
some others, in the Arabic case for example: /‫ر‬/ /r/ and /‫ل‬/ /l/
􀂾 Old people problems: they face problems in pronouncing some words Finally, it
should be noted here regarding types of errors that (redundancy reduction) can be both
linguistic and non-linguistic; it is actually both communication learning and redundancy.

6.The Evaluation of Errors

Having collected the data, described the errors, classified them and explained them, then
we move to the last step (procedure) which is the (evaluation of errors) [assessment).
Firstly, it should be noted that (errors) which refer to competence are more serious than
(mistakes) which refer to performance, because the former are not self-corrected and the
latter are usually if not always self-corrected. Basically, when evaluating errors, we have
certain criteria which include:

Intelligibility: usually referred to as (communicative errors) (communicability)

[communicativity], a researcher needs to ask: is what you hear intelligible? Is it partially
intelligible or is it intelligible with some kind of difficulty? Actually, rating by a teacher is
totally different form rating by a non-teacher. Again, this kind of evaluation depends on
the experience (affected by) of the listener which means it is (not definite) [indefinite]
Irritability: does it annoy the listener or not? Actually and in some cases: some listeners
are not aware of the errors, some others; however, are aware of them, but they do not care.
Hence, a scholar of Arabic or a person who is very much interested in this or that
particular language will be to a great extent annoyed by errors committed for example by (
an incompetent Muslim preacher preaching on Friday)

Global versus local errors: it should be noted first that (global errors) but not (local
errors) are partially related to or affected by (intelligibility). Above all, when an error
affects or changes the basic meaning of the sentence/ utterance, it is (global), if it does not
do so, then it is (local), consider the (3rd person (s)) which is a local error as nothing
happens to the meaning of the sentence, an example for (global errors) is using a
transitional word in the place of the other like (although) instead of (because) or the
opposite. More examples for (global errors are as it follows:

􀂙 Psychological reversed errors:

• I missed the train.
• I like English.
•‫فقدت القطار‬
• ‫تعجبني االنجليزية‬
In the above examples, we can notice the change of the subject in the two languages: (I) in
the two sentences in English and (‫ )االنجليزية( & )القطار‬in the Arabic language (standard).
Error gravity (seriousness): how serious is the error? This question will include taking
into consideration the following points:
􀂙 Meaning change
􀂙 Frequency: a feature frequently used, or a student makes frequently, both are serious.

Error Correction

Ur (1996) claims that there are different opinions by different language teaching
approaches as regards to error correction. For example, the communicative approach sees
that not all mistakes need to be corrected. Focus should be on the message rather than
mistakes. However, it can be said that mistakes are important part of learning and
correcting them is a way of bringing the learner’s interlanguage closer to the target
language.

According to Erdoǧan (2005), the technique of error correction requires that the teacher
should understand the source of the errors. It is only in this way that the teacher can
provide appropriate remedy that will allow the learner to discover the correct rules. Thus,
the source of the error is very important for the teacher to decide how to treat it.

Since there is not enough time to deal with all the errors made by the students, the
correction of errors should be done according to their nature and significance. It is argued
that priority should be given to errors which may affect communication and cause
misunderstanding. Brown (2000) suggests that local errors usually need not be corrected
since the message is clear like in saying “ I gave she a present.” instead of “ I gave her a
present.” However, global errors need to be treated since the message in this case is not
comprehended clearly. Thus, the priority in error correction should be given to global
errors in order to develop the student’s communication skills.

Erdoǧan (2005) claims that different kinds of tasks need different treatment. For oral
works, it is usually recommended that students making mistakes during a speech should
not be interrupted, but to be reminded of the mistakes and talk about the reason. The type
of the feedback-form or content should be decided on according to the goal of the study. If
the goal is to make the students practice a certain grammar point, it may be necessary to
give a form feedback. Or else, if pronunciation item is being practiced, the teacher should
correct the related mistakes without interrupting the speaker (Ur, 1996).

