翻訳と辞書
Words near each other
・ Interlink Publishing
・ Interlis
・ Interlisp
・ Interlobar arteries
・ Interlobar duct
・ Interlobar veins
・ Interlobular arteries
・ Interlobular bile ducts
・ Interlobular duct
・ Interlobular veins
・ Interlaken, New Jersey
・ Interlaken, New York
・ Interlaken-Oberhasli (administrative district)
・ Interlakes
・ Interlan
Interlanguage
・ Interlanguage (disambiguation)
・ Interlanguage fossilization
・ Interleaf
・ Interleague Minor League Postseason Series
・ Interleague play
・ Interleave lower bound
・ Interleave sequence
・ Interleaved 2 of 5
・ Interleaved deltas
・ Interleaved memory
・ Interleaved polling with adaptive cycle time
・ Interleaving
・ Interleaving (disk storage)
・ Interlegis


Dictionary Lists
翻訳と辞書 辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ]
スポンサード リンク

Interlanguage : ウィキペディア英語版
Interlanguage

Interlanguage is the term for a dynamic, rule-based linguistic system that has been developed by a learner of a second language (or L2) who has not yet reached proficiency. A learner's interlanguage preserves some features of their first language (or L1), and can also overgeneralize some L2 writing and speaking rules. These two characteristics of an interlanguage result in the system's unique linguistic organization.
An interlanguage is idiosyncratically based on the learners' experiences with the L2. It can "fossilize", or cease developing, in any of its developmental stages. The interlanguage rules are claimed to be shaped by several factors, including L1-transfer, previous learning strategies, strategies of L2 acquisition (i.e., simplification), L2 communication strategies (i.e., circumlocution), and overgeneralization of L2 language patterns.
Interlanguage is based on the theory that there is a dormant psychological framework in the human brain that is activated when one attempts to learn a second language. Interlanguage theory is often credited to Larry Selinker, who coined the terms "interlanguage" and "fossilization." Uriel Weinreich is credited with providing the foundational information that was the basis of Selinker's research. Selinker (1972) noted that in a given situation, the utterances produced by a learner are different from those native speakers would produce had they attempted to convey the same meaning. This comparison suggests the existence of a separate linguistic system. 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.
Interlanguage can be variable across different contexts; for example, it may be more accurate, complex and fluent in one domain than in another.
To study the psychological processes involved one can compare the interlanguage utterances of the learner with two things:
#Utterances in the native language (L1) to convey the same message produced by the learner.
#Utterances in the target language (L2) to convey the same message, produced by a native speaker of that language.
It is possible to apply an interlanguage perspective to a learner's underlying knowledge of the target language sound system (interlanguage phonology), grammar (morphology and syntax), vocabulary (lexicon), and language-use norms found among learners (interlanguage pragmatics).
By describing the ways in which learner language conforms to universal linguistic norms, interlanguage research has contributed greatly to our understanding of linguistic universals in second-language acquisition.
== Background ==

Before interlanguage hypothesis rose to prominence, the principal theory of second-language (L2) development was contrastive analysis. This theory assumed that learners' errors were caused by the difference between their L1 and L2. This approach was deficit-focused, in the sense that speech errors were thought to arise randomly and should be corrected. A further assumption followed that a sufficiently thorough analysis of the differences between learners' first and second languages could predict all of the difficulties they would face. This assumption was not based in rigorous analysis of learner language but rather was often anecdotal, and researchers' claims were prone to confirmation bias.
Robert Lado (1957) held that the claims of contrastive analysis should be viewed as hypothetical unless and until they were based on systematic analyses of learner speech data. Around this time, second-language acquisition research shifted from hypotheses of language learning and the development of language-teaching materials to the systematic analysis of learner speech and writing with the practice of error analysis. Although this was initially done to validate the claims of contrastive analysis, researchers found that many learner behaviours could not be easily explained by transfer from learners' L1 to their L2.
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. William Nemser called it an ''approximative system'' and Pit Corder called it ''transitional competence''.

抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)
ウィキペディアで「Interlanguage」の詳細全文を読む



スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース

Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.