Luận văn english coordinators and, but, or as cohesive devices an analysis or errors made by secondary students

Vinh universityForeign language department ========== Nguyen Thi Van english coordinators: and, but, or as cohesive devices: an analysis of errors made by secondary students Sù ph©n

Vinh university

Foreign language department

==========

Nguyen Thi Van

english coordinators: and, but, or as

cohesive devices: an analysis of errors made

by secondary students

(Sù ph©n tÝch lçi ë häc sinh ptth trong viÖc sö dông c¸c tõ nèi

tiÕng anh: and, but, or nh nh÷ng ph¬ng tiÖn liªn kÕt)

graduation thesis field: error analysis

Vinh, 2005

Vinh university

Foreign language department

==========

english coordinators: and, but, or as

cohesive devices: an analysis of errors made

by secondary students

(Sù ph©n tÝch lçi ë häc sinh ptth trong viÖc sö dông c¸c tõ nèi

tiÕng anh: and, but, or nh nh÷ng ph¬ng tiÖn liªn kÕt)

graduation thesis field: error analysis

Supervisor: Vò ThÞ ViÖt H¬ng Student : NguyÔn ThÞ V©n

Class : 42A 1 - English

Vinh, 2005

I should like to express my deep gratitude to my supervisor Vò ThÞ ViÖt H¬ng M.A who gave me valuable advice and helped me with source of materials during the writing of this thesis.

Also, I should like to thank all my teachers at the foreign language department of Vinh university for their lectures on the area of valuable knowledge which enlightened the arguments in the study.

I am appreciative of all those who kindly given me advice and help during the period of my study at Vinh university for Foreign studies.

Finally, I wish to express my deep thanks to my parents and friends for their encouragement and support

to my doing this thesis

Vinh, summer, 2005 Nguyen Thi Van

table content

1.1 The coordinators meaning function and position 4

1.3 Coordinators as cohesive devices in sentence connection 81.3.1 Semantic implications for coordinators AND 91.3.2 Semantic implications for coordination by But 111.3.3 Semantic implications for coordination by OR 13

1.4.3.3 Error analysis and contrastive analysis 201.4.4 Causes of errors in second language learning 212.4.4.1 Interlingual errors and mother tongue interference 21

Chapter 2 The study 26

2.6.1 Results of part 1 multiple choice question 302.6.2 Results of part 2 guided sentence production 312.6.3 Results of part 3 guided sentence production 34

3.2 Implication for teaching coordinators to Vietnamese pupils

[[

45

list of figures and tables

Tables 2.4 Number of ERRORS and their causes in part 1

Tables 2.5 Number of ERRORS and their causes in part 2

Table 2.6 Number of ERRORS and their causes in part 3

Table 2.7 Number of ERRORS and their causes in part 4

PART I : INTRODUCTION

1.1.Rational of The study

In recent years, together with the increasing need for English learning, greatefforts have been made in order to improve the quality of English teaching andlearning These include the search for and implication of new and more effectiveteaching methods Special attention has also been paid to research in differentareas of the teaching and learning English

In the process of learning language in general, and of learning English inparticular, making errors is not easy to avoid As well making errors is a part oflearning, finding errors is a part of teaching, this helps the process of learningquicker and more effective, given the fact that description and analysis ofstudents’ errors play a crucial role in the improvement of the teaching andlearning Error analysis has been an interesting area which has attracted theattention of an increasing number of researchers

Since the Vietnamese and English languages have very distinct grammarsystems, Vietnamese learners of English tend to encounter a lot of difficulties intheir acquisition of the target language Among these difficulties is the use ofcoordinators AND, BUT, OR as cohesive devices which plays an important role

in the making of discourse Until now, concerning English discourse, the use ofcoordinator AND, BUT, OR as cohesive devices seems to have been given agreat deal of attention This is revealed in the works of “ Linking words ” byCollin Cobuild, 1996; “ A university grammar of English ” by Randolph Quirk,Sidney Green Bacon, 1973; “ A study on coordinators AND, BUT, OR ” by VoThi Thao Ly, 1999 However, to the best of my knowledge, no research so farhas been done on error analysis in area of using coordinators AND, BUT, OR ascohesive devices .It is obvious that learning language is for communicationrather than for acknowledgement of language Therefore, based on the outcomes

of the previous contrastive analysis studies concerning cohesive devices, ananalysis of errors in using AND, BUT, OR is tended to be an effort contributing

to filling the gap

For the reasons as above, I have decided to choose the topic “ ENGLISHCOORDINATORS : AND, BUT, OR AS COHESIVE DEVICES: AN ERRORANALYSIS MADE BY SECONDARY STUDENTS.”

