Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis

Contrastive abridgment HypothesisThe chapter is a theoretical examination of the discipline of mismated digest. Its main aim is to brook a literature review of antonymous analysis. In pursuit of this aim, the chapter first sheds the light on the history of the discipline of crinkleive analysis by providing a definition and a sketch of its origin. Then, an account of the plays involved in the par and contrastive process is brookd. After that a classification of the contrastive studies is introduced. Additionally, a shortened review of the contrastive analysis possibility is presented as well as CAs applications and contributions to new(prenominal) palm handle linguistic communication teaching, nomenclature universals, etc. Finally, the criticism enjoin towards CA is identified along with the recent developments originating from the discipline itself.Definition and OriginThither atomic number 18 trio types of comparative studies. They atomic number 18 comparative historical philology, comparative typological linguistics, and contrastive linguistics. Comparative historical linguistics developed in the 19th carbon, it aims to find the uncouth genetic related t one(a)ss surrounded by groups of dustups. Comparative typological linguistics classify terminologys jibe to the characteristics and features they sh ar. placard that languages which belong to a given typological group do non need to be genetically related, i.e., both languages can be closely related in their typological classification regardless their genetic distance. Contrastive linguistics/analysis is a sub discipline in linguistics which is come to with another benignant of comparison. It is refer neither with historical development nor with the problems of describing genetic relationships. Contrastive analysis is purely synchronic in its orientation. It differs in its scope from comparative historical linguistics, since it is typically concerned with a comparison of cor responding subsystems in only dickens languages. To put it disparately, Contrastive analysis studies the language items used in the same period, not those items which exist in different periods. It involves comparing and contrasting languages or subsystems of languages in company to identify their similarities and differences. Accordingly, contrastive analysis is ground on theoretical linguistics as well as descriptive linguistics. It is based on the former since the success or failure of these comparisons depends on the theory applied and it is based on the last mentioned since no comparison is to take place without a prior explanation of the languages under charter.Contrastive analysis had a long history. As primeval as 1000 A.D, the slope abbot Aelfric of Eynsham (c. 955 c. 1010) wrote his Grammatica a grammar of Latin and English, based on the assumption that the knowledge of grammar of one language facilitates the scholarship of the other. Additionally, in the sevent eenth century, the grammarian John Hewes expresses the view that the knowledge of the inbred grammar cannot only facilitate bring outing a foreign language but desirewise interface (the root word of interference) with it. Hewes in his (1624) A Perfect Survey of the English Tongue taken according to the USA and analogie of the Latine, presented the fundamentals of English in order to provide the assimilator with a Right knowledge cen surely of their owne mother tongue, in regard it holden a great difference in it selfe from the dialect of the Latine (as cited in Krzeszowski, Tomasz, 1990, p. 02).Other grammarians like Howel (1662), Coles (1675), and Lewis (1670?) applied the idea of facilitation (positive transfer) through and through adapting the grammars of English or of Latin to the needs of speakers of various native languages.Note that those early contrastive studies were motivated in close the same way as modern contraceptive studies in the USA. As early as 1670, Mark Le wis stated the followingThe most facil (sic) way of introducing near(prenominal) in a Tongue unknown is to show what Grammar it hath beyond, or short of his Mother tongue following that Maxime, to proceed a noto ad ignotum, making what we know, a step to what we are to lean (sic) (as cited in Krzeszowski, Tomasz, 1990, p. 02).Nearly three centuries later, Charles Fries wrote the followingThe most efficient materials are those that are based upon a scientific description of the languages to be knowing, carefully compared with a parallel description of the native language of the learner (Fries, 1945, p. 9)Although the word contrast did not appear until the end of the eighteenth century, the idea of comparing languages for pedagogic reasons is not a new one, as it goes back to the beginning of the foreign language teaching tradition. Nevertheless, written records of such configuration of effects went back to the 15th century.It should be mentioned that earlier contrastivists wer e not concerned with methodological problems, though they did develop a method of comparison know as The cut Theory, the first method in contrastive studies. The sign theory is an approach introduced by Krzeszowski (1985) and was designed for teaching Latin in England it