Behaviorism (1930-1950’s)

 

B. F. Skinner. (1957) Verbal Behavior.

 

·      Knowledge is based on experience

 

·      Learning is the establishment of stimulus-response connection

 

·      The study of learning should be restricted to observable inputs and outputs

 

 

Contrastive Analysis as Behaviorist

       Robert Lado (1957) Linguistics Across Cultures.

 

·      Positive and Negative transfer of learned L1 habits

 

·      Learning easy when habits of L1 like L2

 

·       Learning hard when habits of L1 not like L2

Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis

 

Where two language are similar, positive transfer will occur; where they are different, negative transfer or interference will result: a priori predictions.

 

Type of Difficulty

L1: English     L2: Spanish

Example

 

1. Split

x

x

y

por

  for

para

 

2. New

 

Ř - - - - - - -  x

 

Marking grammatical gender

 

3. Absent

 

x - - - - - - -  Ř

 

Do as a tense carrier

 

 

4. Coalesced

x

x

y

 

his/her is realized as a single form su

 

5. Correspondence

 

x - - - - - - -  x

 

-ing = -ndo used as a complement with verbs of perception

(hear talking, oir hablando)

 

Several empirical studies in the late 60’s and 70’s did not support the predictions made by contrastive analysis.

 

 

Behaviorism and Teaching Methodologies

 

·      “Audiolingual Method”

 

o    Memorize and repeat whole sentences designed to highlight where L1 and L2 differed

o    The goal: Learn new habits

 

·      Reinforcement Methods

 

o    Students rewarded for correct productions to develop stimulus-response connections

o    Much like L1 acquisition theory of reinforcement

 

Error Analysis: 1960-1970’s

 

·      Weak form of contrastive analysis used to explain a subset of errors a posteriori

 

Error:  a systematic deviation made by learners who have not yet mastered the rules of the L2. 

 

*A learner cannot self-correct an error because it is a product reflective of their current stage of L2 development.*

 

Mistake: a random performance slip caused by fatigue, excitement, etc.

 

*Learners can readily self-correct mistakes.*

 

Interlingual errors: errors traced to L1 interference

 

Intralingual errors: similar errors found in all L2 learners regardless of their L1

 

·      Some intralingual errors explained by “rule formation”

o    Exposure to L2 => hypothesis formation about the nature of L2 grammatical rules

o    Test hypothesis in production of L2

o    Rules refined based on mismatch between their production form and continuing input

 

 

Types of Errors

 

 

Interlingual

 

Interference

Is the book of my friend.

 

 

Intralingual

 

Overgeneralization

 

I wonder where are you going.

Simplification

(redundancy reduction)

 

I studied English for two year.

Communication Based

Using “airball” for balloon (coinage)

 

Induced errors

(teacher’s presentation) of material, as if = like)

She cries as if the baby cries.

FOR

She cries like a baby.

 

 

Error Analysis Critiqued

 

·      By focusing only on errors, researchers were denied access to the whole picture of SLA.

 

·      It was often difficult to determine a unitary source of an error. (see examples in Ellis)

 

·      L2 learners avoid certain constructions that the feel are difficult, or where they are likely to make errors. 

 

Schachter (1974)

 

Japanese and Chinese learners of English made fewer errors with relative clauses than Arabic and Farsi learners of English, but they produced fewer.

 

Dušková (1983)

 

Czech learners of English (Czech has no articles)

 

·      I should like to learn foreign language.

·      It was very interesting journey.

·      …working on the similar problem as I.

 

In cases w/o article, what is the cause of the error?

 

Mentalist Theory

 

        Noam Chomsky (1957) Syntactic Structures.

 

·      Linguistics should be concerned about deeper, abstract, universal properties of language

 

Compare to behaviorist concern with observed input-output, and observable differences between languages

 

 

·      Goal of linguistics: discover the underlying grammar that generates an infinite set of grammatical sentences

 

o    How do we know meaningless sentences are grammatical?

 

 Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

*Colorless sleep ideas green furiously.

 

o    How can we disambiguate two meanings?

 

Behaviorist investigation only concerned with actual output.  Need to look “deeper” into the structure

 

Visiting relatives can be boring.

 

“Relatives who visit can be boring.”

“To visit relatives can be boring.”

 

o    Surface and abstract/underlying structures posited

 

 Who do you want to see?

 Who do you wanna see?

 Who do you want to feed the dog?

*Who do you wanna feed the dog?

 

You want to see who?

You want who to feed the dog?

 

Whoi do you want to see ti?

Whoi do you want ti to feed the dog?

 

 

 

·      Domain of linguistic investigation:

Linguistic competence.

 

o    Investigated by self introspection of native speaker

 

o    Any evidence from performance was irrelevant.

 

o    Language considered an innate part of the brain

 

o     Notion of the “black box”, a place in the brain that controls language, but we have no direct access to it.

Mentalist Theories Influenced Ideas about

L1 and L2 Acquisition

 

·      Language Acquisition Device (LAD)

 

o     Innate mental organ

o     Used in L1 and L2 acquisition

o     Evolved to search for patterns in the input and formulate “rules” of grammar

 

·      Lead to the “Active Construction of a Grammar” theory in L1 acquisition

 

o     Children were searching out patterns

o     Lead to the construction of an underlying grammar

 

·      Lead to the idea of an “interlanguage” in L2 acquisition

 

o     Learners of L2 followed fairly consistent sequence of acquisition

o     Commonalities due to factors beyond L1 characteristics

o      L2 learners using LAD to form new underlying grammars