1.2 Aim of the study

The study reported in this thesis aims to :

- Identify the errors in using AND, BUT, OR as cohesive devices faced byVietnamese learners at high school.

- Find the major causes and sources of error committed by high schoolstudents in the area of using AND, BUT, OR as cohesive devices

- Make some suggestions for teaching and learning these cohesive devices

1.3.Scope of the study

- Analyze errors through the tests

- Collect in to typical type

- Find related reasons

1.4.Method of the study

This study uses methods:

- Investigating and analyzing method

- Explanation

- systematic method

1.5 Design of the study

This thesis consists of three parts

 Part I: Introduction

In this introductory chapter, justifications are made for the conducting of thepresent research The aim, scope and method of the study are then identified.The design of the study is also provide

 Part II: Content

This part consist of two chapters:

Chapter I: Theoretical Background

This chapter will provide an in-depth review of the relevant literature related

to the issue under investigation Specially, a review of coordinators: AND, BUT,

OR in English will provide the theoretical framework for the identification of theerrors that students made In addition, theories about the sources of errors willhelp explore what factors caused students' commitment of errors in using thosecoordinators in English Error analysis as the main theoretical tool for analysingdata will also be reviewed

Chapter II: The study

This chapter will present the methodology adopted to collect data for theresearch, which includes the desciption of research questions, setting, subjects,

data collection techniques This chapter will also present and discuss the resultand findings of the study.

*Part III: Conclusion and Implication

This part will summarise major findings, suggest some types of execises The Appendix containing the test given to the students for data collectionand some typical errors

PART II: THE CONTENT

CHAPTER I: THEORITICAL BACKGROUND

1.1.The coordinators: the meaning, the function, and the position 1.1.1 The meaning of coordination

Coordination, subordination are grammatical devices in their own meaning With subordination, the content of the subordinate clause is simple presented

as given

With coordination, both parts of coordinated units are offered as newinformation, especially with coordinated clauses, where the informationmentioned in one clause is as important as that presented in the other

Let’s examine the following:

[1] Was it snowing and did you go out?

[2] Did you go out although it was snowing?

Where the fact that “it was snowing” is already known, the subordinatingclause “although it was snowing ”, therefore, only helps to emphasize the mainclause

So [1]can be interpreted “is it true that you went out although it was snowing?”

On the contrary [2] can be understood “is it true that it was snowing and youwent out?”

1.1.2.The function of coordinators

Sydney Green Baums, Geofrey Leek, Janvartvik and Randolph Quirk (1973)regarded the three conjunctions AND, BUT,OR as the most central coordinators

In general, coordinators join elements that are grammatical equivalent Theseelements can be single words, phrases or clauses

Examples:

[3] This way you get the books quickly but easily

(Single word coordinated)

[4] If I’m not satisfied, I may return the books, my membership will becancelled and I will owe nothing

( Independent clause coordinated)

[5] I’m going to join a library book club because I like books and because theyare good value

( Dependent clause coordinated)

In this thesis, only clausal coordinators are examined or else they areobserved in the way they join two clauses to form a compound sentence.

