Monday, April 1, 2019

Why Error Correction Is Necessary Essay

Why Error Correction Is Necessary EssayCorrection is necessary. The crinkle that students just need to use the wrangle and the rest depart summon by it self seems rather weak. Students come to us to teach them. If they want scarcely conversation, they testament probably in stamp us or, they might just go to a chat room on the Internet. Obviously students need to be rectify as part of the learning experience. However, students as well need to be encour festerd to use the linguistic colloquy. It is true that coiffureing students term they are trying their top hat to use the language can practically discourage them. The most hunky-dory solution of all is make correction an activity. Correction can be used as a follow-up to any given social class activity. However, correction sessions can be used as a reasoned activity in and of themselves. In former(a) words, instructors can set up an activity during which each mistake (or a ad hoc type of mistake) go away be righ t. Students know that the activity is going to focus on correction, and train that fact. However, these activities should be kept in balance with other, more free-form, activities which give students the chance to express themselves without having to worry about being corrected any other word.It is to S.P. Corder that Error Analysis owes its place as a scientific system in linguistics. As Rod Ellis cites (p. 48), it was non until the 1970s that EA became a recognize part of applied linguistics, a development that owed much to the fly the coop of Corder. onward Corder, linguists observed students mistakes, divided them into categories, tried to see which ones were common and which were non, exactly not much attention was drawn to their role in entropy language skill. It was Corder who confronted to whom information about shifts would be helpful ( instructors, researchers, and students) and how.There are galore(postnominal) major concepts introduced by S. P. Corder i n his article The significance of learners illusions, among which we encounter the pursuit1) It is the learner who de borderines what the input is. The teacher can present a linguistic form, but this is not necessarily the input, but precisely what is available to be learned.2) Keeping the supra point in mind, learners needs should be considered when teachers/linguists see their syllabuses. forwards Corders work, syllabuses were based on theories and not so much on learners needs.3) Mager (1962) points out that the learners built-in syllabus is more economic than the teachers syllabus. Corder adds that if such(prenominal) a built-in syllabus exists, then learners errors would confirm its existence and would be systematic.4) Corder introduced the tuberosity surrounded by systematic and non-systematic errors. Unsystematic errors derive in ones homegrown Australian language Corder calls these mistakes and states that they are not epochal to the process of language learning . He keeps the term errors for the systematic ones, which descend in a second language.5) Errors are world-shattering in three shipway to the teacher they show a students arm to the researcher they show how a language is acquired, what strategies the learner uses. to the learner he can learn from these errors.6) When a learner has made an error, the most efficient way to teach him the correct form is not by simply giving it to him, but by letting him discover it and test several(predicate) hypotheses. (This is derived from Carrolls proposal (Carroll 1955, cited in Corder), who suggested that the learner should go the correct linguistic form by searching for it.7) Many errors are out-of-pocket to that the learner uses structures from his native language. Corder necessitates that possession of ones native language is facilitative. Errors in this case are not inhibitory, but rather evidence of ones learning strategies.The above insights played a significant role in linguistic r esearch, and in exceptional in the draw close linguists took towards errors. hither are just about of the areas that were influenced by Corders workSTUDIES OF assimilator ERRORSCorder introduced the distinction between errors (in competence) and mistakes (in realizeance). This distinction directed the attention of researchers of SLA to competence errors and provided for a more surd framework. Thus, in the 1970s researchers started examining learners competence errors and tried to explain them. We find studies such as Richardss A non-contrastive rise to error depth psychology (1971), where he identifies sources of competence errors L1 transit consequents in handicap errors incorrect (incomplete or over-generalized) application of language rules results in intralingual errors construction of faulty hypotheses in L2 results in developmental errors.Not all researchers vex agreed with the above distinction, such as Dulay and Burt (1974) who proposed the following three catego ries of errors developmental, interference and unique. Stenson (1974) proposed another category, that of induced errors, which result from incorrect instruction of the language.As most research methods, error compendium has weaknesses (such as in methodology), but these do not diminish its immenseness in SLA research this is why linguists such as Taylor (1986) reminded researchers of its enormousness and suggested ways to overcome these weaknesses.As mentioned previously, Corder noted to whom (or in which areas) the study of errors would be significant to teachers, to researchers and to learners. In addition to studies concentrating on error categorization and abridgment, various studies concentrated on these three antithetical areas. In other words, research was conducted not only in order to understand errors per se, but also in order to use what is learned from error analysis and apply it to amend language competence.Such studies include Kroll and Schafers Error-Analysis an d the