involved adjusting the grammatical descriptions of two English and Latin. For many years, contrastive studies were practiced in the classroom nonrationally. However, modern linguistic theories which flourished in the 20th century did affect the state of contrastive studies and hence, interests in methodology and theory of contrastive analysis began to grow.Contrastive analysis usually involves two languages and it is based on the assumption that languages have enough in common to be compared, as stated by James (1980, p. 3)CA is a linguistic enterprise aimed at producing inverted (i.e. contrastive, not comparative) two-valued typologies (a CA is always concerned with a pair of languages), and founded on the assum ption that languages can be compared.Among the prominent objectives of contrastive analysis are supplying insights into the convergences and divergences vivacious among languages, send foring problematic areas in L2 learning and contributing to the development of language teaching materials.A quick glance at the history of the discipline of CA will manifest that it has been assigned different labels by different European and American scholars. It was referred to as parallel description (Fries 1945), analytical comparison (Mathesius, 1964), comparative descriptive linguistics (Halliday-McIntosh-Stevens 1964), differential description (Mackey 1965), descriptive comparison (Catford 1968), dialinguistic analysis (Nemser 1971), analytical description (Ibid), differential studies (Lee 1974), interlingual comparison (Fillipovic 1975c). However, the widely used border contrastive linguistics has been coined by the American linguist and anthropologist gum benjamin Lee Whorf (1897-1941) i n his 1941 article Languages and logic. In the aforementioned article, Whorf distinguished between comparative and contrastive linguistics. He claimed that contrastive linguistics is of even greater splendor for the future technology of thought (1967, p. 240) and he defines it as a discipline which plots the outstanding differences among tongues in grammar, logic, and general analysis of experience.Contrastive analysis first appeared in Central Europe before the Second World War and spread afterwards in North America. It was Lados Linguistics Across Cultures (1957) which sets the corner stone of contrastive analysis, specifically the idea that the leg of differences between the two languages correlates with that of difficulty. In its early days in the forties (1940s) and fifties (1950s), CA was seen as a pedagogical tool, through which problematic areas in language teaching and learning can be predicted.Accordingly, CA relies very much on psychology as it is concerned with the e xpectation of learning difficulties which crop up from learners NL and TL hence it needs a psychological component. It should be mentioned that CA is more causalityful in the prediction of pronunciation difficulties, however, when it comes to grammar, it is not so powerful since most of grammatical errors in second language learning occur in areas where CA cannot predict.It is important to check that on that point are three phases of Contrastive Analysis each having its own characteristics the (1) traditional, (2) classical and (3) modern phase.Traditional contrastive studies which marked the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century were horizontal in dimension in the sense that an instalment(s) in language A is compared with an eq element(s) in language B. They proceed from the description of the same features in the two languages to their juxtaposition on the basis of translation equivalence as assessed by a bilingual informant. Normally, a stop consona nt of reference, often called tertium comparationis, is required outside the languages to be contrasted.The period between the end of the Second World War and 1965 was recognized as the classical period of contrastive studies. In this period, CA has been credited its status as a scientific, pragmatic as well as academic discipline. The most prominent figures of that period are Charles Fries, Robert Lado, Kenneth Pike, Ureil Weinreich among many others.The modern period of contrastive studies has been marked by the numerous contrastive projects carried out all over the world. However, it should be emphasized that theoretical issues of preliminary periods came under severe criticism. We will return to this presently, for the time being, it is sufficient to see that a problem exists. Despite the criticism of the previous periods, this phase marked the memorial tablet of CA as an academic discipline throughout the world. It should be emphasized that modern linguistic approaches and te chnology have opened new horizons for CA. Notably, cognitive linguistics, pragmatics and lead linguistics have all offered new theoretical cloths and methodology.Stages of Contrastive AnalysisContrastive Analysis involves three stages, description, juxtaposition, and comparison. Lets consider each stage separately.The descriptive stageIn this stage, the contrastive analyst provides an exhaustive description of the languages under study. Note that each language should be described individually apart from the other. Furthermore, the two languages should be