Figure1:

Independent clause, coordinator, independent clause

Figure 2:

Subordinate clause, coordinator, subordinate clause

1.1.3.The position of coordinators AND, BUT, OR

Figure 3:

[6a] John plays the piano, and his sister plays the guitar

[6b] John plays the piano, his sister and plays the guitar(*)

[7a] I may see you tomorrow or may phone later in the day

[7b] I enjoy thrillers but don’t want to join a crime book club

[8a] They are living in England or they are spending a vacation there

[8b] OR they are spending a vacation there, they are living in England.(*)[9a] He was unhappy about it, and yet he did what he was told

[9b] He asked to be transferred, because he was unhappy and because he saw

no prospect of promotion

[10] He asked to be transferred because he was unhappy and (because) he saw

no prospect of promotion, and (because) conditions were far better at theother office

[11] John might take them by car, Mary might go with

( “or” understood)

them by bus, or I might order a taxi for them

Note: (*) means “unacceptable”

As we can see, AND, BUT, OR are the most central coordinators which canjoin two equal clauses as in [6a] However [6b] can not be acceptable for thecoordinators are always restricted to initial position in the clause When joiningtwo clauses, AND, BUT, OR allow ellipsis of the clause they introduce if thesubject is co-referential with that of the preceding linked clause as in [7a] and[7b] This feature applies to all the threes, but a bit less frequently to BUT What

is more, clauses introduced by AND, BUT, OR are sequentially fixed in the

relation to the previous clause as in [8a] and therefore can not be transposedwithout producing unacceptable sentences as [8b] or at least changing therelationships of the clauses Another feature can be illustrated through [9a,b] -AND precedes YET and BECAUSE, but does not follow any other conjunction,

as in [9a]

As well as linking two main clauses, AND and OR can link subordinateclauses as exemplified in [10] In these cases, the second and subsequentsubordinators “because” may be omitted

Finally, such linking of more than two clauses is frequently applied to ORand AND, also possible but rather limited to BUT BUT is restricted to linking amaximum of two clauses and only links certain types of subordinate clauses,such as temporal adverbial clauses (example12), “ that” clauses as in ( 13 ) andclauses introduced by the same conjunctions (14)

[12] I spoke to him after the conference was over, but before he started work

[13] He said that John would take them by car but (that) they might be late

In this case, the second subordinator, the one following BUT is omitted

[14] He didn’t see who met the ambassador, but who took him away

In the case, the first part of the sentence is negative and contrasts with thepart that follows BUT In this respect, AND and OR differ from BUT( asanalyzed above) While it is possible to construct [15]

[15] John played football, Mary played tennis, but Alice stayed at home

Such a sentence is interpreted as if the first two clauses had been linked by AND

“John played football, and Mary played tennis, but Alice stayed at home”

To sum up, the following table has been constructed to make clear thesyntactic features of the three coordinators examined above

tiallyfixed

Sequen-Notpreceded byconjunctions

Ellipsisofsubject

Linking ofsubordinateclauses

Linking ofmore thantwo

clauses

-Notes: “+” indicates that the item satisfies the criterion

“ -” indicates that the item fails to satisfy the criterion

“ +” indicates that the item satisfies the criterion only under conditions

1.2.Conjunction, cohesion and discourse

Conjunction does not look backward or forward for text references It does presuppose the textual sequence and signals the relationship between segments

of discourse And it is viewed by Halliday and Hasan as cohesive relation

In the relationship among conjunction, cohesion and discourse two terms of “ cohesive relations” and “ cohesive devices” are discussed

Halliday and Hasan(1976) discuss the cohesive relationship under the headings: reference, substitution, lexical relationship, and conjunction However the most type of cohesive relation which exists between one sentence or clause and an other in discourse is indicated by conjunction as shown below, based on Halliday and Hasan (1976)

a/ additive : and, or, furthermore,

b/ adversative: but, however, nevertheless,

c/ causal : so, consequently,

d/temporal : then, after that,

Cohesive devices not only function as formal links but also indicate different kinds of semantic relationship in any segment of discourse Especially, conjunctions as cohesive devices play an importance in turning separate clauses, sentences and paragraphs in to units of connected discourse

1.3 Coordinators AND, BUT, OR as cohesive devices in sentence connection

Quirk, Green Baum, and Svartvik in the two books “A university grammar of English” and “Grammar of contemporary English” put forwards eight implications by AND, four by OR ,and two by BUT.In our study, we recover all those and discuss some more other implications which are discovered by one another researcher Vo Thi Thao Ly