For correcting written works, it is argued that the teacher should not correct the students’
mistakes directly , but instead to put writing comments or symbols which show the kind of
the mistake. For instance, putting “sp” for spelling mistake under the wrong word. In this
case the teacher will not give the correct form but rather alert the student that there is
something wrong. Using symbols is effective since it involves the learner himself in the
correction and the looking for the source of his mistakes

2. Contrastive Analysis CA
Introduction
The hypothesis of Contrastive Analysis is that (anything similar between two languages is
easy to learn and anything different is difficult to learn).This hypothesis is debated. It can
be tested to decide is it true in all linguistic levels or is it more truly in some levels than
others. CA has started in 1950s. In the end of 1960 and beginning of 1970 it became
popular and started to be attacked. The fault of this hypothesis is that it has been greatly
influenced by Behaviorism, ignoring to one reason or another all other factors that
contribute to the processes of learning and teaching (psychological, social and etc.
factors). CA can be done between two varieties, dialects and not necessarily two languages
We have to concentrate on: the history of CA, its uses and proponents of CA. It is
important to note that in the beginning of 1960s a centre for Applied Linguistics (CAL)
was opened in Washington, it was established by Modern Language Association (MLA),
or Linguistic Society of America (LSA). It published a series of books on CA in the
middle 60s. However, in the United States, they started to abandon the CA at least from
the point of view of pedagogical aspects but in Europe it was still active, specifically in
Western Europe.

Generally speaking, CA requires description of both 1st and 2nd language in order to find
similarities and dissimilarities. Basically, CA’s hypothesis is that the
more similar are the languages or their rules, the easier they are; the more different they
are, the more difficult they are. Lado and Fries are considered as the proponents of this
field of study. Both Lado and Fries emphasized onthe importance of the study of CA. In
CA, we talk about (Transfer) which can be either positive or negative. For instance, it can
be positive in the case of transferring the sound /‫ب‬/ in Arabic to the sound /b/ in English
(similarities). Yet, it is negative, in cases such as /pin/ instead of /pen/ as the
pronunciation of the word pen (differences). Principally, a distinction is made between
Contrastive Linguistics (CL) and Comparative Linguistics (CL). The former focuses on
the differences between two languages or dialects; whereas the latter concentrates on
similarities. Again, (CL1) is similar to (CA) and it is mostly called as Contrastive
Analysis, a thing which indicates that they do mean the same thing. (CL2), on the other
hand, is an hierarchical (usually chronological) linguistic study mainly in the late 19 th
century. That is, they study things such as family of languages to find historical
similarities and emphasize them or sometimes may be underline them. For instance,
(father) and (pater) (E-G), (daughter) and (‫دختر‬: dokhtar), (E-P) and (night) and (nacht)
(E-G) are all examples to show this field of study. One field which needs to be
distinguished from these two fields is Language Universals (LU). In this field of study,
researchers go beyond both (CL1) and (CL2). That is, all languages have nouns, verbs
vowels and consonants, etc. It makes generalizations about all languages rather than two
languages. Lado has determined the uses of CA in the following points: learning,
teaching, teacher material preparation, teaching and learning evaluation, language testing,
research processes, translation studies, bilingual lexicography, and the study of language
universals, all benefit from the CA.

In language learning, it helps to learn some aspects of the language such as /t/ in Arabic
and English and American English, in Arabic; it is like the American /r/ [flab, voiced]. For
example, (thirty) /􀈙irdi/ the sound /t/ assimilates with /r/. Again in (twenty) /twini/, it
assimilates with the sound /n/. Hence, it has to be proceeded by a stressed vowel and
through CA we can say why it is pronounced in those ways.

Definition of Contrastive Analysis

Contrastive analysis or (CA) for short is the systematic comparison of the native
language and the language that the learner wants to learn. In other words, it is the
identification of points of structural similarity and difference between two languages
(Crystal, 1992). Contrastive analysis flourished in the fifties and sixties and since that, it
has played an important role in teaching English as a foreign language. Richard, Platt and
Platt (1992,p.83) claim that “contrastive analysis was developed and practiced in the 1950s
and 1960s as an application of structural linguistics to language teaching.” In addition,
contrastive analysis has become one of the most important subjects in the recent history of
teaching English as a foreign language because of its theoretical and practical implications
(Aarts, 1980). Contrastive analysis was based on the assumption that a learner of a second
language will tend to transfer his old habits to the second language. Lado (1957,) writes “
individuals tend to transfer the forms and meanings and the distribution of forms and
meanings of their native language and culture.” Those forms that are similar in the source
language and the target language will cause a facilitation for learners, however those that
are different will cause a difficulty for them; Dulay et al. (1982) write “contrastive
analysis (CA) took the position that a learner's first language “interferes” with his or her
acquisition of a second language, and that it therefore comprises the major obstacle to
successful mastery of the new language.”

