The Nature and Role of Errors in Second

Language Learning Dr. Salwa Fathi Ben-Amer Faculty of Arts, English Department University of Garyounis

The Nature and Role of Errors in Second Language Learning

Salwa Ben-Amer University of Garyounis

Abstract
It is inevitable that learners make mistakes or errors in the process of foreign language learning. Common mistakes are a necessary element of all learning due to the phrase that says learn from your mistakes". We all know that the only way to avoid language mistakes would be to avoid speaking and writing in a foreign language and that would be bad. Researchers and teachers of foreign languages realize that mistakes are needed to be analyzed carefully as an important step in understanding some of the keys of second language acquisition. The aim of this paper is to point out the significant of learners errors for the teachers, researchers and learners themselves. Errors show the process of constructing a new system of language. They are also an indication of the students progress. and clarify what strategies they apply to learn from their errors which they discover by themselves. In this regard, the learner should find the correct linguistic form by searching for it.

1. Introduction
Error analysis in second language acquisition (SLA) was established by Corder (1967). He is the father of Error Analysis .This field influenced by behaviorism which suggested that learning acquires a set of habits and errors considered as being a result of the persistence of existing mother tongue habits in the new language. So researchers sought to use the distinctions between the learners first and second languages to predict errors. It is the contrastive analysis which predicts that a majority of errors are produced by making faulty inferences between native language and the target language or about the rules of the target language. This paper concerns the error analysis which has become a field of linguistics and helps teachers to find out the sources of errors and take pedagogical precautions towards them. Error analysts distinguish between errors according to basic type or level of language or degree to which they interfere with communication. They deal effectively with learner production (speaking and writing) and not with learner reception (listening and reading).

The focus will also be on the pedagogical interpretation of errors according to many scholars in the field of linguistics and error analysis. Also it presents classification of errors according to the views many scholars in this field and shows the origins of the learners errors: are they due to the first language interference or to faulty inferences about the rules of the target language? At the end of this study, there are answers to many questions about the correction of the errors and what kind of feedback should teachers give to their students.

2 Interpretation of Errors
What is an error? Pedagogically, an error is viewed as unwanted form which the course designer or the teacher does not want. George (1972). He argues that the course designers choice is made according to the performance he wants without taking into consideration the learners mental process and his previous knowledge of language which represents the gap between the input and the output where the information is stored. Corder (1973:259) states that errors take place "as a result in unacceptable utterances and appear as breaches of the code". Selinker (2007: 150) said errors are indispensable to learners since the making of errors can be regarded as a device the learner uses in order to learn. Gass and Selinker (2001) identify errors as systematic which like to occur repeatedly and not recognized by the learner just the researcher could locate them. Error, claims Olsson (1974) constitute of learning.

2.1 Classification of Errors

Error analysts often seek to develop typology of errors which can be categorized in terms of various criteria. Such as interlingual errors due to L1 (mother tongue) interference, and intralingual errors which are committed regardless of L1. (D. Larsen et al 1991). Both Corder (1967) and James (1998) make a distinction between a mistake and an error. A mistake as unsystematic error can be selfcorrected, but an error cannot. Corder (Ibid.) argues that it is useful to refer to errors to perform as mistakes and they have no significance to the language learning process. Gass and Selinker (2007) mention that systematic errors occur repeatedly and not recognized by the learner but by the teacher. This kind of errors made by second language learners came as a result of the lack of target language (L2) knowledge. Non-systematic errors

occur in the normal adult speech in their native language due to memory lapses or physical states. These types of errors do not reflect a defect in the native speakers knowledge of their own language. So, error analysis is concerned only with systematic errors to provide an evidence of how language is learnt. Richards (1971:12-22) classifies English errors produced by speakers of several language backgrounds into four types: a. over-generalization; b. ignorance of rule restriction; c. incomplete application of rules; d false concept hypothesized

a. Over-generalization
The learner produces deviant structures on the basis of his experience of other structures in the language because of the influence of two factors: the first one is the redundancy reduction. It means the learner reduce his linguistic burden, for instance, He come to England. It is the omission of the third person (comes). The second factor is the interference of the utterances with each other when applying certain types of teaching techniques including: pattern drills and transformation exercises. For example, to change He walks quickly to the continuous He is walking quickly is likely to produce He is walks quickly.