1.3.1 Semantic implications for coordination by AND

AND denotes a relationship between the contents of clauses :

First of all, "pure” addition is implicated as

[16] She wears jeans and she has long hair ( Quirk, 1973)

The second clause (she has long hair ) is made to support something more for the first one Clearly, this sentence is effectively formed based on “additional relation”

We also can find relation of sequence between clauses are expressed by AND Here two “and so” and “and then” are mentioned

With “and so”, the following samples are analyzed:

[17] I can’t stand this, and I’ve got to do something( Eskerine ; p 42)

[18] Give me a handful to save the life of the mother of my sons And I willforget that I saw you in my house as a robber( Buck; p 40)

These samples [17], [18] share the same semantic structure as in [7] thefirst clause (I can’t stand this) must stand before the second one ( I’ve got to dosomething)

With “and then” chronological sequence as described by Quirk (1973),wecan have following examples:

[19] Could you believe that at 18 you could marry, and at 19 you would bemaster of our house (Volodya’s letters)

[20] Finish your breakfast and we’ll be starting (Hemmingway;p 43)

Clearly, as in [19] the event in the first clause chronologically precedes theevent in the second clause And this order can not be changed

From this, another implication is offered Examine following samples:[21] He heard an explosion and he ( therefore) phoned the police ( Quirk, 1973)[22] A I myself was hold to a great house

B And you want to sell your daughter ( Buck, 1961)

In [21], it is obvious that the event in the second clause is a consequence or theresult of the event in the first clause In [21] AND is understood as “andtherefore” It is completely interpreted by B inferring from what he hears ANDhere is equivalent to either “and as a result” or “and therefore”

Furthermore, AND can function as another role, with different semanticrelation, in the aspect of “a point similar”

For another implication, we go on with these examples:

[25] I won’t leave you and you’ll behave yourself ( Hemmingway, 1986)

[26] Work diligently, and you’ll pass ( Tom meets Becky, 1972)

With [25], the implication is shown by the paraphrase:

“ You’ll behave yourself If you do, I won’t leave you”

It is clear that the second clause is a condition for the first one means “if thesecond then the first” And it is reversed in [25] the second needs the first as acondition

Far from additive relation, AND implicates “adversative” relation.

Let’s look at these examples:

[27] I’ve done French at school for ages And I simply can’t read it through I’veoften tried( Quirk, 1973)

[28] He tried hard and he failed ( Quirk, 1973)

Through [27], [28] AND connects one element of surprise in view of thecontent to the other As in [28] “he tried hard” expects “he passed”, but in fact

“he failed” is completely contrary to the expectation, thus “contrast” here is oneimplication that can be employed by AND

In M.A thesis of Vo Thi Thao Ly, the author gives two more implications of

"differentiation” and “purpose” These are classified through the followingexamples:

[29] God makes the country And man made the town (Quirk , 1973)

[30] When the rich are too rich, there are ways And when the poor are too poor,there are ways ( Buck, 1961)

[31] I’ll just step back, and tell her to be patient ( Hemmingway, 1986)

[32] Why not write to warn him? And that will be all right

We can not group [29], [30] into ‘contrast’ implication although they seem

to be so because two clauses in each do not completely contrast It is more likely

chrono-condition similarity comment

(expla-nation) contrast

different -iation purpose

Table 1.1 The frequencies of the implications by AND

1.3.2 Semantic implications for coordination by BUT

In “ A university grammar of English”, Quirk introduced the only oneimplication of BUT That is “contrast” The contrast can be expressedimmediately through opposite clauses or indirectly through inference by some

vocabulary or the whole structure of discourse which are considered as decriesfactor toward the contrary.

