CA and EA paved the way for Interlanguage theory (IL hereinafter) in . The term ‘Interlanguage’ was first introduced by Selinker ( &). The Interlanguage theory, that assumes that an active and independent learning mind Selinker believes that the evidence for interlanguage can be found. Inter-language Theory Presented to: Ma’am Mehwish. Selinker’s Five Fossilization Process Steps Over-generalization Transfer of.

Author: Kam Nazuru
Country: Cameroon
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Photos
Published (Last): 28 December 2015
Pages: 450
PDF File Size: 20.48 Mb
ePub File Size: 16.66 Mb
ISBN: 580-2-58613-963-7
Downloads: 95156
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Nitaur

Selinker’s Interlanguage Theory by Erin Tillman on Prezi

Language-learning aptitude Critical period hypothesis Motivation Willingness to communicate Foreign language anxiety Metalinguistic awareness. It can also occur when a learner succeeds in conveying messages with their current L2 knowledge. The learner fossilizes the form instead of correcting it.

The specific problem is: Also, regardless if you believe fossilization exists, the educator should always assess where inherlanguage students are not acquiring knowledge appropriately and devise better strategies and plans on teaching. Thus began an explosion of research into understanding how language and the internal grammar in second language learners evolved.

This page was last edited on 21 Augustat Interlanguage can be observed to be variable across different contexts. This system can be observed when studying the utterances of the learner who attempts to produce meaning in their L2 speech; it is not seen when that same learner performs form-focused tasks, such as oral drills in a classroom. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Second Language Acquisition Course Code: Finally, they learned the rule for appropriate use of “-ing”.

Applying Interlanguage to the Language Classroom

There has been a wide range of research investigating interlanguage with various levels, ages, and languages. May Learn how and when to remove this template message. Theory, methods, and applications.

Before the interlanguage hypothesis rose to prominence, the principal theory of second-language L2 development was contrastive analysis. It can ” fossilize “, or cease developing, in any of its developmental stages. This repeats over and over with the person alternating stairways and floors until the person reaches the top of the building native fluency.


November Inerlanguage how and when to remove this template message. The blended words are called “prefabricated patterns” or “chunks”. The results have led to understanding interlanguage as embodying the characteristics of being systematic, dynamic, and variable.

Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.


Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email. The idea that language learners’ linguistic systems were different from both their L1 and L2 was developed independently at around the same time by several different researchers. Along with interlanguage comes a very controversial topic called fossilization. Systematic variation is brought about by changes in the linguistic, psychological, and social context. Interlanguage theory tried to determine if there was a continuum in the internal grammar of learning additional languages, and through research, resolve if learners acquired L2 in much of the same fashion as L1.

Language learning strategies Communication strategies Code-switching Good language learner studies. Interlanguage is claimed to be a language in its own right.

This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia’s quality standards. Individuals learning a second language may not always hear spoken L2 words as separate units. Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition.

The difference is mostly one of variability, as a learner’s interlanguage is spoken only by the learner and changes frequently tyeory they become more proficient in the language.

Interlanguage has multiple dimensions that make it impossible to list in an article like this, but interlanguage carries a interanguage of research to show the validity of the hypothesis. Thus, literate learners may produce much more target-like forms in a writing task for which they have 30 minutes to plan, than in conversation where they must produce language with almost no planning at all.

These two characteristics of an interlanguage result in the system’s unique linguistic organization. The concept of interlanguage is closely related to other types of language, especially creoles and pidgins. But they will show higher accuracy when the word following the tensed word begins with a nonconsonant e. Retrieved from ” https: As the person breaks through the outer atmosphere of earth, he is still closer to earth, but he is moving towards the moon to become an alien he understands more of what it means to use Korean and to think like a Korean.


The more time that learners have to plan, the more target-like their production may be. Interlanguage viewed language development as a combination of several factors including nature of input, environment, internal processing of the learner, and influence between L1 and L2.

Interlannguage have tendencies to believe students are huge buckets we just pour information into and they learn it.

By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. The interlanguage rules are claimed to be shaped by several interlangjage, including L1-transfer, previous learning strategies, strategies of L2 acquisition i. International Review of Applied Linguistics.

Interlanguage can be variable across different contexts; for example, it may be more accurate, complex and fluent in one domain thekry in another.

When learners experience significant restructuring in their L2 systems, sdlinker sometimes show a U-shaped learning pattern. This comparison suggests the existence of a separate linguistic system. The realization that students will interpret information differently should provide some guidance on how instruction of the information should be presented. Social factors may include a change in register or the familiarity of interlocutors.

The biggest controversy comes from the fossilization aspect that explains why learners fail to reach various levels. This approach was deficit-focused, in the sense that speech errors were thought to arise randomly and should be corrected. Free variation in the use of a language feature is usually taken as a sign that it has not been fully acquired. Fossilization is the process of ‘freezing’ of the transition between the L1 and L2, and is regarded as the final stage of interlanguage development.