Chapter 8 对比分析和难度等级

1、Chapter 8Contrastive Analysis, Interlanguage, and Error AnalysisThe Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH) 01020304Contrastive AnalysisHierarchy of Difficulty Moderating the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis Markedness and Universal Grammer Definition of Contrastive AnalysisContrastive analysisContrast

2、ive analysis is the systematic study of a pair of languages with a view to identifying their structural differences and similarities. Historically it has been used to establish language genealogies. -From WikipediaDefinition of Contrastive AnalysisContrastive analysis was used extensively in the fie

3、ld of second language acquisition in the 1960s and early 1970s, explaining why some features of a target language were more difficult to acquire than others. Therefore, the difficulty in mastering certain structures in a second language (L2) depended on the difference between the learners mother lan

4、guage (L1) and the language they were trying to learn.The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)The CAH claimed that:the principal barrier to second language acquisition is the interference of the first language system with the second language system;a scienti

5、fic, structural analysis of the two language in question would yield a taxonomy of linguistic contrasts between L1 and L2;the taxonomy of linguistic contrasts enable the linguist to predict the difficulties a learner would encounter.The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)The Contrastive Analysis H

6、ypothesis (CAH)Theoretical basis of CAH:Behavioristic ApproachAStructuralist ApproachBThe CAH was considered feasible tools of structural linguistics.Human behavior is the sum of its smallest parts and components.The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)Such

7、as Friess slot-filler grammar (1952), the CAH, the tools of structural linguistics would enable a linguist to describe accurately the two language in question, and to match those two descriptions against each other to determine valid contrasts, or difference.Behaviorism contributed to CAH that human

8、 behavior is the sum of its smallest parts and components, and that language learning could be described as the acquisition of all of these discrete units.The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)The CAH has appeal in that we commonly observe in second langua

9、ge learners a plethora of errors attributable to the negative transfer of the native language to the target language.How can we infer where the learner comes from?How do people interpret “interfering” elements of learning with human learning theories?No interference could be predictd, no difficulty

10、would be experiencedsince one could transfer positively all other items in a language.Human learning theoriesThe Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)The logical conclusion was that: second language learning basically involved the overcoming of the difference

11、s between the two linguistic systems-the native and target languages.Charles FriesRobert LadoRepresentative of CAHRobert Lados Linguistics Across Cultures (1957), Lado claimed that those elements which are similar to the learners native language will be simple for him, and those elements that are di

12、fferent will be difficult. Robert Lados Linguistics Across Cultures (1957), Lado claimed that:Randal Whitman(1970) noted -Randal Whitman(1970) noted -Contrastive analysis involved four different procedures: Second:selectionFirst: descriptionThird:contrastFourth:predictionHierarchy of DifficultyHiera

13、rchy of DifficultyStockwell, Bowen, and Martin(1965), who proposed what they called a hierarchy of difficulty.For phonological systemFor grammaticalstructuresEight possible degrees of difficulty based on .16 levels of diffculty based on.Hierarchy of DifficultyHierarchy of DifficultyClifford Prator(1

14、967) captured the essence of this grammatical hierarchy in six categories of difficulty.Prators hierarchy is applicable to both grammatical and phonological features of language. Clifford Prator (1967) Hierarchy of DifficultyHierarchy of DifficultyHierarchy of DifficultyHierarchy of DifficultyHierar

15、chy of DifficultyHierarchy of DifficultyHierarchy of DifficultyHierarchy of DifficultyHierarchy of DifficultyHierarchy of DifficultyHierarchy of DifficultyHierarchy of DifficultyHierarchy of DifficultyHierarchy of DifficultyConclusionConclusionPrators reinterpretation, and Stockwell and his associates original