Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)

Background
Until the 1960s, the field of first language acquisition was dominated by behaviorist ideas.
These emphasized learning through habit-formation, which was brought about by imitation,
reinforcement and repetition of behavior.

The field of second language learning was dominated by the same ideas. However, in SLA,
there is an additional complicating factor, the second language learner already possesses a
set of habits: his native language. Some of these earlier habits will help the new learning
task. Others will hinder it.

Contrastive analysis hypothesis

The contrastive analysis hypothesis is based on behaviorism which views language learning
as a process of habit formation. The L1 system is a set of old habits, and the L2 system is a
set of new habits. There will be a transfer of habits acquired in L1 to the target L2. If L1
habits are similar to L2 habits, learning will be easy without any difficulty as a result of
positive transfer. However, when L1 habits and L2 habits are different, this will create
problems as a result of negative transfer.
Positive transfer facilitates learning while negative transfer is responsible for errors, which
may turn into bad habits.

For example, the contrastive analysis of syntactic structure in English and French
shows that both languages have a S-V-O word order:
The dog eats the meat.
Le chien mange la viande.
This similarity, according to CAH, is supposed to facilitate learning as a result of positive
transfer.

If the noun is replaced by a pronoun, word order does not change in English. However, in
French the direct object pronoun precedes the verb:
The dog eats it.
Le chien la mange.
The difference, according to CAH, is supposed to cause learning difficulties as a result of
negative transfer, which will lead to errors.

Errors are considered sins because they turn into bad habits unless they are corrected. So
the main focus in teaching was to ensure that learners performed without committing
errors. And when errors occur, they must be corrected, and then the correction is
established as a new habit through repetition and reinforcement.

Mother tongue interference (MTI) refers to the concept that learning a second language is
influenced by the habits of the learner's first language. The old habits of L1 will interfere
directly in the learning of L2. Similar habits will be learned easily while different habits will
create problems and result in committing errors.

Transfer is the influence of the first language on the learning of a second language. Transfer
may be positive or negative.

1 Muhammad Saedy 0946762744 – 0982555965

Positive transfer occurs when L1 and L2 structures are similar, and it facilitates language
learning.
Negative transfer or interference occurs when the learner erroneously applies structures
from the first language in the second language causing learning difficulties.

Conducting a CA
Teaching materials / Instruction / Pedagogy
Acoording to CAH, second language learning focuses on the differences between the first
and second language systems. Robert Lado states that those elements that are similar to
the learner's native language will be simple for him, and those elements that are different will
be difficult. Charles Fries considers that the most efficient teaching materials are those that
are based upon a comparison between the native language of the learner and the target
language.

This has strong implications for second language instruction. By performing a

comparison of L1 and L2 structures, it is possible to find out the similarities and the
differences. The structures that are similar will be easy to learn, so they can be ignored, and
the focus of teaching materials should be on the differences because the structures that are
different will cause learning difficulties as a result of negative transfer. Comparison of L1 and
L2 gives the ability to predict the language items that will cause difficulty and the errors that
the learner will be prone to make. By predicting possible errors, teaching materials are
designed to minimize the occurrence of errors. For example, most Arab learners commit an
error in the pronunciation of /p/ as /b/ because this is an area of difference between English
and Arabic. After predicting possible errors, it is possible to use intensive techniques, such
as repetition or drills, in order to overcome the interference and establish the necessary new
habits.

TITLE? transfer+ease/difficulty
Lado, in his early and influential book Linguistics Across Cultures (1957), stated:
“individuals tend to transfer the forms and meanings, and the
distribution of forms and meanings of their native language and
culture to the foreign language and culture—both productively
when attempting to speak the language and to act in the culture,
and receptively when attempting to grasp and understand the
language and the culture as practiced by natives.”
In the words of Lado (1957, p. 2):
The student who comes in contact with a foreign language will find features of it quite easy
and others extremely difficult. Those elements that are similar to his native language will be
simple for him, and those elements that are different will be difficult.
According to Lado, when learners attempt to learn a second language, they tend to transfer
the forms and meanings of their L1 into the L2 both productively when they speak and
receptively when they understand. In the comparison between L1 and L2 habits, lies the key
to ease and difficulty.

language transfer is an error which occurs when elements of the L1 are incorrectly
imposed onto the L2 (Wray and Bloomer 2012, 54)
Language transfer (also known as L1 interference, linguistic interference, and cross
meaning) refers to speakers or writers applying knowledge from their native language to a
second language. Dulay et al (1982) define interference as the automatic transfer, due

2 Muhammad Saedy 0946762744 – 0982555965

to habit, of the surface structure of the first language onto the surface of the target
language. Lott (1983: 256) defines interference as ‘errors in the learner’s use of the foreign
language that can be traced back to the mother tongue’. Ellis (1997: 51) refers to
interference as ‘transfer’, which he says is ‘the influence that the learner’s L1 exerts over the
acquisition of an L2’. He argues that transfer is governed by learners’ perceptions about what
is transferable and by their stage of development in L2 learning. In learning a target
language, learners construct their own interim rules (Selinker, 1971, Seligar, 1988 and Ellis,
1997) with the use of their L1 knowledge, but only when they believe it will help them in the
learning task or when they have become sufficiently proficient in the L2 for transfer to be
possible.

For example, Arabic speakers may impose equational sentences (not using a linking verb)
on English producing errors like: *Life nice.

(Equational sentences are sentences which would have the verb “to be” conjugated in the
present tense if they were in English. For example, “I am Jim” would be “I Jim” in Arabic.)

The Strong Version of CAH

The strong version of contrastive analysis hypothesis focuses on the interference of L1 in L2
learning. It considers that the majority of L2 errors are due to negative transfer and claims
that it is possible to predict the errors of L2 learners before they occur.

The Weak Version of CAH

In its weak version, the CAH was toned down to the claim that it can account for L2
learners' errors after they were made. In this version, errors are studied after they have
been committed by second-language learners to find explanations for these errors.

Theoretical Assumptions of CAH

The CA hypothesis rests on the following assumptions about the process of language
learning:
1- Language learning is a process of habit formation. Habit formation relies on the
principles of association of stimulus and response to form a habit.
2- Old L1 habits hinder or facilitate the formation of a new L2 habit depending on the
differences or similarities between the old and the new habits. This derives from
interference theory which rested on the association of stimulus with response. Learning a
new response to the same stimulus would require "extinction" of the old association.
Otherwise, the old habit would prevail.

This means that unlearning is a necessary intermediate step. However, the notion of
unlearning is problematic, and that is why it has been revised. Rather than referring to
extinction, unlearning is referred to as suppression of the old habits of L1 that interfere in L2
learning.

3 Muhammad Saedy 0946762744 – 0982555965