For example:

[33] John is poor but he is happy ( Quirk, 1973)

What is said in the second clause( he is happy) is completely unexpected inview of what is said in the first one It is obvious that the contrast here is shown

by two key words “happy” and “poor”

[34] John didn’t waste his time in the week before the examination but studiedhard every evening ( Quirk, 1973)

The contrast here is a restatement in affirmative terms of what has been saidnegatively in the first clause

The cases of “contrast implication” found through the way of inference asfollowing examples:

[35] Master didn’t want to sell Tom But he is in debt (Buck, 1961)

Two clauses themselves are not in the contrary However, they areunderstood as contrast through inference such as “he is in debt”, so he needsmoney to pay for his debt, and he must make a decision that “he has to sellTom” It is in contrast to the first clause" Master didn’t want to sell Tom”

Besides, also in the study of Vo Thi Thao Ly, the author supports two moreimplications by BUT Let’s examine these examples:

[36] You are allowed to stay at home But you are always in bed ( Tom meetsBeckey)

[37] There’s nothing attractive at all But I have to accept it

[36] can be paraphrased as:

“ You are allowed to stay at home, in a condition that you arealways in bed”

As a fact that the second clause is treated as a condition for the first one [37] can be paraphrased as:

“ Although there’s nothing attractive at all, I have to accept it”This reveals “concession” relation

Therefore, “condition”, “concession” are considered as two more implications

1.3.3 Semantic implications for coordination by OR

OR has the basic function of connecting alternatives

Examine the following examples:

[38] You can stay here or you can go back home tonight ( Quirk, 1973)

[39] Mary will go to the grocery this evening or John will go tomorrow morning

( Quirk, 1973)

OR in [38], [39] expresses one idea that only one of possibilities( first clauseand second clause) can be realized

According to Quirk, OR in these examples is exclusive But if the realization

of more than one alternative, “either” can be added for excluding thecombination as follows:

“ Either you can stay here Or you can go home tonight.”

“ Either Mary goes to the grocery this evening Or John will gotomorrow morning.”

In this case “either” accompanies only two alternatives It is quite differentwith the case as follows:

[40] You can boil an egg, or you can make some cheese sandwiches or you can

do both

( Quirk, 1973)

OR here implies “inclusion”, it allows the realization of a combination of thealternatives, the third possibility is accepted by a third clause

For anther implication, let’s examine these examples:

[41] He began his educational career Or, in other word, he started to attend thelocal kindergarten ( Quirk, 1973)

[42] It seems to me that they don’t want to come Or they don’t want me tomeet him

( Hemmingway, 1986)

In [41], [42] clearly, the second clause is similar in meaning to the firstclause, or we can say it is a case of paraphrase Here implication expressed by

OR is “a restatement” or “a correction” of what is said

OR may imply a negative condition

Let’s look at these examples:

[43] Give me some money, or I’ll shoot ( Quirk, 1973)

[44] Frank, give me water or I shall die of thirst ( Erskrine, 1963)

[43], [44] can be paraphrased:

“ Give me some money If you don’t , I’ll shoot you”

“ If you don’t give me water, Frank, I might die of thirst”

One more implication of “deduction” is offered in Vo Thi Thao Ly’s study It

is shown by the following example:

[45] A: Some more, please?

B: No, thanks

A: Or you dislike this one

It is obvious that there is no alternative here It is only an inference from whatthe speaker thinks regarded as “ deduction”

Like AND and BUT , the author gives a table of the frequencies of theimplications by OR through testing in 100 samples from many sources

Far more important than that, the semantic mechanism has been examined withthe help of several pragmatic concepts such as inference, implication,illocutionary force, implicates or explicitness,

In short, we have 10 implications by AND, 6 by BUT, and 6 by OR.However, they three have some implication in common To conclude, and tomake everything clear we would like to introduce the following table whichshow as the frequency of occurrence of the implications by each coordinatorand which common implications are shared by the three examinedcoordinators AND, BUT, OR over 300 samples (100 for each)

OR Ø + Ø Ø Ø Ø — Ø — Ø — Ø

Table1.4 The frequencies of the Implications by AND,BUT,OR

Frequency of appearance: Ø means = 0%

“+” means higher frequency than “-”

1.4 Errors in language learning process

1.4.1.the notion of error

In the “ Dictionary of language teaching and Applied linguistic”(1992),Jack C Richards, John Platt and Heidi Platt, they define:

“In the speech or writing of a second or foreign language learner, error isthe use of linguistic item (e.g a word, a grammatical item, a speech act, etc ) in

a way which a fluent or native speaker of language regards as showing faulty orincomplete learning”

