Language Transfer-Interlanguage
Language transfer has been a central issue in Applied Linguistics, Second Language Acquisition, and Language Teaching for more than a century. It occurs and either when speakers who do not share the same language need to communicate; it also occurs naturally in language learning programs when learners transfer elements from their mother tongue to the L2. Corder (1983) suggests that the word “transfer” belongs to the school of behaviorist learning theory and transposes instead the use of the term mother tongue influence. Sharwood & Kellerman (1986) introduce the term cross linguistic influence, which takes previous definitions a step further by suggesting the potential influence of L3 on L2. In other words, another language that a learner practices, but not the mother tongue, could possibly affect the learning of the L2. Selinker (1972) introduced the term interlanguage to describe the same influences. Educational psychologists prefer the term transfer in order to directly refer to the use of past knowledge and experience in a new situation.
In the 1950s, language transfer was often deemed the most important factor to consider in theories of L2 teaching and learning. In the 1960s perceptions shifted: transfer was considered less critical in language learning; learners’ errors were not seen as evidence of language transfer but rather of the creative construction process. Some researchers virtually denied the existence of language transfer in their enthusiasm for universalist explanations. The controversy stood strong for many years among second language teachers and researchers as well as linguists. In recent years, however, a more balanced perspective has emerged in which the role of transfer is acknowledged and in which transfer is seen to interact with a host of other factors in ways not yet fully understood.
There has also been a significant debate as to whether transfer could be considered as a valid concept for use in discussing language acquisition at all. Discussions on transfer often begin with the work of American linguists in the 1940s and 1950s. Lado (1957) suggested the idea that L2 learners are almost entirely dependent on their mother tongue in the process of learning the target language. On the other hand, Dulay and Burt (1974) almost totally rejected the significance of transfer in the creation of interlanguage. Lado (1957) and Fries (1945) in an attempt to rationalize and order language teaching content have been closely associated with the so-called contrastative analysis (CA) hypothesis according to which ‘the most effective materials are those that are based upon a scientific description of the language to be learned, carefully compared with a parallel description of the native language of the learner’. Constrastative analysis suggests that through a process of mapping one system onto another it is possible to identify similarities and differences that can to lead to a better understanding of the potential problems faced by L2 learners. The different structures of L1 and L2 may result in interference which is a term that in the linguistic field is used to describe any influence from the L1 with a direct effect on the acquisition of the L2.
Language transfer is most commonly discussed in the context of English language learning and teaching. However, it can occur while learning any language and in any linguistic circumstance in which non-native speakers are involved.
Positive and Negative Language Transfer
Language transfer may be positive or negative. Positive transfer implies the mother tongue and the second language (L2) have similar structure and maybe vocabulary resulting in “correct” comprehension and language production, both written and spoken. Since the term “correct” is widely criticised in the context of communicative language learning it should be pointed out that its use refers to the fact that the language production of a non-native speaker is in line with most native speakers’ notions of acceptability. Negative transfer is considered the transfer of elements and structures form the mother tongue to the target language in a way that diverges from the use of the target language by natives. In this case, language interference is most often discussed as a source of errors.
The concepts of positive and negative transfer are central to contrastative analysis. They reflect an essentially behaviorist model of language learning that describes the acquisition of language in terms of habit formation. Reflecting Skinner’s interpretation of laboratory experiments on rats (1957), in which positive and negative stimuli led to certain “learned” behaviors, (second) language acquisition is described in a similar mindset. The broad acceptance of that these views in the 1950s and 1960s encouraged the audio-lingual method of teaching which focused on extensive drilling in order to form the required “habits”. Errors were seen as an unwanted deviation from the norm and an imperfect product on perfect input. On the other hand, challenging Skinner’s model of behaviorist learning, Chomsky (1959) proposed a cognitive approach to language learning and suggested the existence of language universals, to which all babies have access and which originate directly from the constitution of the human intellect rather than from experience. This idea of innateness was particularly interesting and brought into question the practices of the audio-lingual method.
Individuals often demonstrate some awareness of language mixing even though they are not familiar with linguistic terms such as code-switching and transfer. This suggests that transfer can be either conscious or unconscious. Consciously, learners or unskilled language users may sometimes allow influences from their mother tongue when speaking or writing in a L2; this could be a result of forgetfulness or the absence of the related knowledge. Unconsciously, non-native speakers may not realise the difference between structures and internal rules of languages. In both cases, either when introduced on purpose or unconsciously, the so called “errors” might result to misconceptions due to the non-existence of certain structures in the target language; if effective communication is nevertheless achieved, however, “errors” may be simply overlooked by a native speaker.
Importance of Language Transfer
There are a number of reasons for language teachers, linguists, and instructional designers to consider more closely the issue of language transfer. Teaching can become more effective through the consideration of differences between languages and of course between cultures. Review of research on similarities in errors made by learners of different backgrounds may also help teachers or others involved in the design and implementation of linguistic education programs to understand better learning difficulties. Corder argues that the presence of errors in a learner’s linguistic production is evidence that the she tries to organize the knowledge available at a particular moment. This discussion has led to a new perspective on errors; their value was reassessed. There was a departure from the view that errors are purely negative in the learning process. Error analysis became a valuable tool in language learning and errors came to be considered as an important source of information. Emerging views take into account the fact that learners have a built-in syllabus and they go through a continuous process of hypothesis formulation and reformulation.
Language Transfer within the siLang context
The siLang project addresses negative transfer effects in the context of serious games designed with the objective of enhancing communication skills of professionals in vehicular languages addressing work needs. The project does not claim to correct the negative transfer effects or linguistic errors that are committed during interaction in a common language like English, between individuals that do not share a mother tongue. It rather aims to enhance communication capacity of individuals with diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds by helping them understand these common “errors” in view of the background of their co-speakers. At the same time siLang enhances language competence in a vehicular language like English. The project’s methodology integrates negative transfer effects mainly evident in pronunciation, grammar, syntax, vocabulary, and more.
Please click here to go back to the Learning methodologies specific to language instruction page.
Click here to go back to the homepage
References
Corder, S. P. (1983), "A role for the mother tongue" in S. M. Gass & L. Selinker (Ed), Language Transfer in Language Learning (pp. 18-31). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins North America
Chomsky, N. (1959), A review of B.F. Skinner’s verbal behavior. Cited in J.A.
Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1974), Natural sequences in child second language acquisition. Language Learning, 24, 37-53.Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Fries, C.C. (1945), Teaching and Learning English - As a Foreign Language
Lado, R. (1957), Linguistics Across Cultures. Applied Linguistics for Language Teachers. University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor
Selinker, L. (1972), ‘Interlanguage’. IRAL 10/3 pp 209-231.
Skinner, B.F. (1957), Verbal Behavior. New York. Appleton-Century-Crofts. Slobin, D. (1977). Language Change in childhood and in history. In J. Macnamara (ed) Language learning and thought, 185-214. New York: Academic Press
Sharwood Smith, M. and Kellerman, E. 1986. “Crosslinguistic influence in second language: an introduction”. In Crosslinguistic Influence in Second Language Acquisition, E. Kellerman and M. Sharwood Smith (eds), 1-9. Oxford: Pergamon.