Terms and Concepts

Asynchronous: Occurring at different times.

Contrastive Analysis: The study of a pair of languages to identify their structural

differences and similarities.

Error Analysis: The study of the types and causes of errors made by second language
learners.
First (native) Language (L1): The first language a person learns to communicate (speak,
write), generally because it is utilized in the home and/or community.

Interference: Rules of the native language obstructing knowledge of the new (second)
language.

Interlanguage: A language system developed by a second language learner; identified

when the learner uses strategies like language transfer, overgeneralization, and
simplification to acquire the L2.

Linguistics: The study of language.

Morphology: The study of word formation and structure, including inflection and origin.

Second (target) Language (L2): The second language a person learns or is attempting to
learn.

Second Language Acquisition: The ability to communicate effectively (proficiently) in a

second language.

Transference: Using the system of rules (i.e.: how sentences are formed) of one language
to produce another language.

.Transitional Competence: The ability to transfer a native language to a second language

Principles of Contrastive Analysis :

1. Synchronic Orientation:
CA focuses on comparing languages at the same point in time, rather than tracing
historical developments.
2. Positive interference ( Transfer) :
If a grammatical structure or pronunciation exists in both the native and target languages,
learners will likely find it easier to acquire because they can transfer positive knowledge
from their native language.
The concept of transfer is central to CA. Positive transfer occurs when similarities
between languages facilitate learning.
3. Negative interference :
When there are differences between the two languages, learners may transfer incorrect
patterns from their native language, leading to errors. This is known as negative transfer
or interference.

4. Predicting learning difficulties:

 CA aims to identify potential areas of difficulty for language learners based on the
differences between their L1 and the target language. This allows teachers to focus
instruction on areas of potential difficulty.
5. Focus on structural differences (Systematic Comparison) :
While some early approaches also considered cultural differences, CA primarily focuses
on comparing the structural elements of languages (phonology, morphology, syntax,
lexis ) to identify areas of potential conflict.
6. Not All-Encompassing:
While CA is useful for explaining some errors, it cannot predict all learning challenges
as learners also exhibit errors due to other factors.

7. Theoretical and Applied Linguistics:

CA draws upon theoretical linguistics for its framework and descriptive linguistics for
the detailed language descriptions used in the comparison.

Example: If a learner's native language uses subject-verb-object word order, and the target
language also uses the same order, this is a case of positive transfer. However, if the native
language places adjectives before nouns and the target language places them after, this can
lead to negative transfer, where the learner might incorrectly place adjectives before nouns
in the target language.

In essence, contrastive analysis helps us understand how learning a second language is

influenced by the learner's first language, and it provides valuable insights for language
teaching and materials development.

Limitations
While CA can be helpful in identifying some potential learning challenges, it doesn't
account for all errors. Some errors occur regardless of the learner's native language, and
CA may not accurately predict all areas of difficulty. Error analysis, which examines the
actual errors learners make, is often used in conjunction with CA to gain a more
comprehensive understanding of SLA.

Positive interference vs. Negative interference

Positive transfer, on the one hand, refers to the use of old behaviours in new learning
situations that results in ' correct performance' in the target language because the old
behaviours and the new ones are the same. Negative transfer, on the other hand, refers to
the use of old behaviours in new situations of learning that results in errors since the old
behaviours and the new ones are different (Dulay et al. 1982) .Cristopherson (1973, p.49)
claims that: “negative transfer , or interference , is transfer of skill x wich impeds the
learning or has a negative
influence on the command of a skill y because of differences between both skill.”
 Transfer
19
17
Positive (+) Negative (-)

Overgeneralization Interference
( L1 L2) ( L1 L2)
( L2 L1) ( L2 L1)

The objectives of Contrastive analysis

Firstly, contrastive analysis is considered as an approach used to predict the
problems and difficulties that can face learners as well as errors which can be made by
them. Oller (1971, p.79) claims that contrastive analysis is “... a device for predicting
points of difficulty and some of the errors that learners will make.” According to
Christopherson (1973), predicting problems in second language learning can be realized
through knowing the similarities and differences between the source language and the
target language. That is, providing insights into similarities and differences between the
native language and the foreign language will help the linguist to discover the difficulties
that can encounter the learner
during his process of learning that foreign language.

