Chief Ankama
14 May 2008
opinion
Windhoek — Some Namibian students learning English as L2 (second language) are inclined to make specific types of errors both in spoken and written form, usually regional bound. It appears that each region has its own specific types of errors.
The north of Namibia is but one area where English second language learners make similar or typical errors. My former colleague Margaret Goverde was lecturer for English at the University of Namibia Northern Campus Access Course, and she has collected some of the errors her students make.
I looked at her collection of errors and compared them with errors contained in the Newsletter produced by learners of one of the local high schools - Oshakati Secondary School. In the light of the above, I would like to pay attention to the typical errors these L2 learners make and further look into how they make them.
Northern Namibia is home to more than 60 percent of the entire Namibian population and this literally means a populous learning community expanse. The Oshiwambo consists of eight languages (some people call them dialects), however people have no problems of understanding one another, nor do they have any difficulty in speaking one or more of the regional languages.
Since English is the official language in Namibia, it is also the medium of instruction in education. As such, students learn it as a subject from grades 1 to 3, and from Grade 4 it takes over from a local language as medium of instruction and it continues to be the second language throughout the learning career up to tertiary level.
Given the vastness of the northern regions, the dominance of the local languages, the scarcity of both ESL teaching-learning materials and well-trained staff to teach English, there are mountains of ESL teaching learning problems, especially in the rural primary schools where material needs are more acute.
It is in this understanding that I would like to present this topic in the light of the literature review; revisiting ESL - building the situation/context, the problem errors, the combating methodology and then conclusion.
ESL Perspective
The theory of English Second Language learning is an art in itself for both the teacher and the learner, viewed from a positive perception. Lightbown & Spada (1999,p. 31) state that a child or adult learninga second language is different from a child acquiring a first language in terms ofboth personal characteristics and conditions for learning.
It is obvious, but as Lightbown & Spada say, all second language learners regardless of age, have by definition already acquired one language.This prior knowledge may be an advantage in the sense that the learner has an idea how languages work, but on the contrary, knowledge of other languages might also lead learners to make incorrect guesses about how the second language works.
This may cause errors which such learners would not make in their first language (p. 32). The errors being referred to here are typical of those that will be presented in this paper. This view has been watermarked by De Houwer (1995, p. 220), saying that bilingualism helps learners particularly those at the early years to focus more on formal aspect of language as well as fine-tuning inunderstanding rules of both languages as compared to the monolinguals (ibid).
Ellis (SLA 1997, p. 3) explains second language learning as referring to any language that is learned subsequent to the mother tongue in the classroom or naturally acquired. Various ways have been used to find out how L2 learners acquire and learn the target language, which includes analyses of samples of learners' L2 use of language in written or spoken communication.
That the degree of ability and progress in use of the target language is better monitored over a lengthy time in order to identify their categories of weakness and strengths.
SLA researchers try to discover factors (e.g. external-input or internal-language aptitudes) L2 learners possess as individuals, influencing L2 learners to do what they do in the SLA situation (p. 5).
I want to make a point here that although acquisition and learning seem to be used synonymously at times, I would like to align myself more to learning since English second language acquisition is still a less viable option in the region under discussion.
Lightbown & Spada (1999) outline an interesting comparison on second language between young learners and adults. They point out that young second language learners do not have much content of language and world knowledge in the shelves of their mind as compared to older ones.
The two authors say children are nevertheless not shy to use the new language in spite of limited proficiency.This is perhaps the reason why young second language learners, generally speaking, improve much faster than older learners.
There is one condition which appears to be common to second language learners of all ages, according to Lightbown & Spada, and that is during the in-class, the 'foreigner talk' or 'teacher talk' (p. 34).
Similarly Ellis (SLARLT 1997, p. 107-108) discusses a theory of instructed second language acquisition which addresses how instructed learners acquire the kind of linguistic and pragmatic knowledge needed for the production of L2 sentences for the development of proficiency. At the same time it explores universal aspects of L2 learning based on two primary distinctive theories i.e. explicit and implicit knowledge/learning and controlled and automatic processing.
The theory classifies the kinds of input taking place in the L2 class. That teaching linguistic code L2 features are at times made artificial in order to enable L2 learners quickly to capture the recognition of some language features that are highlighted/stressed in class for making learners aware of their most typical errors such as the practice of tenses, plurals etc. It is here where L2 features are made noticeable and learnable by learners.
Whether this indeed helps learners to improve their second language proficiency, I cannot tell, but Ellis refers to explicit knowledge as abstract and explanatory and that this is the kind of knowledge that helps the L2 learner to distinguish for instance the difference between a subject and verb or present and past tense. Implicit knowledge is said to be intuitive, in that the learner is unaware of its existence, although the notion of unconsciousness is apparently disputable (SLARLT, p. 110-111).
If second language learning, in this case English is so widely researched,how is it possible that there are learners who learned English for twelve years but stillthey make a number of significant errors?
I would like first to look at learning styles and perhaps go beyond classroom environment. Erhman (1996, p. 50), writes that to the degree learning styles are "preferences" or "needs", they are much the same kind of thing, even though the former represents a more limited domain than the latter, which is just not a learning preference but a personality disposition.
He further says both have direct effect on learning strategies, classroom activities, and other choices a learner makes. With any mismatch between the learner and the curriculum related stuff and the teaching style of the course, says Erhman, there will be effects on the efficiency and effectiveness of the learning (ibid).