described using the same model or framework, because if it happens that the two languages were described using different models, certain features whitethorn be described successfully than others.The juxtaposition stageIn this stage, the contrastive analyst should respond to the following question what is to be compared with what? In classical contrastive studies, the decision was based on intuitive judgments of competent bilingua l informants. It was thought that competent bilinguals are able to decide about whether an element X in language A is equivalent to element Y in language B or is not. However, these intuitive judgments proved to be very weak as there are no soak up principles underlying these decisions and as they were based on formal resemblances only which are not enough. As a consequence, the contrastive analyst faced the problem of establishing the criteria of comparison, also referred to as the tertium comparationis. It should be mentioned that the tertium comparationis is a kind of constant against which differences are measured, as stated by James (1980)The first thing we do is contract sure that we are comparing like with like this means that the two (or more) entities to be compared, man differing in some respect, must share certain attributes. This requirement is particularly gruelling when we are contrasting, i.e., looking for differences-since it is only against a background of same ness that differences are significant. We shall call this sameness the constant and the differences variables. (p. 169)The notions of the equivalence and the tertium comparationis were presented graphically in Djordjevi (1987).In traditional contrastive studies, the TC was defined as the common platform of reference (Krzeszowski, 1990, p. 15). During the classical period, however, the TC was either formally or semantically based (James, 1980).Note that in phonologic CA, the tertium comparationis is the IPA chart and the vowel diagram in Lexis, it is the set of semantic components. However, contrastivists failed to establish a clear TC for grammatical CA. Because of this failure, three candidates have been proposed surface structure TC, deep structure TC, and translation equivalence TC.The comparative stageIn this stage, the contrastive analyst identifies the similarities and differences existing among the two languages. Note that the comparison involves types and not tokens (i.e. t he contrastive analyst compares structures rather than strings of sound or graphic substance). Another issue related to the comparison stage is the particular that one does not compare languages in toto, instead a specifying process is usually under way, like for recitation the area of grammar, phonology or lexicology which aftermath in a variety of contrastive studies such as grammatical CA, phonological CA, and lexical CA.According to Krzeszowski (1990), there are three distinguished areas in this stageComparisons of various equivalent systems across languages, such as pronouns, articles, verbs, and in phonology consonants, vowels, as well as sub-systems, such as nasals, laterals, etc., depending on the degree of delicacy of the grammar.Comparisons of equivalent constructions, for example, interrogative, relative, disconfirming, nominal phrase, etc., And in phonology clusters, syllables, diphthongs, and various distributions of sounds.Comparisons of equivalent rules (in those m odels where the concept of the rule appears), for example, subject raising from the embedded sentence, adjective placement, interrogative inversion, passivization, etc., and in phonology assimilation, dissimilation, metathesis, etc.In each area of comparison, one of three possible situations may ariseXLi = XLjWhen item X in Li may be identical in some respects with an equivalent item in Lj.XLi XLjWhen item X in Li may be different in some respects from an equivalent item in Lj.XLi = LjWhen item X in Li has no equivalent in Lj. (Krzeszowski, 1976, p. 90) (as cited in Krzeszowski, Tomasz, 1990, p. 39).Levels of AnalysisContrastive analysis can be conducted at different levels of language, for example it can be carried out at the phonological level, grammatical level, as well as the lexical level.Phonological CAWhen comparing the sound system of two languages, the contrastive analyst has to go through four basic steps. Firstly, he should draw up the phonemic inventory (describe and co mpare vowels and consonants) of the two languages under study. Secondly, the contrastive analyst should compare the phonemes in the two languages interlingually. At this stage, the contrastive analyst should apply the minimal pair test. Here is an example of the minimal pair test between the phonemes /k/ and /g/ in English and ArabicEnglish came /Keim/ vs. game /geim/Arabic /kelb/ dog vs. /gelb/ heartIn Algerian Arabic /q/ and /g/ are phonemes and allophones/gern/ horn vs. /qern/ century phonemes/gmar/ moon vs. /qmar/ moon allophonesThirdly, the contrastive analyst should state the allophones of each phoneme of the two languages being compared. And fourthly, he should state the distribution restrictions of the phonemes and allophones of both languages.Grammatical CAIn a grammatical contrastive analysis, the contrastive analyst compares