b. Ignorance of Rule Restriction

It is the application of rules to contexts where they do not apply, for example: The man who I saw him It is not clear why these types of errors cannot be classified directly as overgeneralization. It could be, because they involve the process of ignoring the rule restrictions.

c. Incomplete Application of Rules

Under this types of error, the occurrence of structures are to be noted whose deviancy represents the degree of development of the rules required to produce acceptable utterances. An example of this is the difficulty of using inversion when the learners form questions for instance, Why this man is cold? Richards (1971:22) attributes this to redundancy which is the same category; overgeneralization.

d. False Concept Hypothesized

It is the developmental errors which derive from faulty comprehension of the target language. For example, learners may produce He was went or He is speaks. Richards (1971:22) traces these errors to the teaching received that based on contrastive analysis of English and another language or on contrasts within English itself. Another classification of errors was proposed by Larry Selinker who proposed the theory of interlanguage. He notes that the utterances produced by the learner are different from that native speaker. They attempt to convey the same meaning. This comparison reveals a separate linguistic system which can be observed when studying the utterance of the learner who trying to produce meaning in the target language. (Selinker, L., & Douglas, D. (1985) p. 190- 204). Selinker proposed anther another classification of errors (1972:209-241) He classified five types of errors: a) language transfer; b) transfer of training; c) strategies of second language learning; d) strategies of second language communication redundancy in communication; e) overgeneralization of the target language patterns . a) Language transfer It plays a role whose influence on SLA but not all researchers in this field are agreed upon. They are errors which can be traceable to the learners mother tongue especially in pronunciation. The frequent inability of Arab learners to distinguish between /b/ and /p/ sound is an example of this type of error. b) Transfer of Training Refers to the grammatical knowledge acquired by the learner through the medium of instruction. They are errors which are traceable to the methodology of teaching and they are the items resulting from particular approaches used in training. c) Strategies of Second Language Learning It is suggested that there is a tendency on the part of learners to reduce the target language to a simple system For example, learners, Who learn transitive and intransitive verbs, tend to produce interlanguge forms such as I am feeling thirsty I am hearing him (Selinker 1972) According to Selinker (2007), learners strategies are culture bound to some extent .As an example chanting is used as a learning device in many traditional cultures. These strategies are presented in the

conscious and subconscious level. So when the learner realizes that he has some difficulties in the linguistic competence, he uses some strategies to get through the situation. d) Strategies of Second Language Communication Redundancy in Communication These strategies which are used by the learners dictate them internally as they were the knowledge of the target language in order to communicate. An example of this is the learners utterances which lack [S] in he come or [ed] in yesterday he play football These are errors which traceable to redundancy in communication. Selinker (1972) mentioned that if communication is successful then transfer will happen. Here the danger is that successful communication does not depend entirely on formal correction that means it could lead to fossilization where the learner uncorrected but still able to successfully get his message understood , has no socio-functional need to change his language so it fossilizes in that state . e) Overgeneralization The learner may over-generalize the use of [ed] in irregular verbs. For example, standed instead of stood. Another example is where learners over generalize the use of drive to all vehicles; drive a bicycle instead of ride a bicycle. One of the criticisms to this classification is that the difference between communication strategies is not clear. They both represent simplification of the target language by the learners to reduce the linguistic burden. It is also possible to categorize learner's errors on the basis of the linguistic levels. Lee (1990:59), for instance, elaborates on the following classification of learner errors: a) Grammatical errors which stress the need for grammatical accuracy in speech and writing these types may hinder communication. But errors at the sentence level reflect performance" It means "immediate teacher correction is not necessarily appropriate b) Discourse errors: which depend on the observance of the rules of speaking and writing. These kinds of errors reflect learners cultural knowledge of language use.

c) Phonologically-induced errors: they manifested in wrong pronunciation. These errors should be corrected immediately by the teacher, because they may have a meaning-differentiating function, as in live/leave, leave/leaf, exit (noun)/exit (verb). d) Lexical errors: they are manifested in speaking and writing. They may obstruct communication. For instance, the transfer of function words such as preposition, conjunction and pronouns. These errors are due to lexical interference most often happens unintentionally. For example: He works in the field Instead of He works on the field. Also, instead of saying, John, Mary and Robert They say John and Mary and Robert.

