Stages of learner language development There are many different ways to describe the progression of learners’ linguist development.It is useful to think in terms of four stages based on observations of learners’ errors. By: Huda Al-Malki
1) random errors; IT iS CALLED “PRESYSTEMATIC”,THE LEARNER IS vaguely AWARE THAT THERE IS SOME SYSTEMATIC ORDER TO a PARTICULAR CLASS OF ITEMS.Inconsistencies such as :JOHN CANS SINGJOHN CAN TO SING. JOHN CAN SINGINGSAID BY THE SAME LEARNER WITHIN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME indicate a stage of experimentation AND INACCURATE GUESSING.
2) EMERGENT STAGE OF LARNER LANGUAGE.THE LEARNER BEGINs TO DISCERN A SYSTEM AND INTERNALIZE CERTAIN RULES which may not BE CORRECT BY TARGET LANGUAGE STANDERS. THIS IS CHARACTERIZED BY SOME BACKSLIDINGIN GENERAL THE LEARNER IS UNABLE TO CORRECT ERRORS WHEN THEY ARE POINTED out BY SOMEONE ELSE.
e.g.:THIS IS CONVERSATION BETWEEN LEARNER (L)ANDNATIVE SPEAKER (NS) THER IS NOT ANY ERROR IN THEIR SPEECH L;I GO NEW YORK NS;YOU’RE GOING TO NEW YORK ?L;(DOESN’T UNDERSTAND)WHAT?NS;YOU WILL GO TO NEW YORK?L;YESNS;WHEN?L;1972NS;OH !YOU WENT TO NEW YORK IN 1972 L;YES I GO 1972
3- The Systematic Stage • In this stage the learner manifest more consistency in producing the second language. The learner’s internalized rules closely approximate the target language system. The salient difference between the second and third stage is the ability of learners to correct their errors when they are pointed out.
4-Stabilization stage By: Amal Al-Quthami • A final stage in the development of learner language systems is called “a post systematic” stage. Here the learner has relatively few errors and has mastered the system to the point that fluency and intended meanings are not problematic. This fourth stage is characterized by the learner's ability to self correct. The system is complete enough that attention can be paid to those few errors that occur and corrections be made without waiting for feedback from someone else.
A great deal of attention has been given to the variability of interlanguage development. Just as native speakers of a language vacillate between expression like '' it has to be you'‘ and “it must be you”, learners also exhibit variation, sometimes within the parameters of acceptable norms, sometimes not.
Some variability in learner language can be explained by what Gatbonton described as the ‘’ gradual difficult’’ of incorrect forms of language in emergent and systematic stages of development. First, incorrect forms coexist with correct, then the incorrect are expunged. Context has also been identified as a source of variation. In classrooms, the type of task can affect variation. And variability can be affected, in both tutored and untutored learning, by the exposure that a learner gets to norms.
Tarone suggested four categories of variation 1 – Variation according to linguistic context. 2 - Variation according to psychological processing factors. 3 - Variation according to social context. 4- Variation according to language function.
One of the most fruitful areas of learner language research has focused on the variation that arises from all disparity between classroom context and natural situation outside language classes. As researchers have examined instructed second language acquisition. It has become apparent not only that instruction makes a difference in learners success rates but also that the classroom context itself explains a great deal of variability in learners output.
It is common to encounter in a learner’s language various erroneous features that persist despite what is otherwise a reasonably fluent command of the language. This phenomenon is most saliently manifested phonologically in “foreign accents”in the speech of many of those who have learned a second language after puberty.
The relatively permanent incorporation of incorrect linguistic forms into a person’s second language competence has been referred to as fossilization Fossilization is a normal and natural stage for many learners, and should not be viewed as some sort of terminal illness.
Vigil and Oller (1976) provided a formal account of fossilization as a factor of positive and negative affective and cognitive feedback . The feedback learners get from their audience can be either positive ,neutral ,somewhere in between, or negative. The two types and levels of feedback are charted below: Affective feedback: Positive: keep talking: I'm listening. Neutral: I'm not sure I want to maintain this conversation. Negative: this conversation is over. Cognitive feedback: Positive: I understand your message : its clear. Neutral: I'm not sure if I correctly understand you or not. Negative: I don’t understand what you are saying: its not clear.
What is the first requirements for meaningful communication?? It is an affective affirmation by the other person.
Positive feedback in the cognitive dimension will potentially result in reinforcement of the forms used and a conclusion on the part of learners that their speech is well-formed . Fossilized items, according to this model , are those deviant items in the speech of a learner that first gain Positive affective feedback(keep talking) then Positive cognitive feedback (I understand) reinforcing an incorrect from of language.
Done by: Maryam Al-harthi
Error Treatment Jamila Zawger Jamila Al Shareef
Error Treatment • One of the major issues involved in carrying out FFI is the manner in which teacher deal with student error.
Should errors be treated? • How should they be treated? • When? • For a tentative answer to these question as they apply to spoken errors. • Let us first look again at the feedback model offered by Vigil and Oller. Metaphorically depicts what happens in that model.
a green light: allow the sender to continue attempting to get a message a cross. • a red light: cause the sender to abort • such attempts. • The traffic signal of cognitive feedback is the point at which error correction enters.
the green light: symbolizes noncorrective feedback that says ‘ I understand your message’ • the red light: symbolizes corrective feedback that takes on a myriad of possible forms and causes the learner to make some kind of alteration in production. • yellow light could represent those various shades of color that are interpreted by the learner as falling somewhere in between complete green and red light.
The most useful implication of Vigil and Oller model is cognitive feedback must be optimal in order to be effective.
Abort recycle (-) x continue (0) continue message (+) Effective feedback Cognitive Feedback
In every practical article on error treatment Hendrickson(1980) advised teachers to try discern the difference between • 1 –global 2 –local • the local error is clearly and humorously, recognized . Hendrickson recommended that local error usually need not be corrected since the message is clear and correctionmight interrupt a learner in the flow of productive communication
global error need to be treatmed in some way since the message may otherwise remain garbled (the different city is another one in the another two ) is a sentence that would certainly need treatment because it is incomprehensible as it is . Many utterances are not clearly global or local , and it is difficult to discern the necessity for corrective feedback .
Basic options • 1-to treat or ignore • 2-to treat immediately or to delay • 3-to transfer treatment [ to, say ,other learners or not ] • 4-to transfer to another individual, a subgroup or the whole class • 5-to return or not to original error maker after treatment • 6-to permit other learners to initiate treatment • 7-to test for the efficacy of the treatment
Possible features • 1-fact of error indicated • 2-location indicated • 3-opportunity for new attempt given • 4-model provided • 5-error type indicated • 6-remedy indicated • 7-improvement indicated • 8-praise indicated