Burrhus Frederick Skimmer
founder of modern behaviourism. In the 1950 he put forward the view that
learning was result of environmental rather than generic factors. Introducing the nation of operants He emphasised the importance of reinforcement (3 part of SRR Istm-responce-reinforcement). Because a learning a lg1 was conceived as
habit-formation, the crucial role was ascribed to imitation and repetition.
Apperant conditioning:an individual responds to a simulus by behaving In a particular way.
Criticism behaviourism: The mentalist/innalist theory of lg acquisition.
Noam Chomsky put forth a mentalist idea of a „linguistic faculty” called Lg Acquisition Device LAD that included innately specified constraints on the possibile forms human lg could take.According to him ‘infants’ innate knowledge of lg was a care tenet, ‘development constituted’ growth or maturation of the lg module, and lg input set the parameters for a particular pattern from among those innately provided.
1.Criricism of CAHempirical:doubts concerning the ability of CAH to predict errors arowe when researchers began to examine lg-learner lg In depta Theoretical: there were a number of reservations concerning the feasible of comparing lgs and the methodology of CAH Practical:there were doubts about whether CAH had anything relevant to offer to lg teaching.
Audiolingual approach: to foreign lg teaching In the 1960s, which advocated avoiding errors At all act, researchers began to realise not only that mistakes were a natura and inevitable outcome of learning
The emergence of Error Analysis:
-a corpus of lg-learner is selected
-the errors In the corpus are identified
-the errors are explained
-are evaluated
From an EA perspective, the foreign-lg learner is no longer perceived and a passive recipient of input, but rather as playing an active frole, processing input, generating and testing hypotheses.
Empirical research and the predictability of errors the criticism levelled against CAH In the late 1960s, and Elary 1970s trigged more interest. Dulay&Burtidntyfied type of terror according to their psycholinguistic origins: 85% developmental errors, i.e. those, that don’t reflect L1 structure but are fund In first lg acquisition data. 12% unique errors, those that don’t reflect L1 structure and also aren’t fund In first lg acq data. 3% interferencje like errors, i.e. those that reflect L1 structure and aren’t fund In L1 data
Error typologies and error sources Elary attemptsat terror typology such as those based on CAH and behaviourism, were rather simplified and distinguished roughly between negative transfer and positive tr Eror a form unwanted by the teacher (George 1972); a devision from the norms of the target lg (Eblis 1994).
Carder: 4 main categories of errors
-omition-learners omit certain linguistic forms because of their complexity In production
-addiction-of rendundant things May be instigated by the learners’L1, i.e. Japanese may find it harder to follow phonatictic rulet of english
-selection-may occur In the area of morphology, syntax, lexis
-ordering-shifting the position of certain phonemes, i.e. fignisicant instead of significant
Carter 3 types to their systematicty:
-presystematic errors, occur when the lg learner is unaware of the existence of a particular rule In L2
-systematic errors-learner Has discovered the rule only if hppens to be wrong one;learner is unable to self-correct, though He May be able to account for the mistaken rulet and the type used.
-post systematic errors- lg learner knowi the correct target lg rule but uses it inconsistently. Global errors impede communication and they prezent the healer from comprehending some aspects of the message; involve the overall structure of a sentencje or the sentencje might be difficult to interpret.
Local errors May Violeta an important grammar rule, they don’t impair comprenension