Contrastive Analysis

A Presentation by Lulud, Nicko, and Novian

Contrastive Analysis: The Definition

CA is SLA approach that compares features of L1 and L2 in order to determine the similarities and differences of L1 to L2

Continued…

The idea of CA was popular back in the time when structural linguistics (structuralism) and behavioral psychology (behaviorism) were dominant (Yang, 1992).

We’ll talk about this later on…

CA: The Transfer

In Contrastive Analysis, when students of L1 learn L2, there are two kinds of transfer happening:Negative TransferPositive Transfer

Positive Transfer

refers to the similarity found in both L1 in L2; be it in the grammatical structure, morphology, or pronunciation.

These similarities are believed to ease the students in learning the L2

Negative Transfer

refers to the differences of grammatical structure, morphology, and pronunciation of the L2 compared to the L1.

The negative transfer is said to be the obstacle of the students in learning L2

When do these transfer occur?

In the context of Indonesian students learning English, both positive transfer and negative transfer will occur in the process of learning such as in the learning of grammar, morphology, and pronunciation.

Positive Transfer “Saya makan” and “I

eat”“Pembunuh” and

“Murderer”Car [kar] (English),

and /k/amu, /a/dik, and /r/api (Indonesian)

• Grammar• Morphology• Phonology

The Negative Transfer• Grammar• Morphology• Phonology

There is no verb in base form, singular-subject-present form, past form, past participle form, and present participle form in Indonesian

Tensed-sentence“I ate” can easily be translated as “saya makan” dopping or ignoring the tense information

There are many phonemes that do not exist in L1 (Indonesia)

However

though those three aspects of language can experience both positive and negative transfer, the focus of CA is on the surface forms of both L1 and L2 systems.

It also focuses on describing and comparing the languages one level at a time – generally by contrasting the phonology of L1 and L2 first, then morphology, then syntax, with the lexicon receiving relatively little attention, and discourse still less

Implication in ELT

CA only provides WHAT to teachALM provides HOW to teach

Why ALM?

StructuralismCA Comparing L1 & L2

structuresALM Teaching the new

structuresIt shares the same theories as the basis Behaviorism

CA Language acquisition essentially involves habit formation

ALM Strengthen habit through drills

Its principles related to Contrastive Analysis

Related ALM principles with CA

Language is speech, not writingLanguage is a set of habitsTeach the language not about the languageLanguages are different

Pros and Cons in CA

experienceresearch theory

Pros argumentations in CA

Klein (1986: 26) stated that “the existence of various forms of transfer is too obvious to be ignored”.

Rivers and Temperley (1978: 152) also assume that CA is also still good to analyze the students’ problem

Lehn and Slager (1959) compared the L1 and L2 in the process of transfering.

Table about the difficulties/problems

Native Language Learner Problems Examples:Arabic speakers learn English /b/ Habit

Arabic speakers learn English /v/ have it

Indonesian speakers learn English /g/ to /k/ Leg

Indonesian speakers learn English /d/ to /t/ Bird

Indonesian speakers learn English /b/ to /p/ Cap

Indonesian speakers learn English More than two consonants

Girls

Cons argumentations in CA

Hughes (1980) attributes the reasons for CA’ loss popularity to each lack of success in predicting difficulties. He also argues that CA has undervalued the contribution of the learners and also failed to recognize what has to be learnt.

Cons argumentations in CA

Wardhaugh (1970: 125) believes that the strong version of CA was quite unrealistic and impracticable.

Lances (1969) reports that one-third to two-third of his adult foreign students English’ errors were not traceable to the first language.

Cons argumentations in CA

James (1985) also made some counter arguments that:Interference from the L1 is not the sole source of error in L2

learning.The predictions of students’ error in L2 made by CA are not

reliable. CA is based on, and perpetuates, a naïve view of language

structure.There is not establishing criteria fir comparability.CA only conceives of interference in one direction, from L1 to L2.

Thank You