CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS

1. CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS Dr. S. HosseiniMasoum (Prepared by IeiliDehghaniMoghadam)

2. CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS: • Definition: Contrastive analysis(CA) is the systematic study of a pair of language in order to identify their structural differences and similarities,usually for the purpose of translationand language teaching.

3. 1. Place of CA in linguistics In the linguistics : • CA is neither generalist nor particularist but some where intermediate on a scale between the two extremes. • It is not concerned with classification , and as the term contrastive implies ,more interested in differences between languages than in their likenesses. • It is not concerned either with language families or with other factors of language history(like synchronic and diachronic).

4. 2. CA And Interlanguage CA as a iterlanguage study :. In fact CA belongs to interlanguage. • Interlanguage is a language which is between two languages (the source and target language).The interlanguage hypothesis claims that learner languages is different from both native and target language system in one way or another while at the same time having some features in common with them. • This branch of linguistic interested in the emergence of the language rather than finished product.

5. 3. CA As An Applied Linguistic Applied linguistic as its name implies is an activity. • It is not theoretical study .It makes use of theoretical study. . • Applied CA: Applied CA is central component of applied linguistic. It is one of the few investigations into language structure that has improved pedagogy as its aim and is therefore truly a field of applied language research.

6. 4.CA and Bilingualism • Bilingualism is not the study of individual single language nor of language in general , but of possession of two languages . • Two kinds of bilingualism: • 1. social bilingualism :It is the possession of two languages by single community . • 2.Individual bilingualism: If we study the person who has competence in two languages. • CA concern is with second category.

7. James notes that contrastive analysis presents a successful theoretical and practical case for the value of CA as a research tool both for those studying applied linguistic and for teachers needing to adjust their teaching to the state of knowledge of their students. THE PSYCHOLOGICAL BASIS OF CONTRASTIVEANALYSIS • Transfer in learning psychology: • In the CA concept of transfer is very important and it is corner stone of CAH (Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis). Contrastive analysis is found on the assumption that second or foreign language learner will tend to transfer the formal feature of their L1 to their L2 utterance.

8. Depending on the similarities anddifferences between the structure of the learner’s native language and that of target language we have two kinds oftransfer: • 1. Positive transfer: occurs when the first learning is similar to the second one. It facilitates learning.(mother - مادر) • 2. Negative transfer: this happens when the first learning is different from the second one. It is problematic and causes interference. • Those elements that are similar to his or her native language will be simple and those elements that are different will be difficult.

9. TRANSFER THEORY AND CA by lado: ᾿᾿Individuals tend to transfer the forms and meanings and the distribution of forms and meanings of their native language and culture to the foreignlanguage and culture both productively (when attempting to speak the language )and receptively(when attempting grasp and understand language) DIFFERENT VERSION OF CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS: • Three different versions of contrastive analysis hypothesis have been discussed in the literature: • 1. Strong version • 2. Weak version • 3. Moderate version

10. The Strong version • Rooted in behaviorist psychological and structural linguistic. • The prime cause or even sole cause of difficulty and error in the foreign language learning is interference coming from native language. • Focused on the notion of interference of first language system with second language system as principal barrier to second language learning. • It made rather strong claim with respect to predicting difficulties and errors of second language learning .

11. The difficulties are chiefly or wholly, due to difference between two languages. It describes Interlingual error (error in FL which are caused by interference)  Having realized that the strong version was too ambitious and beyond reach of contrastive grammar Ward haugh proposed weak version. • TheWeak version: • It starts with the evidence provided by linguistic interference and uses such evidence to explain similarity and difference between two systems. • It is a model with diagnostic and explanatory.

12. Errors are studied after they have been committed by second language learner. • It is confined to notion of linguistic interference and seems to be able to account for error caused by language transfer. • It advocates the fact that interference does exist and canexplaindifficulties. • The moderate version: proposed by Oller and Ziahosseini: • It has more explanatory power than other two versions .

13. It centers on the nature of human learning not just contrast. • It can describe both interlingual and intralingual errors (errors the source of which is either the native or target language). • The advocates of this theory believe that principle of STIMULUS GENERALIZATION is at work in the learning of foreign language. STIMULUS GENERALIZATION • The categorization of abstract and concrete patterns according to their perceived similarities and differences is basis for learning, whenever patterns are minimallydistinct confusion may be result and where are functionally or perceptuallyequivalent correct generalization may beresult.

14. Similar items are difficult to learn. • Difficult items are easy to learn. • Example: We have all experienced learning an entirely new game or skill perhaps more easily than one that is somewhat similar to a skill already learned. THECHNIQUE AND PROCEDURE of CONTRASTIV E ANALYSIS: • James asserts that executing (doing) a Contrastive analysis consists of two main steps: 1. 1.Description 2. Comparison However five different steps have been mention in the literature for comparing andcontrasting two languages: 1. Selection: Select of certain form, item, rule, structure…….for comparison.