3. Errors and Mother TongueInterference

Johanson (1975) states that to use two languages familiarly and without contaminating one by the other, is very difficult. Various researchers have concentrated on errors which demonstrate the influence of ones native language to second language acquisition. It is a traditional version of the contrastive analysis hypothesis which predicts that elements of a foreign language that are similar to the students native language will be simple, and those elements that are different will be difficult, and where differences exist, errors would be bidirectional. For example, French speakers learning English and English speakers learning French would make errors on parallel linguistic features. (Lightbown and Spada 1999:73). Hagege (1999:81) argues that the teacher should know that a child who is in the process of acquiring a second language will subconsciously invent structures influenced by knowledge, he already possesses and this may constitute errors which are completely natural.

The influence of L1 on L2 was also examined by Lakkis and Malak (2000) who concentrate on the transfer of Arabic prepositional knowledge to English (by Arab students). They examined both positive and negative transfer in order to help teachers identify problematic areas for Arab students and help them to know where transfer should be encouraged or avoided. They concluded that an instructor of English, whose native language is Arabic, can use the students L1 for structures that use equivalent prepositions in both languages. On the other hand, wherever there are verbs or expressions in the L1 and L2 that have different structures, that take prepositions, or that have no equivalent in one of the languages, instructors should point of these differences to their students (Ibid. 20). Arab learners have a tendency towards the overuse of prepositions in English similar to that in Arabic. For instance, they say I go to home Rather than I go home Also Hagege (1999:33) discusses the influence of L1 on accent, he notes that the ear acts like filter, and after 11 years critical age, the ear only accepts sounds that belong to ones native language thus, learners of a foreign language will only use the sounds existing in their native language when producing L2 sounds, which may often obstruct communication. This can be seen clearly when they replace the English sounds that do not exist in Arabic such as /v/ and /p/ with their nearest Arabic sounds. For example, they say: /feri/ instead of /veri/ (very) and /bensl/ instead of /pensl/ (pencil). Examples of Negative L1 transfer Errors: Grammatical errors in prepositions: there are various prepositions in English that have the same function and when Arab students do not know which preposition to use in a certain sentence; they often compare that with its Arabic equivalence using literal translation. Consider the following example:

He lives in the second floor Rather than He lives on the second floor This is clearly mother tongue interference. Scott and Tucker (1974:85) claim that prepositions seldom have a one to one correspondence between English and Arabic. An Arabic preposition may be translated by several English prepositions while an English usage may have several Arabic translations". b) Syntactic errors: in English, items in a series are separated by commas and the coordinate conjunction and is used just before the last word on the other hand, in Arabic, each item in a series is preceded by the conjunction which is literally and Diab (www.lael.pucsp) . c) Lexical Errors it is also possible that students transfer some lexical item to the target language. For instance some learners of English give the same Arabic meaning of English prepositions such as they say I saw the programme in TV instead of on TV. Also, they say he speaks for me rather than he speaks to me. d) Semantic Errors due to Literal Translation. Sometimes, Arab learners give the literal meaning of English texts which either distorts the meaning or gives different meaning from that of the original. This can be manifested in the following example: the criminal has to come before the judge. instead of saying: Here the preposition before is translated literally, i.e. out of context.