Teaching of Composition, where the authors demonstrate how error analysis can be used to improve writing skills. They analyze likely sources of error in non-native-English writers, and attempt to provide a process approach to writing where the error analysis can help achieve intermit writing skills.These studies, among many others, show that thanks to Corders work, researchers recognized the importance of errors in SLA and started to examine them in order to achieve a better grounds of SLA processes, i.e. of how learners acquire an L2.STUDIES OF L1 INFLUENCE ON SLAVarious researchers soak up concentrated on those errors which demonstrate the influence of ones native language to second language acquisition. Before Corders work, interference errors were regarded as inhibitory it was Corder who pointed out that they can be facilitative and provide information about ones learning strategies (point 7, listed above). Claude witchge (1999) is a supporter of this concept and he m entions it in his keep The electric shaver between two languages, dedicated to childrens language education. According to Hagge, interference between L1 and L2 is observed in children as well as in adults. In adults it is more obvious and increases continuously, as a monolingual person gets aged and the structures of his firstly language get stronger and impose themselves more and more on any other language the adult wishes to learn. In contrast, as regards children, interference features will not become permanent unless the child does not have sufficient exposure to L2. If there is sufficient exposure, then instead of stretching a point where they can no longer be corrected (as often happens with phonetics features), interference features can be easily eliminated. Hagge stresses that there is no reason for worry if interference persists more than expected. The teacher should know that a child that is in the process of acquiring a second language will subconsciously invent struc tures influenced by old(prenominal)ity he already possesses. These hypotheses he forms whitethorn constitute errors. These errors, though, are entirely natural we should not expect the child to acquire L2 structures immediately (p. 81).In addition to studies of L1 transfer in general, there have been numerous studies for detail language pairs. Thanh Ha Nguyen (1995) conducted a case study to demonstrate first language transfer in Vietnamese learners of English. He examined a item language form, namely oral competence in English historic tense making. He tried to determine the role of L1 transfer in the acquisition of this English linguistic feature as a billet of age, eon of exposure to English, and place and purpose of learning English.The influence of L1 on L2 was also examined by Lakkis and Malak (2000) who concentrated on the transfer of Arabic prepositional knowledge to English (by Arab students). Both positive and negative transfer were examined in order to help teache rs identify problematic areas for Arab students and help them understand where transfer should be encouraged or avoided. In particular, they concluded that an instructor of English, whose native language is Arabic, can use the students L1 for structures that use equivalent prepositions in twain languages. On the other hand, whenever 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 out these differences to their students.Not only was L1 influence examined gibe to language pair, but according to the type of speech liftd (written vs. oral). Hagge (p. 33) discusses the influence of L1 on accent he notes that the ear acts like a filter, and after a tiny age (which Hagge rubrics is 11 years), it only accepts sounds that belong to ones native language. Hagge discusses L1 transfer in order to convince readers that there is indeed a critical age for languag e acquisition, and in particular the acquisition of a native-like accent. He uses the congressman of the French language, which includes complex vowel sounds, to demonstrate that after a critical age, the acquisition of these sounds is not possible 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.STUDIES OF CORRECTIVE FEEDBACKCorder elaborated on Carrolls work to show that the most efficient way to teach a student the correct linguistic form is to let him test various hypotheses and eventually find the right form (point 6, listed above). In these steps, Hagge points out the importance of self correction (p. 82-83). According to Hagge, it is useful to always perform an error analysis based on written tests administered by the teacher, but without informing the student of the purpose of the test. On that basis, self-correction is preferable to correction by the teacher, esp ecially if the latter is through with(p) in a severe or intimidating way. Self correction is even more efficient when it is done with the help of childrens classmates. According to teachers, the younger the children, the greater the cooperation among them and the less aggressive or intimidating the corrections. Hagge dedicates a section in his book to the importance of treating errors in a positive way. In this section, titled The teacher as a good get a lineer, he notes that it is useless, if not harmful, to treat errors as if they were diseases or pathological situations which must be eliminated, especially if this treatment becomes discouraging, as occurs when teachers lose their patience be arrive at of childrens numerous errors. This, of course, does not mean that corrections should be avoided after all it is the teachers duty to teach the rules of the L2. But the correction of every error as soon as it occurs is not recommended. The justification that Hagge offers is the fol lowing the linguistic subject that the child tries to produce is a sequence of elements which are interdependent immediate corrections which interrupt this message tend to produce negative consequences, even to the less sensitive children such consequences