and contrasts between the grammatical systems of two languages. The comparison may take different forms, for example, in English word order is used to differentiate between an affirmative sentence and an interrogative one you are a instructor/are you a teacher? In Spanish, however, the same distinction is indicated via the use of intonation plot in Arabic, the same distinction is expressed through the addition of functional words like at the beginning of sentences. Another kind of grammatical contrastive analysis may investigate how a given linguistic sept functions in two different languages, such as the case of adjectives in English and French. In English, adjectives scat to be pronominal, however, in French they tend to be post nominal, for example The narrow door La porte etroite.Lexical CAContrastive lexicology is carried out between the vocabulary system(s) of two languages. It is concerned with the way lexical items in one language are expressed in another language. This can be done through identifying both the semantic fields and the semantic properties in order to specify the divisions and sub-divisions of the l exicon. Lexical CA may result in complete, partial, or nil equivalence between languages.Towards the Classification of Contrastive StudiesContrastive studies can be divided into various subdivisions according to many criteria. Jacek Fisiak distinguished between theoretical contrastive studies and applied contrastive studies as stated in the following advertTheoretical CS give an exhaustive account of the differences and similarities between two or more languages provide an adequate model for their comparison, determine how and which elements are comparable, olibanum defining such notions as congruence, equivalence, correspondence, etc. Applied CS is part of applied linguistics. Drawing on the findings of theoretical contrastive studies they provide a framework for the comparison of languages, selecting whatever information is necessary for a specific purpose, e.g. teaching, bilingual analysis, translating, etc. (Fisiak, 1981, p. 9)He claims that theoretical contrastive studies do not investigate how a given category present in language A is represented in language B. Instead they look for the realization of a universal category X in both A and B (Fisiak et al. 1978 10). Whereas, applied contrastive studies are preoccupied with the problem of how a universal category X, realized in language A as y, is rendered in language B. (Fisiak et al., 1978, p. 10), as illustrated belowX XA B A(y) B(?)Figure 2. a) Theoretical CAs b) Applied CAsHence, a theoretical contrastive study provides us with exhaustive descriptions of the languages being compared and contrasted. Also, it highlights the main points of convergences and divergences between the languages in question. A worth emphasizing point is that there are no claims to be made as to whether the results are applicable for other purposes or not. An advantage of theoretical contrastive analyses is that they make reference to the universal tertium comparationis X whereas applied contrastive analyses do not make such a reference. Additionally, theoretical contrastive studies contribute to the establishment of language universals. Also, they are language case-by-case and non-directional.It should be mentioned that theoretical contrastive studies insist on the descriptive neutrality between the two languages under study, which is why attention should be drawn to some problems of terminology. In contrastive studies, terms like SL vs. TL, L1 vs. L2, and NL vs. FL occur and re-occur. However, the avoidance of these terms is highly required in theoretical contrastive studies, simply because the languages under study have an equal status.Applied contrastive studies draw on the findings of theoretical contrastive studies. Their aim is not merely linguistic but also applicable to other domains like language teaching, translation, bilingual education, etc. Traditionally speaking, applied contrastive studies have been concerned with setting out the possible problematic areas in the learners target languag e, i.e., providing reliable prediction of the learners difficulties (James, 1980, p. 181-7).It should be mentioned that Applied contrastive studies devote more attention to surface representations since these are what the learners/translators have a more agile access to and what language teaching has always been concerned with.Despite the fact that applied contrastive studies draw on the findings of theoretical contrastive studies, still they do not deal only with differences but also they give importance to the similarities. Hence, the teacher should point out the similar forms, so that learners will not figure them, because very often, an element of a foreign language is similar to what one has in his own language.Notice that the first contrastive studies were predominantly theoretical (Grandgent, 1982 Vietor, 1894 Passy, 1912 J Baudouin de Courtenay, 1912 Bogorodickij, 1915). Still, the applied part of CA was not completely neglected (e.g. Vietor, 1903), but it was of little im portance. Also, the aim of developing pedagogical materials was more visible in the US, while Europe was more interested in the