| Making errors is a universal phenomenon in language learning, and no language learner can avoid it. But linguists hold different views on how to treat learner errors. Researchers have put forward many kinds of theories about errors. This thesis first tries to discuss three important error theories: Contrastive Analysis (CA), Error Analysis (EA) and Intel-language Hypothesis (IH) from the aspects of error viewpoints, methods of error analysis and their respective research achievements. By analyzing the three theories, we can see that the research objects of both CA and EA are errors, the main difference between them is that CA is motivated by the prospect of being able to identify points of similarity and difference between particular native languages and target languages, while EA pays attention to the study of the nature of errors, recognizing the types of errors, the causes for making errors and researching and evaluating the gravity of the effect of errors on communication. However, both of their language materials for research mainly come from some written materials, such as students' compositions, but ignoring some errors made in their spoken language. In contrast, the Interlanguage theory puts all the errors , including oral errors into its research domain, trying to provide a full, dynamic and vertical description of learners' language, noticing the whole process of learners' language development. Compared with CA and EA, the interlanguage theory takes a more positive attitude towards errors, firmly believing that errors will be made throughout the whole process of language acquisition, constituting a particular characteristic of the process of language acquisition.Although the advantages of promoting second language learning of interlanguage talk used by second language learners have been confirmed by many researchers, there are still many questions for us to probe into. What on earth do the errors in interlanguage talk affect the speakers and listeners? Whether are the common errors in students' interlanguage talk rule-governed or not? What characteristics are there in the interlanguage talk of the students of English at different stages of interlanguage development? How should the foreign language teachers analyze and correct the errors made by the students with different target language levels? How can the teachers of English instruct the students at different stages of interlanguage development to have interlanguage talk toperformance system, especially for Group A, whose errors were probably due to ignorance or unfamiliarity of rule restrictions and must be corrected or consolidated in time.4. The findings of the experiment on interlanguage talk also showed that the process of L2 acquisition develops in the style of "U". Interlanguage fossilization existed in the errors made by Group C, which shows that L2 learners have to experience a plateau in terms of psychology, and a climax in terms of language proficiency.5. Based on the characteristics of errors, we found that the three groups belong to three different stages of interlanguage development: Group A was at the random error stage; Group B belonged to the emergent stage; and Group C belonged to the systematic stage. The three stages have their respective characteristics of interlanguage.These discoveries can further prove that L2 acquirers' interlanguage errors are rule-governed. And, although students can experience the same patterns and stages in the process of L2 acquisition, there are different kinds of errors at different stages and their interlanguage has different characteristics. This is because there are many factors affecting interlanguage in the process of L2 acquisition. In different situations, students' language performance shows a lot of differences. Interlanguage development is an integral sector of L2 acquisition. In this process, the learners' interlanguage rules about the L2 are transitional, which will approximate to the target language if learners are given adequate timely and suitable input.This t...
|
PDF Full Text Request