INSTITUTO SUPERIOR

JOSEFINA CONTTE

PROFESORADO DE INGLS
UNIDADES CURRICULARES: Adquisicin de
Segundas Lenguas y Ciencias del Lenguaje
PROFESORAS: Prof. Mariana Sottile y Prof. Valeria
Roldn
CICLO LECTIVO 2016
TERCER AO
FECHA:
TRABAJO DE INVESTIGACIN FINAL
ALUMNA: Mara Sol Torres
DNI: 39190126

1
 INTRODUCTION

According to Ellis (1994), SLA (Second Language Acquisition) is the

systematic study of how people learn a language other than their
mother tongue, inside or outside the context of a classroom. The main
goal of SLA is to describe what learners do when learning an L2
(second language). Along with the last idea, SLA seeks to explain why
learners acquire the L2 the way they do in terms of internal and
external factors.
In order to achieve these aims, researchers collect samples of learner
language, that is to say, the learners oral and written productions in
the L2 and analyze them cautiously. Such samples provide information
about what learners know about the target language.
In general, SLA research has focused on formal features of language.
Most often, the emphasis is placed on exploring how the learners
ability to produce grammar structures of the L2 develops over time.
The purpose of this report is, in a broad form, to describe and explain
the process of acquisition of the question form of the past simple
tense in English. Precisely, this research examines the errors made by
a group of learners of English as a L2 with Spanish as their L1 when
producing questions in the past simple tense.
Upon reflecting on the processes carried out in the acquisition of this
grammatical structure, some questions were posed: is the acquisition
process of the question form of past simple the same in the L1 and in
the L2? What factors might have influenced the the subjects
acquisition of this grammatical structure?
In order to carry out this analysis of errors, first, a theoretical
framework will be presented, then the description of the methodology
used for explaining the errors identified will be described. Finally, the
analysis itself will be carried out.

2
3
 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The Creative Construction Hypothesis

The developing language of children has its own underlying system.
The process of learning a second language refers then, to the creative
construction of a system in which learners are consciously testing
hypotheses about the target language from a number of possible
sources of knowledge. In such way, the learners construct their own
legitimate system of language that gradually approximates to the
system used by native speakers of the language by a process of trial
and error and hypothesis testing. (Brown, 2007)

Interlanguage
Selinker (1972) defines interlanguage as the separateness of a second
language learners system that has a structurally intermediate status
between the native and target languages. It is a system based upon
the best attempt of learners to bring order and structure to the
linguistic data surrounding them.
Moreover, Selinker (1972) states that interlanguage may be seen as
an adaptive strategy which uses simplification, reduction,
overgeneralization, transfer, formulaic language, omissions, and the
like.
The learners of a second language go through developmental stages
on their way to each target language competence. In fact, Corder
(1975) describes interlanguage as a permeable, dynamic and
changing system. Additionaly, he believes that it can be used quite
effectively for communicative purposes.
Interlanguage is permeable because is open to the influence from
internal and external factors. What is more, it is dynamic as learners
constantly receive new input that makes them revise their hypotheses
about the target language.

4
Not to mention that interlanguage is transitional because learners
change the grammatical structures they use at different
developmental stages. That is to say that they use interim
grammatical structures on the way of reaching competence in the
target language. However, interlanguage may undergo fossilization:
the production of errors belonging to a previous stage of
development. (Ellis, 1994)
Development of interlanguage
Corder (1975) suggests that interlanguage takes place as a gradual
process and that there are some distinct stages along this continuum:
1. Random errors: the learner is vaguely aware there are some
systems.
2. Emergent stage: tat this stage. The learner has begun to
identify a system and internalize its rules. These rules may not
be right but they are the best for the learner. Furthermore,
backsliding constantly happens at this stage, that is to say that
the learners seem to have learned the rule but then they forget
it.
3. Systematic Stage: the learner has built a stronger system of
rules closer to the target language.
4. Stabilization stage: the learner makes very few errors.
Nonetheless, already at this stage, the learners language
problems may be fossilized, that is, they may be automatized in
learners production and it may be difficult to correct that.
Interlanguage theory is relevant in that it helps to realize that
learners errors are both an important part of learning and a valuable
resource for teachers of a second language. These errors display the
learners interlanguage development, what they are capable of
producing and what not.