theoretical dimension.The other classification of contrastive studies is based on the linguistic model applied when describing the languages involved. Since contrastive analysis can be carried out in different linguistic frameworks, there are the structural, transformational, stratificational, or systemic contrastive studies.A third taxonomy is the one provided by Di Pietro (1971). He divided contrastive studies into Autonomous vs. Generalized and into Taxonomic vs. Operational. In autonomous contrastive studies, no reference is made to any universal which may be shared between the languages compared. Each language is described independently from the other. However, in generalized contrastive studies, reference is made to the shared features/structures which exist between the compared languages, not only because of their typological or genetic similarities but because of the universal grammar which underlie all human languages.Concerning the Taxonomic vs. Operational contrastive studies, the former states the similarities and differences across languages, the latter seeks to formulate a series of conversions performed on the source language in order to produce the forms of the goal language (Di Pietro 1971, as cited in Krzeszowski, Tomasz, 1990, p. 24).Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)Definition and originContrastive Analysis Hypothesis states that the structure of the learners L1 affects the acquisition (the two terms acquisition/learning interchangeably) of their L2, in the sense that whenever there are similarities the L2 learning is facilitated, and whenever there are differences the learning process is difficult. The term Contrastive Hypothesis implies the theory itself, while the term Contrastive Analysis implies the methodology. Hence, the term Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis implies both theory and methodology.CAH came int o existence in the 1960s. It originated from Lados Linguistics across CulturesThe plan of the book rests on the assumption that we can predict and describe the patterns that will cause difficulty in learning, and those that will not cause difficulty, by comparing systematically the language and the culture to be learned with the native language and culture of the student (1957, p. VII).CAH is based on the assumption that second language learners tend to transfer L1 features to L2 utterances as stated by Lado (1957)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 (p. 2).Accordingly, Ellis (1965) suggested that the psychological foundation of CAH is transfer theory. In fact, CAs assumption that L1 interferes with the learners L2 acquisition/ education leads us to the notion of transfer be it positive or damaging. Transfer refers to the application of native language knowledge when trying to speak the target language. corroborative Transfer (facilitation) occurs when the structure of the two languages is the same hence no errors will crop up. However, negative transfer (interference) occurs when the structure of the languages is different, and here errors will crop up and so the difficulties in tackling the target language. All in all, the more the similarities the more the learning process is facilitated, and the more the differences the more the learning process will be difficult. The aforementioned statement reflects linguists belief that a comparison of learners L1 and L2 will reveal problematic areas for L2 students, as stated by Lado (1957)In the comparison between native and foreign language lies the key to ease or difficulty in foreing language learning Those elements that are similar to (the learners) native language will be simple for him, and those elements that are different will be difficult. (p. 1-2)The linguistic framework of th e CAH is structuralism which assumes that language is a finite structure which can be compared with structures of other languages.Additionally, Skinners behavioural psychology is the basis of the CAH, specifically, the idea that learning is a habit formation process that takes place by reinforcement. Language acquisition consists of the acquisition of a set of habits errors in second language were seen as the result of the first language habits interfering with the acquisition of the habits of the second.Procedures of the contrastive analysis hypothesisCAH applies the following procedure when attempting to predict areas of difficulty, as illustrated or stated by Whitman (1970)A contrastive analysis must proceed through four steps description, selection, contrast, and prediction. Unfortunately, most analyses are weakened by insufficient care or attention at one or more of these steps, each of which is beset with a host of problems. (p. 191)In the Description stage, the contrastive an alyst provides a formal description of the learners L1 and L2. In the selection stage, he selects specific forms (linguistic items, or rules, or structures, etc.) for contrast, as it is impossible to contrast every single facet of two languages. In the contrast stage, he carries out the contrastive process which will result in highlighting the similarities and differences existing among the two languages. Finally, come the stage of prediction in which the contrastive analyst