Secondly, contrastive analysis is considered as an approach that aims at diagnosing errors.

It is worth mentioning that this role is only attributed to the weak version of (CA) and not
to its strong version since the first has an explanatory function while the second has a
predictive one. Thus, the weak version with its explanatory function enables the teacher to
use his linguistic knowledge to account for some errors made by learners of a foreign
language. James (1980, p. 148) claims that “An important ingredient of the teacher's role
as monitor and assessor of the learner's performance is to know why certain errors are
committed. It is on the basis of such diagnostic knowledge that the teacher organizes
feedback to the learner and remedial work.”

Thirdly, contrastive analysis aims at developing course materials for language teaching.
Fries (1945) was among those who support converting data from (CA) into teaching
programs; he argues that a successful teaching process can be achieved by using course
material based on systematic comparison of the source language and the target language.
Dulay et al. (1982) writes “... a comparison of a
learner's L1 and L2 –contrastive analysis- should reveal areas of difficulty for L2 students,
thereby providing teachers and developers of L2 materials with specific guidelines for
lesson planning.”

The significance of Contrastive Analysis

In language teaching, it helps teachers to decide the problems of the students in some
certain areas. Once again, it helps to prepare teaching materials for example:
ESP (English for Specific Purposes) & EAP (English for Academic Purposes). Yet, we
can evaluate these materials and see whether this or that particular book
meets the needs of the students or not? Additionally, we can use CA for language testing.
That is, designing a test on English pronunciation, a person would focus on sounds which
are unfamiliar to learners such as /p/, /e/, and structures like the addition of (s/es),
adjectives before and after nouns, subject-verb agreement like; ‫يقرأ الولد الفتاة تقرأ االوالد‬
‫( يقرؤون قراء االوالد قرا الولد‬alwalad yaqra, qara’s alwalad, qara’s ala’wlad, ala’wald
yaqra’oun, alfatah taqra) [The boy is reading., The boy read., The boys read., The boys are
reading., The girl is reading.].

One more use of the CA is in teaching, learning and evaluation of translation studies such
as in the case of pedagogical translation books wherein we can make use of this theory.
Moreover, in the case of compiling bilingual dictionaries (Lexicography), the CA is also
used. It is important to note here that, (A-E dics.) and (EA dics.), the former are used for
writing purposes and the latter are used for reading purposes. In most cases, these bilingual
dictionaries will explain the differences between words in different levels.

CA in the phonological level is strong. Dissimilarly, in the lexical level it is partially clear
because similarity may lead sometimes to difficulty. In grammar, it is sometimes true and
sometimes wrong. For example, (casino) would mean to us a place for (having tea) and for
the westerners it is a place where in a person can go for (gambling), this word have two
different semantic meanings. One more example, (assister) in French and (assist) in
English; they are similar but the former means (attend) and the latter means (help) and this
would lead to confusion sometimes. Again, (library) in English and (librarie) in French,
the former means a place for borrowing books and the latter a place for selling books. One
more factor regarding words is cognate (like mobile ‫ )موبايل‬and false cognate, false
cognate are meaning or different meanings for the same word like the word (‫شاطر‬
[shatter], clever) in Arabic to mean (thief) according to the famous book of (A Thousand
Nights and a Night). Regarding this point, we have words which have a change in their
meaning from bad to good, called (amelioration) and words which have their meaning
changed from good to bad, called (pejaration). Strictly speaking, four levels which are
considered as major areas will be discussed by CA: Sound level (Phonology),
Grammatical level (Morphology and Syntax), Lexical level (Lexicology and
Lexicography) and discourse level (Pragmatics).