According to Jame M Hendrickson, in methodology in TESOL (1987)

“Error is a word derived from Latin _ Errare meaning “to wander, roam, orstray”, depends on its use for a particular purpose or object” For the purpose of

a discussion on error correction in foreign language teaching, this writer defines

“an error as an utterance, form, or structure that a particular language teacherdeems unacceptable because of its inappropriate use or its absence in real lifediscourse”

Lenon’s concrete definition of error “a linguistic form which, in the samecontext would in all likelihood not be produced by the learner’s native speakercounterparts” (1991:182)

Carl James in “errors in language learning and use” gives the definition oferror “as being an instance of language that is unintentionally deriant and is notself-corrigibleby its author”

1.4.2.Errors and mistakes

In the 1960s, much attention started to be paid the concept of error insecond language learning Distinction was drawn between the two terms “error”and “mistake” although it was impossible to indicate any clear differentiation Chomsky(1965) initiated his distinction by suggesting that errors fall intotwo different types: one orginating from verbal performance factor and the otherfrom inadequate language competence Later in 1967, the error: mistakedistinction was introduced into modern debate by Corder He made use ofChomsky’s distinction by associating the term “mistakes” with failures inperformance and “errors” with failures incompetence He attributed mistakes to

psychological factors such as fatigue, lack of attention or lapses of memory anderrors to the learner’s internalizing the language during the second languagelearning process Mistakes are said to be unsystematic in nature and errorssystematic deviations from the rule of the target language

Corder (1967, p.167) insisted that mistakes are of no significance to theprocess of language learning since they do not reflect a defect in our knowledgebut are traceable to performance failure The learner is normally immediatelyaware of their mistakes and can correct them with more or less completeassurance Native speakers as well as learners may make mistakes On thecontrary, errors are of significance to the process of language learning They doreflect knowledge and are not self-correctable Only learners of a secondlanguage commit errors

However, Duskova (1969) found that many recurrent systematic errors such

as those in expressing genitive relations or confusion of passive and active voice,etc reflect no defects in knowledge at all She attributed them to the learner’slack of autonomy in rule application For this reason, she suggested a criterionfor treating errors (1969, p 17) which should be well taken for our research:

An error analysis should be based primarily on recurrent systematic errorsthat are made by a number of learners and that can be readily traced to theirsources, no matter whether they reflect defects in knowledge or they result frominadequate habit formation

From all as above, I would sum up two definitions of errors and mistakes asfollows

Errors are wrong forms that pupils can not correct event if their wrongness

Let’s consider these examples:

[46] We make mistakes because we are not knowing the rules (Jack; p 197)(in asituation that learners generalizes progressive aspect for all verbs when learningprogressive tense)

[47] Teacher: Did Billy have egg cut up for him at breakfast ?

Learner : Yes, I showeds him

Teacher: You what?

Learner: I showed him

Teacher: You showed him?

Learner: I seed him

Teacher: Ah, you saw him

Learner: Yes, I saw him

In [46], it is obviously that the error is caused by incomplete knowledge oflearners, they predict all verbs can be used in progressive tense

In [47], whenever being reminded, learner corrects his fault and this isfeature of mistake

In conclusion, errors are mistakes caused by the incomplete understanding

of language competence, and mistakes are caused by the inappropriate use oflanguage in the term of social acceptability or language performance

1.4.3.Error analysis

1.4.3.1.The concept of error analysis

In “Errors in language learning and use” by Carl James, error analysis isdefined as following:

“ Error analysis is the process of determining the incidence, nature, cause,and consequences of unsuccessful language”

Error analysis is the study and analysis of errors made by second languagelearners In attempt of finding causes that helps a lot in improvement of learningand teaching method

The steps of error analysis are shown as follows:

Identification of errors

Description of errors

Explanation of errors

Evaluation of errors

Correction of errors

1.4.3.2.Significance of error analysis

Corder, in his seminal 1997 paper, emphasized that errors are evidence ofwhat the learners have taken in second language learning process, rather thanwhat teachers think they have put in Errors are significant in three respects: First, they tell the teacher what needs to be taught