5
Error
Corder (1973) manifests that errors are breaches of the code, that is,
deviations from what is considered to be the norm. Yet, errors contain
valuable information on the strategies that people use to acquire a
language and to communicate in that language (Richards, 1974). The
common sources of error are:
1. Interlingual Transfer (Interference errors) from the native
language called negative
interlingual transfer. They are
caused by the learners attempt to
use patterns of their L1 in English
sentences.
2. Intralingual Transfer:
generalization and/or simplification
within the target language when
the learner is more advanced in the
acquisition of the second language.
3. Context of Learning: the context in which the learning o the
second language takes place. Ex: a classroom. In a classroom

6
 context, the teacher or the textbook can lead the learner to
make wrong hypotheses about the language.
4. Communication Strategies: learners use strategies to getting
their messages across, but sometimes these techniques can be
sources of error themselves.
Nonetheless, Richards (1971) adds another source of error:
5. Developmental Errors: occur when the learner attempts to work
up hypotheses about the target language on the basis of limited
experience.
According to Lennon (1991) there exist four categories for description
of errors:
a. Identification of errors of addition, omission, substitution, and
ordering, following standard mathematical categories.
b. Within each category, levels of language are found: phonology
or orthography, lexicon, grammar, and discourse.
c. Errors may be global or local. Global errors impede
communication; they prevent the hearer from understanding
some part of the message. Local errors do not stop the message
from being heard allowing the hearer/reader to make an
approximate guess about the intended meaning. Errors are
classified into one of both categories according to some error
gravity criteria. The criteria are:
a. Intelligibility
b. Acceptability
c. Irritation
d. There are two related dimensions of error, domain and extent.
Domain is the rank of linguistic unit that must be taken as
context in order for the error to become apparent, and extent is
the rank of linguistic unit that would have to be deleted,
replaced, supplied, or reorder in order to repair the sentence.
(Lennon, 1991)

Types of error

7
1. Corder (1971) distinguishes between overt and covert errors:
a. Overt errors (sentence level): utterances that are
ungrammatical at the sentence level.
b. Covert errors (discourse level): They are grammatically well-
formed at the sentence level but not appropriate for the context
of communication. Ex: answering Im fine, thank you to Who
are you?

2. Intralingual errors
As for intralingual errors, Ellis (1997) affirms that they are produced
by intralingual transfer. Therefore, they are the result of (over)
generalization within the target language, usually when the learner is
more advanced in the acquisition of the second language. Moreover,
these kinds of errors may be due to the creative construction of a
system in which learners are consciously testing hypotheses about
the target language from a number of possible sources of knowledge.
Hence, intralingual errors result from the attempts of the learners to
discover the structure of the language being learned.
Richards (1971) points out different kinds of intralingual errors:
a. Overgeneralization errors: the learner creates a deviant
structure based on other structure in the target language. Ex:
She can plays.
b. (Over) simplification: when the learner takes confusing or
complex linguistic data and reduces them more manageable by
fitting them into a structure of categories and rules that he or
she already knows. Ex: omission of inflections and other
morphemes and redundancy reductions.
c. Ignorance of rule restrictions: application of rules to contexts
where they do not apply. Ex: She made me to rest.
d. Incomplete application of rules: involves failure to wholly
develop a structure. Ex: You like to cook?

8
 e. False concepts hypothesized: the learner fails to fully understand
a distinction in the target language. Ex: One day it was
happened.

Interlingual errors
Ellis (1997) expresses that these errors occur due to interlingual or L1
transfer from the learners native language. In other words, L1
transfer refers to the influence that the learners L1 exerts over the
acquisition of an L2. There are two types of L1 transfer to the learners
acquisition process of an L2: negative transfer and positive transfer.
The former is one of the sources of error in learner language whereas
the latter can facilitate the acquisition of the L2.
Lott (1983) classifies interlingual errors into:
a. Overextension of analysis errors: the learner missuses an item
because it shares characteristics with an item in the L1. Ex:
Italian learners use *process to mean trial.
b. Transfer of structure: the learner employs some L1 feature
(phonological, lexical, grammatical, or pragmatic) rather than
that of the target language.
c. Interlingual/intralingual errors: a particular difference does not
exist in the L1. Ex: the use of *make instead of do by Spanish
learners because make/do distinction is non-existent in
Spanish.