To begin with sound system, we basically have two divisions of Phonology: segments and
supra segmental features. The former refers to: sounds elements, combinations and effects
of these combinations on sounds such consonant clusters: in Arabic we cannot have words
starting with two or more consonants except in the case of colloquial Arabic. Dissimilarly,
in English we can have two and three but with very limited restrictions. The latter refers to
features including stress, juncture and pitch. Basically, intonation is a combination of all
pitch, juncture and stress. Languages are divided into two types: intonation languages
such as Arabic and English and tone language such as Vietnamese and Chinese.

In stress we have word stress and sentences stress and their features are: primary,
secondary, tertiary and weak. For pitch, we have extra high, high, mid and low. For
juncture, we have: fall, rising, sustain juncture and (+) juncture. An example for (+)
juncture is the word (ice-cream) if pronounced continuously /aiskri:m/, if it is with a
stop /ai/ /skri:m/, in Arabic words like (‫[ )كلمتني‬kalamatni], (‫[ ) هي تحدثت الي‬hya
tahadathat elaya: she talked to me] and ( ‫[ )تعبت متني‬ta’ib matni: my shoulder is
exhausted]. One more example in Arabic is, (‫[ )يا اسماعيل‬yasma’ail], one meaning is
referring the name of the person himself, and the other is talking for a female girl whose
name is A’sma’a. Finally, rhythm is based on stress: Arabic language is stressed-syllable
language whereas English is stressed-timed language.
• He is very good. (E) (Rise) at the end
• He is very good. (A) (Fall) at the end [influenceof the mother tongue language (Ar.)]
Arguments against CA: Carl James

In spite of the useful uses of CA which we have mentioned earlier some would argue that
it is not useful in other places. From among these arguments directed against this
methodology is that with the use of CA, learners’ difficulties cannot be always predicted
because there are other features/ factors rather than language interference. In addition, CA
has limitation for the problems that hinder the process of learning. For example, in
phonology it is clearer because it has physiological aspect. That is, a phoneme is mental
and grammar is mental but in phonology, because we are using our aperture (‫[ )ع‬ain], (‫)خ‬
[khaa], foreign speakers or learners do not have in their aperture these movements and also
us (L2 learners) in the case of some sounds in French or in English /e/. In other words, we
(speakers of the Arabic Language) are used to these sounds just as they are used to sounds
which we could not pronounce well, and that is why language interference is clearer and
stronger in the phonological level.

Moreover, in the case of lexicon, we can find language interference but it is not as clear as
it is in the case of phonological level. Again, in the structural level, it is less strong and
clearer because an Arab speaker, for example, would think in Arabic (his or her native
tongue language) and then produces it in English just like the word (library) instead of
(bookshop) for the place of selling books, because these two or more words are not
distinguished from one another like those in English.

More importantly, CA has basically based on Behaviorists’ view (opposite to cognitive

psychology). Language, in language learning is not just a habit, it is more as a process of

device). In spite of this, we cannot deny the fact that They ⎯children have started their
going on (innateness) (biological theories of language), (LAD: language acquisition
 counter arguments based on Behaviorists’ view, but later on they developed their
methodologies. Some others would say that CA is obsolete because its constant relation to
structural linguistics, yet it can benefit from other grammars such as TGG
(transformational generative grammar) in the case of surface and deep structures, lexical
grammar or generative phonology and phonemics. Others would argue that CA cannot be
used for predicting errors; it can actually do but not always. Put it another way, it can
explain errors such saying /ben/ instead of /pen/ for the word (pen) or (the book good)
instead of (the good book). Hence, the original hypothesis of CA was delimited to teaching
.and learning. Finally, CA is time-consuming

The branches of Contrastive Analysis

Contrastive Analysis means the comparison of two languages by paying attention to
differences and similarities between languages being compared.
• It was first suggested by Whorf (1941) as contrastive linguistics , a comparative study
which emphasizes on linguistic differences.
• The publication of Robert Lados' book( linguistics across cultures) in 1957 was the start
of modern applied contrastive linguistics. In later studies the term contrastive linguistics
changed to contrastive analysis. The branches which contrastive analysis is involved:
Translation - teaching- linguistics- textbook writing- error analysis
1 . Translation:
a-As a translator should be faithful to the text so s/he should know the exact equivalents in
two languages (source and target).
b- A translator understands that most of the differences in two languages are not
semantically but culturally.
c- She/ He understands that most of these different beliefs differences comes from
.different values different patterns of thought

2 . Teaching:
Learning the second language is different from acquiring the first language. A child
acquiring English as a native language makes perceptual differences about different
languages, he acquires language system. But a Persian child who is learning English as his
/ her second language does not have this perception about different situations, he / she just
learns the language. e.g.: the concept of the word "cousin" for an English child is
completely different from that of a Persian child.