e) Capitalization LNO capital letters in Arabic. Lack of capitalization in the Arabic alphabet and very different punctuation conventions made incongruent to English. No distinction is made between upper and lower case. It can be said that the contrastive Analysis hypothesis claims that difficulties in language learning derive from the differences between the new language and the learners first language; that errors in these areas of difference drive from first language interference and that these errors can be predicted and remedied by the use of contrastive analysis( Johansson and Johansson 1998:85) The contrastive analysis hypothesis claims that all errors made in L2 could be attributed to interference by L1. Before Corders work, interference errors were regarded as inhibitory; it was Corder who points out that they can be facilitative and provide information about ones learning strategies. According to contrastive analysis, all learners' errors are based on language transfer, but subsequent research in errors analysis shows that this claim is imperfect. Most errors are not due to transfer only, but also to faulty inferences about the rules of the target language. Error analysis, as a branch of applied linguistics demonstrates that learner's errors are not only because of the interference of learners native language, but they also reflect some universal learning strategies. They are applied error analysis, which concern organizing remedial courses and devising materials and teaching strategies based on theoretical error analysis. These kinds of errors are called intralingual errors which seem to be universal, reflecting learners attempts to make the task of learning and using the target language simply. For example, using the past tense suffix ed for all verbs as an example of simplification and over-generalization. These errors result from faulty learning of the target language. They are caused by the influence of one target language item upon another. For example, learners attempts to use two tense markers at the same time in one sentence because they have not mastered the language yet, they say: He is comes have, so interalingual errors occur as a result of learners attempt to build up concepts and hypotheses about the target language from their limited experience with it. Stenson (1974) proposes this kind of induced errors which result from incorrect instruction of the language and not due to first-language interference.

10

4. Studies of Corrective Feedback

Error analysis has an important role in finding the questions that should be raised: How should teachers correct students? What kind of feedback should they give? Does each error need to be treated? In general, it is the teacher's job to find out when something has gone wrong and see whether it is just a mistake or error, is it global or local, and see whether the student can correct himself. There is a technique of correction which should be followed. First of all the teacher should know the source of errors to be able to provide an appropriate remedy. It is an important clue for the teacher to decide on the sort of treatment. There are different opinions by different language teaching approaches regarding error correction, For example: 1) Corder (1973) stated that since a teacher has no time to deal with all errors of the students, priority should be given to errors which may affect communication and cause misunderstanding. 2) Another example, Brown (2000) suggests that local errors as I gave she a present. This sentence usually need not be corrected as the message is clear. Here correction might interrupt a learner in his communication. Whereas global errors need to be treated since the message is not comprehended clearly. Like the example Daddy my car happy tomorrow buy. Error in pluralization, use of articles, tenses, etc are less important than errors regarding word order, connectors in terms of the comprehensibility of the sentence. Therefore, it is implied that priority in error correction should be given to global errors to develop the students communication skills. In Oral Works It is important to realize that the type of the feedback-form content grammar point or pronunciation should be decided on according to the goal of the study. The teacher should correct them without interrupting the speaker (Ur, 1996)

11

In Written Works The teacher should not correct the students mistakes directly, but should mark it indirectly for example: sp rw for written to spelling mistake. Thus, students are able to correct themselves. So the diagnoses and treatment of errors is one of the fundamental skills of the teacher. Freiermuth (1997) points out that errors which should not be corrected non-serious errors which occur due to learners nervousness in the classroom, due to their stress because they have to produce accurately, linguistic form in the L2. These kinds of error are not of serious nature and are similar to what Corder (1973) called mistakes Freiermuth goes on to suggest a hierarchy of errors according to seriousness which should be corrected by a teacher. He explains that: errors that significantly impair communication are the top of the list, followed by errors that occur frequently, errors that reflect misunderstanding or incomplete acquisition of the current classroom focus, and errors that have a highly stigmatizing effect on the listeners (www. Languagehyper.ac.jp). A different approach to error correction is suggested by Porte (1993), she stresses the importance of selfcorrection and she refers to Corders distinction of errors as mistakes and errors. She notes that it is very important that students know how to identify an error in order to avoid it in the future. She suggests a fear-step approach for self-correction. This approach consists of questions that the teacher provides to students. After writing an essay, students should read it four times, trying to answer the questions. The first task asks them to high light the verbs check the tenses, in the second task to concentrate on prepositions, the third task to concentrate on nouns; finally they should correct potential personal mistakes.