Error Analysis (EA)

The fact that learners do make errors, and these errors can be
analyzed, led to a surge of study of learners errors termed Error
Analysis by Corder in the 1960s. It aimed to analyze the different
kinds of errors in order to understand second language learning and
acquisition. Particularly, this field has two aims, one theoretical and
another applied. The theoretical aim studies what and how a learner

9
learns a second language, and the applied target helps the learner to
learn more efficiently by taking advantage of the knowledge of his
dialect for pedagogical purposes.
In the 1970s, Error Analysis supplanted Contrastive Analysis, which
sought to foresee and describe the errors that learners make by
identifying the linguistic similarities and differences between the L1
and the target language. (Ellis, 1997)

Similarly, Corder
(1973:277) classifies errors into four categories:
1. Omission: the learner omits certain linguistic forms because they
are complex to produce. Moreover, this singularity is not
restricted to foreign language learners but is perceived even with
native speakers. Even so, native speakers tendency is to follow
existing conventions whereas foreign language learners do not.
Omission occurs in many areas of the language:
a. Pronunciation: consonant clusters often create problems for
foreign learners and some of its constituents may be omitted.
b. Morphology: learners often leave out the third person singular
morpheme s, the plural marker s and the past tense
inflection ed.
c. Syntax: learners may omit certain elements which are
obligatory, e.g. *You go? instead of Did you go?
2. Addition: learners may add redundant elements to what they say
or write. Addition occurs in:

10
 a. Phonology: through what is termed epenthesis, the insertion of
an additional vowel.
b. Morphology: learners often overuse the third person singular
morpheme s and the plural marker s. Ex: *You plays instead
of You play.
c. Syntax: learners may produce the wrong combination. Ex:
using the article with a place name: *The Paris instead of
Paris.
d. Lexis: learners may add an unnecessary word. Ex: *I stayed
there during five years ago instead of I stayed there for five
years
3. Selection: learners make errors in pronunciation, morphology,
syntax, and vocabulary because of the selection of the wrong
phoneme, morpheme, structure or vocabulary item.
a. Phonology: may be characterized by interlingual transfer. The
learner substituting a familiar phoneme from the mother
tongue for a target phoneme that is difficult to pronounce.
b. Morphology: selection of the wrong morpheme. Ex: the learner
can use est instead of er for the comparative, producing a
sentence like *My friend is oldest than me.
c. Syntax: the learner may select the wrong structure. Ex: *I want
that he comes here instead of I want him to come here. This
error may be induced by interlingual transfer or generalization.
d. Lexis: learners sometimes select words which do not fully
convey their intended meaning. Ex: a tulip may simply be
referred to as a flower. This type of error is prompted by the
strategy of approximation or semantic contiguity.
4. Misordering of certain elements occurs in:
a. Pronunciation: by altering the position of certain phonemes.
Ex: a speaker may say *fignisicant instead of significant.
b. Morphological: misordering of bound morphemes (not
frequent). Ex: *Hes get upping now, the learner attaches the
inflection ing to the particle of the two-word verb get up.
c. Syntax: misordering of words in a sentence. Ex: *Hes a dear to
me friend, where constituents of a single noun phrase are split.

11
 d. Lexis: the learner may swap elements of a compound word. Ex:
Car key may become key car, which carries a different lexical
meaning.
In addition, errors can be classified as productive and receptive:
e. Productive errors: occur in the language learners utterances.
f. Receptive errors: result in the listener /readers
misinterpretation of the speaker/writers intentions.

Sequence of Acquisition
According to Ellis (1994) learners acquire grammatical structures
progressively through a series of stages in order to attain the native-
speaker norms. Therefore, this process of acquisition involves
transitional constructions, that is, interim grammatical structures
learners manifest at different stages of their development.
Such sequences are instructive because they manifest that the use of
a correct structural form does not inevitably mean that this form has
been acquired.
In fact, acquisition follows a U-shaped course of development, that is,
initially learners may show a high level of accuracy only to then
suddenly backsliding before finally once again performing according
to native-speaker norms.
This phenomenon occurs because learners reconstruct their existing
knowledge to accommodate new information. In fact, learners are not
regressing but advancing.

Developmental sequences
As reported by Lightbown and Spada (1993) in both first and second
language acquisition, there are a series of stages for the development
of grammatical structures. These developmental sequences are
similar throughout learners from different contexts.