Contrastive analysis can help teachers to :

- design teaching and learning materials (methodology)
- engage learner in activities to be a good user of target language.(classroom activities)
- evaluate text books.
- pay attention to the structure of the texts beyond sentence level
- pay attention to conversation in its regular pattern in different situations
- pay attention to complex areas like intonation
- pay attention to different underlying rules which differ from culture to culture
- contrastive analysis does not suggest a method or teaching technique but help
methodologists .

3 . Linguistics
- Contrastive analysis pays attention to different languages at lexical, phonological,
syntactical and semantic levels

- Contrastive studies find similarities and differences between languages in:

a) Grammatical structures( pronouns, articles, verbs, consonants and vowels)

b) Sentences and constructions ( interrogatives, relatives, negatives , normal phrases,

syllables, diphthongs,…)

c) Rules of the compared languages ( interrogative ,passivization and etc.)

According to Richards (1971), researches show that contrastive analysis may be most
predictive at the level of phonology and least predictive at the syntactic level, for this
many of the common mistakes are syntactic errors in written work.

4 . Principle programming for writing a textbook.

Contrastive analysis helps a textbook writer avoid using the material with a high degree of
difficulty and high degree of occurrence in a same text ( which makes the text more
difficult ) The writer should balance among the most difficult items and the least difficult
items throughout the text.

5 . error analysis :
Contrastive analysis helps you to classify the errors, predict and finally avoid them. (error
analysis).
Interference theory:
One of the important factors in studying contrastive analysis is paying attention to the
definition of "interference Theory". Base on Psycholinguistics: You look at the second
language through filter /glasses of the first language. The rules of the first language are
matched with the rules of the second language. (You see that the rule systems of the
source and target languages are different and sometimes the rules of languages are
interfered with each other). So studying contrastive analysis can help you to understand
and know these interferences. If certain elements of a second language differed greatly
from the student’s native language, that student would likely encounter difficulties. (Lado
1957) it means sometimes your mother tongue interferes.
*Mary is interested to reading books.
• Mary is interested in reading books.

Before discussing about the different hypothesis of contrastive analysis we should be

familiar with the concept of difficulty and simplicity in language study, so we look at the
hierarchy( degrees of difficulty) in languages:

Degrees of difficulty A contrastive analyst should predict the level of difficulties in

foreign language to avoid using high degree of difficulties along with a high degree of
occurrences in a same text. Now we study the different levels of difficulties:
1. Level 0: transfer
1) No difference or contrast is present between the two languages. (Similar sounds, lexical
items or similar structures in two languages are seen ( positive transfer))
2) The learner can simply transfer (positively) a sound, a structure or lexical item form the
native language to the target language.
3) Concepts of negation and interrogation in two languages are the same.
4) Word order in two languages has the same pattern.
5) Such transfer makes no difficulty; hence the label of "level zero" is given to it.

2. level 1 : Coalescence :
two or more items in the native language become coalesced (come together) into one item
in the target language.( here our source language is Persian and target is English)

Level 2: Under differentiation:

An item in the native language is absent in the target language
Level 3: Reinterpretation:
- An item that exists in the native language (Persian) is given a new shape or distribution.
It is similar to a given item in the target language (English) but not the same.
- A Persian learner overgeneralizes on the basis of similarities and make errors.
Level 4: over differentiation :
A new item in target language (English) which is absent in language.

Contrastive analysis Hypotheses (CAH):

Studying linguistics will undoubtedly lead you to encounter divergent views and many
interesting hypotheses related to language and language function. Among these interesting
hypotheses, we have the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH). First, it would be useful
to start by giving some theoretical assumptions that turn around the Contrastive Analysis
Hypotheses:
1- Learning a language is a question of habit formation.
2- The old habits of the foreign language learner may interfere with their new learning
task.
3- Comparison of the native language and the target language can show the similarities
and differences between them.