Erhman underlines the term learning styles as preferences, stressing that one or another style of a learning style dimension is as good as the other. In other words, it is within the individual learners' tact and skill to manoeuvre learning habits which are beneficial to own use.
Focusing now on learning styles and preferences, Ellis (SLA 1997, p. 44-47) discusses discourse aspect of language, which blends together with Shannon's (1994) discussion on Krashen's theory of SLA in that both are concerned with what goes on in the mental-cognitive processes of the SLA learner when acquiring or learning the language e.g. how the L2 learner acquires rules of discourse used by the native speaker.
Ellis refers to interaction shaping interlanguage development - a conducive or language rich environment discussed by Krashen. He farther explores how L2 learners develop their language ability from error stage to an elevated fewer errors level.
Ellis basically compares the behaviorist view against the mentalist opinion on L2 acquisition and learning. Behaviorists view language as outside and stimuli motivated, while mentalists base their argument of language learning on the capacity of the learner's brains as exposed to input for trigging acquisition.
This leads to the dissimilar in language discourse used by L2 speakers as compared to native speakers, where "the foreigner talk" situation is marked.
This is characterized, according to Ellis, by deletion of certain grammatical features e.g. copulas, modal verbs and articles.
That L2 learners resort sometimes to negotiation of meanings when they are unable to sustain the flow of discussions fitting the Krashen's input hypothesis and the comprehensive input discussed earlier (Michael Long's interaction hypothesis). It is here where negative evidence is modified for positive target language reinforcement.
According to Ellis, roles of input and interaction in L2 should be extended to output in order to measure the effect of discourse of L2 learners in language production as they hear it.
Shannon (1994, pp. 7-19) just like Lightbown & Spada (1999, pp. 3840) reviews Krashen's monitor model and its five hypotheses which have a significant influence on second language acquisition and learning.
Shannon says Krashen proposes that all five hypotheses together account for SLA, that the theory has implications on L2 teaching and provides a basis for a model of language teaching, namely the Natural Approach.
The Acquisition Learning Hypothesis accounts for the two separate ways of developing L2, viz; Acquisition - a subconscious process similar to the one utilized by a child in the L1 acquisition and the Learning - a conscious process resulting from knowing or what is taught about language.
According to Shannon, Krashen's SLA theory is almost similar to L1 in that no taught knowledge in L1, and so can it be in L2 provided the acquirer is in the highly L2 speaking zone by using his/her LAD.
As regard to The Natural Order and The Monitor Hypotheses, learners' grammatical accuracy in The Natural Hypothesis is attributed to rules that are either early or lately acquired, according to Krashen although Shannon shows a contradiction by Mclaughlin (1987) and by Ellis.
Shannon points out that this hypothesis in view of some teachers is embedded within the curriculum they teach. The Monitor Hypothesis on the other hand concerns itself with the how acquisition and learning are used in language production.
Then the Input Hypothesis claims that language is acquired in one way only, i.e. by understanding messages or receiving comprehensible input, and teams together with the Affective Filter Hypothesis which is referred to as a "mental block" that prevents acquirers from fully utilizing the comprehensible input they receive for language acquisition (p. 16). While some teachers do not entirely agree with Krashen's strict Input Hypothesis, they believe that classroom offers a conducive environment for both acquisition and learning.
Affective Filter Hypothesis is seen as a metaphor only, since it is practically immeasurable (p. 17) but teachers talk about it with varied opinions, Shannon says.
It seems though the input-output mechanisms in L1 acquisition and learning have proved to be inconclusive and challenging.
Toohey (1998, p. 78) hypothesizesthat students who enter school speaking languages other than English are defined as something like benignly deviant, in Foucault's terms, in that their language departs from accepted standards, and that as a group these students constitute a rank that requires normalization. Toohey is apt to create scaffolding for (not only) new ESL learners - through careful blending them formally and informally with those who already know the second language.
While this is a positive idea, it is perhaps more beneficial in cases where speakers of the target language have a strong command of the language and that the target language is dominant as compared to other languages spoken in the vicinity.
Toohey's proposal in classroom management should be seen as a contribution in putting new ESL learners at ease within the learning environment. Toohey's view and that of Ellis (SLA 1997, p. 6-9) about Wes and the J & R specific case studies complement each other. In all cases, these L2 learners undoubtedly made significant progress during the observation period, but admittedly they also have not competently picked up the language's bits and pieces they were expected to have acquired by the end of the observation period.
This tells us that learners' errors in L2 cannot or may not completely disappear or that the L2 development of the learner depends on a number of options and multiple of factors and situations.
Therefore, the answers to the question of how L2 learners make different kinds of errors and why they do what they do will also be varied. Ellis distinguishes the difference between errors - gaps in learner's knowledge, learner does not know what is correct, and mistakes -occasional lapses in performance - learner is unable to perform what s/he knows.
That there are systematic and universal errors, global and local errors. That in L2 acquisition there is a silent period (L2 incubation period) which develops later into L2 production when the learner is confident to communicate depending on the grammar accumulated.
Ellis noted that variability in grammar development differs from one to the next learner and this reflects the degree of ability in language knowledge (SLA 1997, pp. 15-20).
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 New Era. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