include anxiety, fear of making an error, the development of avoidance strategies, reduced demand for participation in the classroom, lack of interest for learning, reduced will for self correction, and lack of trust towards the teacher. Esser (1984, cited in Hagge) also made a similar point repetitive and immediate corrections, he noted, may cause sensitive children to develop aggressive behavior towards their classmates or teacher. Thus, Hagge concludes, correction must not be applied by the teacher unless errors obstruct communication. This is the main criterion for error correction (i.e. obstruction of communication) presented by Hagge however there have been studies which examined such criteria in greater detail, such as Fr eiermuths L2 Error Correction Criteria and Techniques (1997). Freiermuth accepts Corders view (point 6) and proposes criteria for error correction in the classroom. These criteria are exposure, seriousness, and students needs.In the case of exposure, Freiermuth claims that when a child creates language (for example, when he tries to express an subject by using a linguistic form he has not yet acquired), he will most likely make errors correcting these errors will be ineffective because the learner is not aware of them. Thus, error correction would result in the acquisition of the correct form only if the learner has been previously exposed to that particular language form.As regards the seriousness criterion, Freiermuth claims that the teacher must determine the temperance of an error before deciding whether he should correct it or not. Here Freiermuth sets a criterion which agrees with that of Hagges the error, he states, must impede communication before it should be considered a n error that necessitates correction. But what constitutes a serious error? Which errors are those which should not be corrected? As an examples of non-serious errors, Freiermuth mentions those errors which occur due to learners nervousness in the classroom, due to their stress or the pressure of having to produce accurately a linguistic form in the L2. These errors can occur even with familiar structures in that case, they are not of serious character and are similar to what Corder called mistakes. Here again we see Corders influence in error analysis, and in particular in the distinction between errors and mistakes. Freiermuth goes on to suggest a hierarchy of errors (according to seriousness) to help teachers steady down which errors should be corrected Errors that significantly impair communication are at 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 h ave a highly stigmatizing effect on the listeners. He also clarifies what can cause stigmatization profound pronunciation errors, or errors of familiar forms.Another important criterion that must be considered by the teacher is individual students needs. The importance of this factor is mentioned in Corder, who in turn notes that this idea had been suggested previously by Carroll (1955, cited in Corder 1967) and Ferguson (1966, cited in Corder 1967). Each student is different and thus may react differently to error correction. We infer from Freiermuths claim that the teacher must perform two main toils first, assess some specific character traits of students, such as self-confidence and language acquisition capability. Freiermuth agrees with Walz (1982, cited in Freiermuth) that self-confident, capable students can profit from even minor corrections, while struggling students should receive correction only on major errors. This claim agrees with Esser and Hagges claim that repetiti ve corrections are likely to precipitate motivation it is reasonable to accept that students who lack self-confidence will be stigmatized to a greater degree than confident students.The teachers second task, according to Freiermuth, is to listen to learners L2 utterances in order to determine where errors occur (i.e. which linguistic forms cause students difficulties), their frequency, and their gravitational attraction (according to the severity criteria mentioned above). Then the teacher can combine the outcome of these tasks and decide on correction techniques for individual students.A different approach to error correction was suggested by Porte (1993), who stressed the importance of self-correction. Porte refers to Corders distinction of errors and mistakes and points out that many students do not know the difference. It is important, Porte notes, that students know how to identify an error in order to avoid it in the future. She agrees with Corder that it is more efficient f or learners to correct themselves than be corrected by the teacher, and goes on to suggest a four-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, each time trying to answer the questions included in each of the four steps. Thus, in each re-reading task (each step) they concentrate on a different look of their essay. In brief, the first task asks them to highlight the verbs and check the tenses in the second task students concentrate on prepositions the third task requires them to concentrate on nouns (spelling, agreement between subject and verb) finally in the fourth task students should try to correct potential personal mistakes. Porte also offers some miniature of what is meant by personal mistakes, in order to help the students identify them.The studies mentioned above are only a few examples that demonstrate how S. Pit Corders work influenced the area of er ror analysis in linguistics. The concepts that Corder introduced directed researchers attention to specific areas of error analysis they helped linguists realize that although errors sometimes obstruct communication, they can often facilitate second language acquisition also they played a significant role in training teachers and helping them identify and elucidate students errors, as well as helping them construct correction techniques.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.