A. The Strong Version

The strong version or priori version claims that the difficulties that will face learners can
be predicted by the contrast of the two languages. Richards (1974) argues that “ the strong
version states that the learner's behavior is predictable on the basis of a comparison of LS
and LT.” In addition, the priori version claims that the differences between the source
language and the target language can lead to the prediction of (L2) learning problems.
Thus the transfer can be positive or negative. As follows :
Positive transfer:
1) It occurs when the first language is similar to the second language.
2) The learner has no difficulty in learning language( because what he has
learned in the first language is positively transferred into the second one.
3. In positive transfer first language helps learning the second language
Negative transfer:
1) It is problematic, because of interference of the first language on the second one. (It
occurs when the first language is different from the second language.)
2) Learning differences in language takes a lot of time an energy
3) The first learning inhibits (prevents ) the second learning.

Learning similarities is easy Conclusion: strong version Learning differences is difficult

and makes interference. Weak point of this theory: This theory can only describe
interlingual errors. Errors in foreign language which are caused by interferences.( just one
third of errors are predicted)

B. The Weak Version

The weak version or posteriori version, on the other hand, claims that some observed
learning problems can be accounted for by the differences between the source language
and the target language ( Christopherson, 1973). claims that “ the weak claim of
contrastive analysis is that of accounting for learner behavior.”
The Weak Version believes that 1)the principle of transfer is just valid for animal learning
not human learning.
2) In the learning of a second language, the native language of the student does
not really" interfere" with his learning, but it plays as an " escape hatch" when
the learner gets into trouble.
3) This view point suggests that what will be most difficult for the learner is his
lack of knowledge in the target language and his native language helps him in
this regard. For example:
Producing the interdental fricatives [ ً and θ] for a Persian learner of English is difficult not
because of inhabitation or transfer of first language into second ,but it is because his lack
of knowledge about these sounds in English. [s, t, z,d] he uses these sounds instead
because he has not yet learned how to produce these English sounds.

III. Moderate Version :

• This hypothesis believes in the effect of principle of stimulus generalization in the
learning of a native or foreign language.
• this theory pays attention to the learner’s errors and tries to predict it. This theory says
that : more difference between two languages, more easily to learn and internalize it.
(Similarities make confusion to learn language.)
• This theory can predict and categorize a large number of errors in language resulting of
overgeneralization of rules either in native or target language.

Comparing languages:
1- choosing a special theoretical model.( traditional, structural or transformational)
2- then structures are compared and contrasted Five steps for systematic comparison and
contrast of two languages: 1)Selection- 2) description- 3) comparison- 4) prediction-
verification.
1.selection:
it is impossible to compare every sound , word , structure and etc.of two languages, so the
analyst should be limited. He/she can do the selection through:
- personal experience
- bilingual intuition
- error analysis : In this step you should decide what is to be compared with what two
elements to be compared in two languages should be similar in some extent.
2) description:
1-The selected materials will be linguistically described.
2- two languages should be described within the same theory.
3- for describing the sound systems of two languages we use structural phonology.
4- for studying and describing syntax and morphology, there is no specific theory.
5-The focus is on differences not similarities.

3) Comparison:
1-The similarities and differences are compared in three levels :
- form
- meaning
- distribution of items in 2 languages which have been collected
2- no comparison is possible without a full description
3- the basic elements and structures should be compared with each other
4) prediction:
1-Now the contrastive analyst can predict for the differences and similarities of two
languages.
2-He / she should judge whether these similarities and differences are problematic or not
(deviant
structures and interference structures are predicted.)
3- sometimes deviants reflect the structures of mother tongue.
5) Verification:
1- It is the final step in a contrastive study.
2-To find out if the predictions made in the forth step (prediction) is true in reality or not.
( Do Persian learners of English, in reality commit the errors which the contrastive analyst
predict it or not?)