Second, they tell the researcher how learning proceeds

Third, they are a means where by learners test their hypothesis about thelanguage they are learning

Errors tell teachers how much progress learners made towards the targetlanguage, where they need help and what sort of help they need Anunderstanding of the causes of the learners’ errors will make a requirement inappropriate teaching techniques

Errors are also feedback to teaching material designers who can arrangetarget language items in their material so that their occurrence can be prevented

as much as possible

To sum up, error analysis should be done in the language teaching andlearning process in order to:

- Identify strategies which learners use in language learning

- Try to identify the causes of learners’ errors

- Work on common difficulties in language learning, as an aid to teaching

or in the preparation of teaching materials

1.4.3.3.Error analysis and contrastive analysis

Contrastive analysis is generally defined as to compare specific linguisticcharacteristics between languages The typical features of contrastive analysis:

- Providing signals of similarities and differences between language

- Explaining and predicting problems in second language learning

- Developing method of language teaching

When errors are found, contrastive analysis should be taken in to account

to explain some of these errors which are caused by transference, whichrelates to similarities and differences between language Therefore,contrastive analysis becomes a part of error analysis

1.4.4.Causes of errors in second language learning

Second language learners commit a number of errors Some of these errorscan be caused by the interference of their mother tongue, and as such are termedinterlingual errors by Richards (1971a) Others are committed by secondlanguage learners regardless of their mother tongue and are called intralingualerrors and developmental errors (Richards,1971b)

Corder(1967) states that learners’ errors are invaluable to the languagelearning process and by classifying the errors and seeking their causes.Researchers can learn a great deal about the second language acquisition processwith benefits in language teaching and learning

1.4.4.1.Interlingual errors and mother tongue interference

According to the behaviorist learning theory, language acquisition is aproduct of habit formation A habit is constructed by the association of aparticular response with a particular stimulus In the second language acquisitionprocess, learners have to overcome the habits of their native language in order toacquire the new habits of the target language Howerver, these old habits get inthe way of learning new habits; in other words, the previous learning of thenative language presents or inhibits the learning of new habits

The phenomenon of native language influences on the learning of a secondlanguage is called “ interlingual” by Weinreich at first, and then “ interlanguage

” by Selinker “Language transfer ”(Selinker, 1969) makes interlingual errorswhich are caused by interference from mother tongue The transfer is as Ladogiven “individuals tend to transfer the forms, meanings, and the distribution offorms and meanings of their native language and culture to the foreign languageand culture (Lado, 1957: 2)” and interference is a negative transfer

According to William.T.Little Wood, in foreign and second languagelearning (1984): “errors due to transferring rules from the mother tongue” It isconsidered as a concept of interlingual errors

Cultural differences are also a factor related to the negative transfer insecond language learning Lado (1957, p.1) claims “errors are originated in thelearner’ disposition to transfer the forms and the meanings, the distribution offorms and meanings of their native language and culture to the foreign languageand culture”

Here are some examples of interlingual errors, that second languagelearners make due to transfer from mother tongue

- MÆc dï c« Êy mÖt mái nhng c« Êy vÉn ®i lµm

 Although she was tired, but she went to work

- Nh bạn biết rằng tôi làm việc rất chăm chỉ

 As you know that I work very hard

- Bởi vì tôi thích anh ta nên tôi cố gắng giúp

 Because I like him, so I tried to help him

Through examples above, we can see that because of negative influence ofmother tongue in learning foreign language, learners use too many conjunctions

in forming complex sentences These errors are easily to be found inpreintermediate and intermediate levels In pedagogical process, we need topresent this influence, conjunctions are needed to makes unified discourse butonly enough, not too many These examples can be corrected as follows:

 Although she was tired, she went to work

Or She was tired, but she went to work

 As you know, I work very hard

Or You know that I work very hard

 Because I like him, I tried to help him

Or I like him, so I tried to help him

Here are some more examples:

I go to school yesterday Hôm qua tôi đã đi học

I go to school every day Hằng ngày tôi đi học

I go to school now Bây giờ tôi đang đi học

Vietnamese is non-transformational language, so there is no change in theverb form for different tense But in English, the distinction among tenses isclear

I went to school yesterday ( verb here must be in the past tense)

I go to school every day (verb must be in the present simple)

I am going to school now ( verb must be in the present continuous)

The notion of “ bao nhiêu ” in Vietnamese can go with all kinds of noun: Anh có bao nhiêu tiền?