predicts the problematic issues and difficulties, which the learner may or may not face while learning the target language.In order to describe the stage of prediction, Stockwell et al. (1965) proposed a hierarchy of difficulty based on the notion of transfer, be it positive transfer, negative transfer or zero transfer. When the forms of the two languages are similar, positive transfer will occur and hence the facilitation of the learning process however, when the forms of the two languages are different, negati ve transfer will occur and hence difficulty in learning when there is no relation at all between the forms of the two languages, here no transfer is to take place, i.e., zero transfer.Versions of the CAHIt is important to realize that there are different versions of the CAH. These are the strong and weak versions of Wardhaugh (1970) and the moderate version of Oller and Ziahosseiny (1970). Wardhaugh (1970) suggested that the strong version predicts areas of difficulty via providing a systematic and scientific analysis of the learners L1 and L2. However, the weak versionrequires of the linguist only that he uses the best linguistic knowledge uncommitted to account for observed difficulties in second language learning. (Wardhaugh, 1970, p. 129)So, there is a shift in focus from the predictive power of areas of difficulty to the explanatory power of observable errors. In addition, Oller and Ziahosseiny (1970) find the strong version too strong and the weak version too weak, and so the y proposed a moderate version of the hypothesis which they summarized as followsthe categorization of abstract and concrete patterns according to their perceived similarities and differences is the basis for learning therefore, wherever patterns are minimally distinct in form or meaning in one or more systems, confusion may result (p. 186).To explain their view, they conducted a study based on English recite errors on the UCLA placement test. In this test, they compared the spelling errors of foreign students whose native language employed/uses a Roman alphabet with foreign students spelling errors whose native language has little or no relation to the Roman alphabet. They arrive to the conclusion that knowledge of one Roman writing system makes it more difficult to learn/acquire another Roman spelling system.Implementations of Contrastive AnalysisBe it a very useful tool, CA is applied in many fields of inquiry. It contributes to different areas of study as stated in the Encyclope dic Dictionary of Applied LinguisticsCA has been used as a tool in historical linguistics to establish language genealogies, in comparative linguistics to create language taxonomies and in translation theory to investigate problems of equivalence. In language teaching it has been powerful through the contrastive analysis hypothesis CAH (Johnson Johnson, 1998, p. 85)Contrastive analysis and language teachingIn the field of language teaching, CA has been influential through the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis, as Fries point outThe most efficient materials are those that are based upon a scientific description of the languages to be learned, carefully compared with a parallel description of the native language of the learner (1945, p. 9)As a matter of fact, the contributions of contrastive analysis to the field of language teaching are numerous and remarkable. First, a contrastive analysis of the learners L1 and L2 helps syllabus designers to prepare effective teaching materials tak ing into consideration students difficulties. As stated by Lado in his (1957) Linguistics across CulturesThe results of such comparisons have proven of fundamental value for the preparation of teaching materials, test and language teaching experiments. Foreign language teachers who understand this field will acquire insights and tools for evaluating the language and culture content of the textbooks and tests, supplementing the materials in use, preparing new materials and tests, and diagnosing students difficulties accurately. ( p. I)Secondly, contrastive analysis provides useful insights to the teacher who has performed a contrastive analysis between the students L1 and L2, and makes him/her aware of the real learning problems and the best way(s) to teach them, as stated by Lado (1957)The teacher who has made a comparison of a foreign language with the native language of the student will know better what the real learning problems are and can better provide for teaching them. (p. 2 )In addition to Lado, Mackey (1965) illustrates the significance of CA to language teaching in the following quotationCA is of particular interest to language teaching because many of the difficulties in learning a second language are due to the fact that it differs from the first. So that if we subtract the characteristics of the first language from those of the second what presumptively remains is a list of the learners difficulties. I DID NOT FIND THE PAGEIt seems likely then, that the most useful contribution that Contrastive Analysis can make to language teaching lies in predicting learning difficulties and helping syllabus designers to produce the most effective materials.Contrastive analysis and language typology