15. 2. Description: The linguistic must describe two languages in question. • 3. Comparison: The mapping of the relationship between one system to other for comparing and contrasting. • 4. Prediction: Analysts make prediction about errors or difficulties. • 5 Verification: Analyst needs to find out whether the prediction made about errors and difficulties are true or not. • Hierarchy of Difficulty: • .The Stock Well, Bowen and Martin proposed what they called a hierarchy of difficulty by which teacher or linguistic can make prediction of relative difficulty of a given aspect of second language. They suggest eightpossible degrees of difficulty for phonological system and 16 levels of difficulty for grammatical system.

16. .Prator proposed six categories of difficulty for both grammatical and phonological in ascending order. • Level 0 –Transfer: • No difference or contrast is present between the two languages. The Sound, structure or lexical items are similar in two languages and positive transfer occurs. Like door /در • Level 1 –Coalescence: • Two items in the native language converge into one item in the target language, example teacher/آموزگارو دبیر

17. Level 2-underdifferentiation: • The equivalence of an item in the native language is absent in the foreign language like مگرو چندمینWhich are present in Persian language but are absent in Persian. • Level 3- Reinterpretation: An item that exists in the native language is given a new shape or distribution in the target language for example – The Persian learner of English must learn a new allophone for the phoneme (L) in the English. That is, Persian /l/is mainly a clear /l/;whereas this phoneme may be clear or dark in English depending on the phonological environment. Level4- Over differentiation: This is counter of level 2.Here an item in foreign language is absent in the native language –so the Persian learner of English must learn the sound θ, δ as new items.

18. Level 5 – Split: • This is a counter part of level1.That is an item in the native language diverge into or more items in the target language. Persian learner of English must learn the distinguish between he and she in the English. • Markedness Theory: • In the hierarchy of difficulty phonological environment and allophonic variant of phoneme may be ignored. • Due to short coming of hierarchy of difficulty marked nesstheory proposed by Eckman, Celce, Murcia and Hawkins for relative degree of difficulty.

19. Marked ness theory: It distinguishes members of a pair of related forms or structures by assuming that marked member of a pair contain at least one more feature than the unmarked one and unmarked member of pair is the one with wider range of distribution than marked one. • Like English indefinite articles a and an. • a-is unmarked form. • an-is marked form. • According to marked theory marked item in language will be more difficult to acquire than unmarked one. • Marked structures are acquired later than unmarked ones.

20. 6. CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS AND LINGUISTIC MODELS: • Model-1.Jame defines this kind of frame work as consisting of three different phases. • First: contrastive analysis adopts linguistic tactic of dividing up concept of language into three smaller and more manageable areas: the level of phonology, grammar and lexis. • Second: use is made of descriptive categories of linguistic: unit, structure, class, and system • Third: contrastive analysis utilizes description arrived at under the same model of language.

21. Model-2:Structural model that was expounded by Harris. Job of structural contrastive analysis was to display the similarity and difference in the form and the distribution of comparable unit.  Model -3:Transformational grammarmodel elaborated • by Chomsky that influences contrastive analysis that consists of: • Universal grammar hypothesis. • Deep and surface structure distinction. • The rigorous and explicit description oflinguistic phenomena.

22. Model-4: contrastive generative grammar proposed by Krezesowki. • In CGG structures are generated from same common base and are compared and contrasted during process of generation and consist of horizontal and vertical dimensions. • Horizontal CA is limited to statement ofthree kind s of interlingual relationship:Those existing between: • 1. L1 and L2 systems, Structures, and Transformational rules. • Vertical model has two defining characters: • 1. It is not based on the confluence of two monolingual grammars but is a singlebilinlingual grammar.

23. 2.Contrastive generative grammarproceed in its derivations from universal semantic input to language – specific surface structure output in five stages: • Stage1 (Semantic): the level of category –neutral input, of a universal semantic conceptual input consisting of configuration of elementary primitive relations such as Agent, Patient, and all sorts of specification of location in time and space. The accent here is on language –neutrality, so no language is excluded, since none is included. • Stage 2(categorical): each language categorizes the configuration introduced at stage1 in ways that are characteristic of, but not necessarily all unique to it. • Stage3 (syntactic): Syntactic rules apply now, arranging the categories into permissible order in actual sentences. function word s are introduced here. This is called minor lexicalization.

24. Stage4 (lexical): In according with language –specific possibilities lexical entries from dictionary are inserted into the syntactic frames. This is called major lexicalization. • Stage-5(post-lexical): Here, post –lexical or cosmetic transformations are applied, providing output with inflection and word boundary maker. • 5. Post -lexical OUTPUT 4. Lexical • 3. Syntactic • 2. Categorical • INPUT 1. Semantic • Model 5.Case grammar: • Case grammar proposed by Fillmore which based on the theory of the universal semantic base of language. • This is a version of the theory of transformational grammar in which there is afixed base grammar B which will serve as thebase component of grammar of any natural

25. Model-5.Case grammar • Case grammar proposed by Fillmore which based on the theory of the universal semantic base of languages. • This is a version of the theory of transformational grammar in which there is afixed base grammar B which will serve as thebase component of grammar of any naturallanguage.

26. Best wishes