5. Difficulties Facing Error Learning

Are making mistakes is a good way to learn a language? Isn't speaking and writing with mistakes an effective way to learn a foreign language? The proponent of this claim picture the feedback based learning by the following as illustrated by Tomasz Szynalski. The learner says or writes sentences, makes some mistakes, the teacher corrects them, and the learner memorizes them. Next he will make fewer mistakes and the process will repeated until
12

the learner will produce sentences without any errors. Some researchers think that this model does not work because of variety of reasons: (a) It is too slow Language learning is a very memory intensive task, because it has huge number of words, phrases, structures, and profound differences in usage to memorize. The learner needs an enormous number of correct examples of the target language but the flow of information is too slow. The learner will speak slowly, with many pauses because he has to think what to say. (b) It requires a competent teacher A learner will not find a feedback-giver outside classroom even if he tries to interact with native speakers, they will not correct his mistakes, as long as they can understand him. There is also a problem of finding a good teacher. Some non-native teachers ignore many mistakes due to insufficient attention, knowledge or time. (c ) It can reinforce mistakes It's a profound fault when your brain gets used to repeat or be familiar with incorrect sentences and you spend most of your time listening to bad grammar because the correction will not always occur and you will listen to your own incorrect version of English grammar for a long time .

6 Conclusion
In conclusion, this area of error analysis helps linguists realize that although errors sometimes obstruct communication, they can often facilitate second language acquisition and they played an important role in training teachers in teaching students in another words, the inevitable existence of errors has led researchers to study on them and fired out the correct steps for language learning. Refrain an awareness of the types of errors learners tend to commit is necessary for language teachers to be able properly correct them. It is inevitable to know that a teacher should be able to not only detect and describe the errors from a linguistic view, but also understand the psychological reasons for the occurrences. Therefore, the diagnoses and treatment of errors is one of the fundamental skills of the teacher.
13

References
Corder, S.P.(1967). The Significance of Learners Errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics 5: 161-9 Corder, S.P, (1973) Introducing Applied Linguistics, Pelican Books Corder, S.P. (1973) Introducing Applied Linguistics. Middlesex, Penguin. Gass, s. and Selinker, L. (2007) Second Language Acquisition: an Introductory Course. Mahwah, NJ: LEA, chapter 3.2. George, H. V. (1972) Common Errors in Language Learning. Massachusetts: Rowley. Hagege, C.L (1996) The Child Between Two Languages: Editions Odile Jacob. Johanson, S.(1975) The Uses of Error Analysis and Contrastive Analysis. English Language Teaching,29,3: 246-253 Johanson, K.and H. Johanson (1998) Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Black well Lee, N.,(1990) Notions of Error and Appropriate Corrective Treatment. Papers in Linguistics and Language Teaching 13 Lightbown, p. and N. Spade (1999) How languages are learned New York: Blackwell. Lakkis, K. and M.A Malak, (2000) Understanding the Transfer of Prepositions forum, Vol. 38, No3, Richards, J. (1971) Errors Analysis and Second Language Strategies. Language sciences, Vol.17, pp. 12-22. Selinker, L (1972) Inter language. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10,209-241 Selinker, (2007) Rediscovering language. Essex: Longman . Scott, M. and Tucker R.(1974). Error analysis and English language strategies of Arab students. Language learning, 24:69-97. Tomasz Szynalski The Role of mistakes in Language Learning. (forthcoming). Ur, p . (1996). A course in language teaching. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
14

Electronic Sources

Diab, N.(1996) The transfer of Arabic in the English writings of Lebanese students. Retrieved January 5,2003 from http://Lael.Pucsp.br/specialist/181diab.ps.Pdf. Freiermuth, M.R., L2 Error correction : Criteria and Techniques, The language Teacher Online 22.06, http://Language.hyper.chubu.ac.jp/jalt/pub/tlt/97/sep/freiermuth.html,1997 Larson http://Language.hyper.chubu.ac.jp/jalt/pub/tlt/97/sep/freiermuth.html,1991

15


: " " . . . . .

61