12
Grammatical morphemes
The list below shows the approximate order of acquisition of
grammatical morphemes of children learning English as their mother
tongue. Research has found that natural second language learners
acquire grammatical morphemes in much the same way that first
language learners do.
1. Present progressive ing
2. Plural s
3. Irregular past forms
4. Possessive s
5. Copula
6. Articles the and a
7. Regular past ed
8. Third person singular simple present
9. Auxiliary be

Question formation stages

Second language learners learn to form questions in a sequence of
development that is close in most aspects to first language question
development. (Lightbown and Spada, 1993).
Stage 1: single words or simple two-or three-word sentences with
rising intonation. Ex: *Cookie? *Mommy book?
Stage 2: questions without changing the internal structure of the
sentence. Ex: *You like this? *Why you catch it?
Stage 3: they notice that the structure of forming a question is
different but they may generalize this rule. Ex: *Is the teddy is
tired?
Stage 4: children begin to master the use of inversion with Wh-
questions and Yes/no questions. Ex: Do you like ice cream?
Stage 5: children combine both operations. Ex: *Why can he go
out?
Stage 6: when wh-words appear in subordinate clauses or
embedded questions, children overgeneralize the inverted form.
Ex: *I dont know why cant he go out.

13
Questions in English

Questions- fronting the tensed auxiliary

The rule for forming the question is: The tensed auxiliary verb moves
in front of the subject.

The question is: what structural position does the tensed auxiliary
move to?

There are two new nodes here (in bold). First, there is an S node. This
is called S-bar. Then there is a C node. C stands for
Complementiser. The complementiser position is: sister of S and
daughter of S-bar (S). So, the structural position that a fronted
auxiliary moves to is the complementiser position.

14
 METHODOLOGY
The subjects
The subjects of the present study were a group of 18 people
belonging to the regular course of English 21era at Instituto
Superior Josefina Contte whose L1 was Spanish. The data was
collected over a period of six classes of 80 minutes each. The
learners were in between 13 to 14 years old. Of the 18 learners, seven
were boys and 11 were girls. Their level of proficiency was
elementary. Additionally, the learning context was that of formal
instruction at a private language school.

15
The procedure for EA
Ellis (1997) divides the Error Analysis methodology into five steps:
1) Identifying errors
The first step in analyzing learner errors is to identify them. To do this
so, the sentences that the learners produce have to be compared with
the grammatical sentences in the target that match with them.
Nevertheless, learners sometimes build sentences that are possible
target-language sentences but not ideal ones.

2) Describing errors
Once the errors have been identified, they can be described and
categorized into types. This can be done in many ways:
Classify errors into grammatical categories.
Identify general ways in which the learners expressions vary
from the rebuilt target-language utterances. Such ways include
omission, misinformation and misordering.
Classifying errors in such ways helps to, in the first place, diagnose
learners learning problems at any stage of their development these
ways can help us to diagnose learners learning problems at any one
stage of their development and, in second place, to calculate how
changes in error patterns occur over time.

3) Explaining errors
Errors are, largely, systematic and, most of the times, predictable.
Errors are not only systematic; many of them are also common. Yet,
some errors are common only to learners who share the same L1 or
whose mother tongues display the same linguistic features. Therefore,
errors can have different causes1.

4) Error evaluation
1 Such sources of error have already been described on the Error section (p.

16
Errors need to be evaluated because some of them -global errors-
may interfere with the intelligibility of what someone says or writes.
Teachers will want to put emphasis on these. Conversely, local errors
are less likely to cause comprehension issues.

17
ANALYSIS

18
CONCLUSION

19
 LIST OF REFERENCES

Brown, H.D. (2007): Cross-Linguistic influence and learner

language in Principles of Language Learning and Teaching, 4th ed.
New York: Longman Pearson.
Corder, S. P. (1975): Error analysis, interlanguage, and second
language acquisition in Language Teaching and Linguistic. Abstract,
8: 201-18.
Ellis, R. (1994): The Study of Second Language Acquisition. OUP.
Ellis, R. (1997): Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Lightbown and Spada (1993): How Languages are Learned.
Chapter 4. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lott, D. (1983): Analysing and counteracting interference
errors,ELT Journal, vol. 37/3, p. 256-261.
Richards, J. C. (ed.) (1974): Error analysis: Perspectives on second
language acquisition. Essex, England: Longman.

Richards, J.C. (1971): A Non- Contrastive Approach to Error Analysis.

Journal of ELT. 25, 204-219.
Selinker, L. (1972): Interlanguage in International Review of
Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. X: 209- 231.

20