How to compare two syntactic /grammatical structures?

grammatical signals in languages which a contrastive analyst should pay attention in
his/her comparing and contrasting languages are :

1 -First grammatical signal :WORD ORDER:

comparing and contrasting two languages:
1- Differences of two languages:
-"Head word" in English is the second word in a compound but in…..
2- Similarity of two languages:
Different word orders in two languages make different meanings with a different
grammatical rule of "Genitive Case"
Two different word order two different meanings

- second grammatical signal :

I NFLECTI ON: 􀀹 similarities of Inflection in two languages:

Different kinds of contrastive analysis:

According to different views toward communication we have two approaches of
contrastive analysis:
1- classical contrastive analysis:
a) Language is a self-contained system
b) It believes in Code linguistics.
Code linguistics deals with language as an abstract system , using grammatical
competence to distinguish syntax, semantics, phonology and lexicon.
d) It is a linguistically- oriented approach
e) It is static
f) The focus is on linguistic elements so the teaching materials focused on presenting and
practicing the linguistic materials which differ in two languages.

2- Modern Contrastive analysis:

a) Language is a means of communication
b) It believes in Human linguistics.
Human linguistics deals with language as a concrete system, using communicative
competence to describe the process of human communication. It falls within the
domain of pragmatics ( holistic interpretation of language) .
c) it is a communicatively- oriented approach or participant- oriented approach.
d)It is a dynamic approach.
e) the focus is on the process of development of discourse as the basis for communication.
F) the discourse analyst studies the relationship between language and the context in
which it is used.( it concerns with how people use real language)

Advantages of modern contrastive analysis:

• Static approach unlike the Dynamic approach is insufficient in comparing and
contrasting the languages because:
• It cannot predict all the errors in producing the language, and also it cannot predict all the
linguistic interferences in language because some of these interferences related to the
process of communication. But Dynamic approach (modern approach) can predict the
errors:
Discourse Analysis
Studying language forms without paying attention to language use is incomplete, so
contrastive analysis goes beyond the limitations of structure and analyzes the use of
language in a socio cultural setting. So all the models of contrastive analysis which neglect
the influence of extra-linguistic factors in speech are defective. There are some factors,
beside linguistic rules which help the transmission of meaning between the two
participants in a conversation:
1- what the speaker thinks the listener knows.
2- The listener attitudes/ behaviors in conversation
3- Mutual agreement or disagreement between participants
4- Shared knowledge
5- Giving a number of verbal and non-verbal cues for mutual understanding

Contrastive analysis at Discourse level( discourse analysis) :

We have two kinds of language :spoken (conversation) and written(text)
The difference between written discourse and spoken discourse:
• Most of the time in conversation or spoken language it is impossible to decide the exact
function of participants or their different feed backs in talking.
• But in written language the writer unlike speaker has the time to think about what to
write and how to write . for this reason the sentences are usually well-formed. It seems in
any oral conversation there are three parts:
• first, a question,
• an answer and
• a comment( feedback) which in some languages the feedback can have some “ follow-
up” like e.g.:
- what time is it? A- what time is it?
- Five past six. B- five past six.
- Thank you. A- good! Clever girl
A – Do you think it’s the time for coming to class?

References

Brown, H. D. (2006). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New York:

.Longman

.Corder, S.P. (1967). The Significance of Learners’ Errors. IRAL 5, 161-170

.Corder, S.P. (1987). Error Analysis and Interlanguage. Oxford, Oxford University Press

C Dulay, H. , M. Burts, and S. Krashen. (1982). Language Two. New York : Oxford
.University Press

.Ellis, R. (1997). Second Language Acquisition. Oxford : Oxford University Press

Erdogan, V. (2005). Contribution of Error Analysis to Foreign Language Teaching.

.Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education. 2, 261-270

Keshevars, M.H. (1997). Contrastive Analysis and Error Analysis. Tehran: Rahmana
.Pub

Lightbown, P., and N. Spada. (2006). How Languages are Learned. (Third ed.). Oxford :
.Oxford University Press

Nemser, W. (1971). ‘‘Approximative Systems of Foreign Language Learners”. In

.Richards, J.C. (ed.) 55-63

Odlin, T. (1989). Language Transfer: Cross Linguistic Influence in Language Learning.

.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Richards.J.C. (1971). Error Analysis and Second Language Strategies. Language
.Sciences17, 12-22

Richards J.C. (1974). Error Analysis, Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition.

.London : Longman Group

Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. Product Information International Review of Applied

.Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10, 209-241

Ur, P. (1996). A Course in Language Teaching. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press