Có bao nhiêu học sinh trong lớp học?

Learners may make the same in learning English such as:

How many money have you got?

But in English, we must use : “much” with uncountable noun

“many” with countable noun

How much money have you got?

How many students are there in the classroom?

1.4.4.2 Intralingual error

According to William.T.Little Wood( 1984) in “ Foreign and secondlanguage learning book”, he writes:

“Learners also make errors which show that they are processing the secondlanguage in its own terms Errors of this type( often called “Intralingual”) areoften similar to those produced by the child in the mother tongue and suggestthat the second language learner is employing similar strategies, notablygeneralization and simplification”

That learners tend to guess or predict rules of new forms based on what theyhave learned, this led to make errors with cases of exception is considered as anaccess to produce intralingual error Therefore, this type of error is caused bylack of sufficient knowledge for the whole aspect

In Richards’ research paper (1971b), he suggest that intralingual errors arethose which reflect the general characteristics of rule learning anddevelopmental errors It is shown that the learners attempt to build up hypothesisabout the target language from his limited experience of it in the class room ortext book He presents the causes of the above errors in terms of : over -generalization, ignorance of rule restriction, incomplete application of rules,false concept hypothesized:

(1) Over - generalization

Over - generalization is defined by Jacobovits (1969, p.55) as the use ofpreviously available strategies in new situations Some of these strategies forsome reasons will be misleading and inapplicable This occurs when the learnersapplied the same structure for new items based on what they have learned Let’s examine these examples:

A learner of English would make a generalization for all nouns for formingplurals This let him predict that a noun can be made plural by adding “s”

He knows that “ boy” has its plural “boys” and assumes that child behaves

so, thus pluralities to “childs”

Similarly, until he learns that “come” and “go” out of general rule forforming the past tense, he is likely to produce wrong forms such as “comed”,and “goed”

Over - generalization of a structure also results from over learning of astructure caused by a certain types of teaching and presentation techniques.Some different pattern drills may interfere with each other creating a chance forthe learner to produce a hybrid structure Richards gave the following examples: Teacher : He walks quickly

Instruction : Change to continuous form

Student : He is walks quickly

(2) Ignorance of rule restrictions

As a matter of fact, ignorance of rule restrictions is a type of over generalization due to the learners’ failure to observe the restrictions of existingstructures The learners make use of a previously acquired rule applying it to anew context where it does not apply

-Look at the following example:

Pupils experience that: “He said to me” And they apply that rule for the verb

“ask”: “He asked to me”

(3) Incomplete application of rules

According to Richards, incomplete application of rules is caused by the factthat second language learners are perhaps primarily interested in efficientcommunication without the need for mastering the rules An other reason forthis is the class room use of question as a teaching technique to elicit utterancesfrom learners Questions of this kind are neither to find out something nor toestablish the targeted skill

For example:

Teacher : Do you read much?

Student : Yes, I read much

(4) False concepts hypothesized

False conceptualization is suggested by Richards to refer to a class ofdevelopmental errors resulting from faulty comprehension of distinction oftarget language items

For example:

Pupils fail in distinguishing “is” and “was”

CHAPTER II THE STUDY

2.1 Research questions

Finding the gap of researches in the use of the coordinators: AND, BUT, OR

and the importance of those coordinators in English discourse, the thesis iscarried out in order to resolve the following research questions:

1 What difficulties do secondary school stuudents have in using thecoordinators AND, BUT, OR i n English

2.What might be the causes and sourses of the difficulties?

3 What suggestion can be made in order to help students acquire the use ofthose coordinators in English

2.2 Research setting

The study is carried out at Yen Mo A high school, Ninh Binh province.Here pupils are supposed to have three forty five minute periods of English a