TOPIC 2:

THEORIES ON
LANGUAGE LEARNING
AND ACQUISITION.
ERROR ANALYSIS.

11
 TOPIC 2: THEORIES ON LANGUAGE LEARNING AND ACQUISITION.

ERROR ANALYSIS.

1. INTRODUCTION

2. LEARNING THEORIES

2.1 Behaviourism

2.2 Mentalism

2.3 Cognitive code

2.4 Affective factor

2.5 Emergentism

2.6 Relational frame theory

2.7 Social interactionism

2.8 Acculturation model

2.9 Discourse theory

2.10 Creative construction theory/monitor model

2.11 Variable competence model

2.12 Universal hypothesis

3. New trends: active methodologies

3.1 Cooperative learning

3.2 Content and language integrated learning (CLIL)

3.3 Task and Project-based learning

3.4 Second language acquisition as a chaotic/complex system

4.- INTERLANGUAGE

5.- ERROR ANALYSIS.

5.2. ERROR CORRECTION

5.1. CHANGES ON THE VIEWS OF ERROR

6.- CONCLUSION

7. BIBLIOGRAPHY AND WEBLIOGRAPHY

11
TEMA 2 THEORIES ON LANGUAGE LEARNING AND ACQUISITION.

INTERLANGUAGE. ERROR ANALYSIS.

1. INTRODUCTION

In this topic we will study one of the most outstanding linguistic aspects in a communic-
ative process: the acquisition of a second language and all the dimensions in the devel-
opment of the teaching-learning process.

Many theories about the learning and teaching of languages have been proposed from a historical
perspective, and have been influenced by developments in the fields of linguistics, psychology, an-
thropology, and sociology. The study of these theories and how they influence language teaching to-
day is called applied linguistics.

“Learning” and “Acquisition” were defined by Krashen in 1981. He said that acquisi-
tion was restricted to the subconscious way in which a native speaker apprehends the
mother tongue; and learning refers to the conscious process that a foreign speaker must
follow to be competent in a FL. In other words, the term “Acquisition” is used for the
process of natural contact with language; “Learning” is used when the contact is struc-
tured through language teaching.

We will follow this distinction here, but in fact, both mingle together either in the case
of a native speaker or a foreign student. This theory is now somehow argued. We can
say that acquisition and learning refer to the same process and that a good ELT course
should seek a perfect mixture of them.

No matter how difficult languages are, children at six are quite competent in
their mother tongue. There is a very interesting process which can be summed up in
the following steps:
- Babbling.
- One-word communication ("dad, dog, food, etc.")
- Two-words communication.
- Telegraphic communication, and
- Acquisition of more specific and serious data.

Motivation is essential when learning. It has been studied by Lambert & Gardner
who point out that the treatment of motivation is quite complex and rather individual.
ELT needs to be motivating in terms of enjoyment, creativity, sense of achievement, etc.

They distinguished two types of motivation:

- Instrumental motivation. The student learns because s/he needs to.

- Integrative motivation. The student learns because s/he wants to be a member of the
speech community that uses a language.
 The above scholars said that both types of motivation are probably present in all
learners but depending on age, experience, needs, etc., each one exercises a varying
influence.

2. LEARNING THEORIES

Until not long ago the main concern of language learning was on the
description/analysis of the language to be learned. It is in the 20th c when psychology
was established as a serious discipline that things began to change. Before that, we had
a series of empirical attempts without any sound theoretical foundations, for instance
Comenius in the 16th c or the 19th-century Direct Method.

2.1 Behaviourism

It can be summed up as “learning as a habit formation”. It is perhaps the first

coherent attempt to a theory of language learning. Based on the ideas of Pavlov and
Skinner, it states that learning is due to a mechanical process of habit formation and
proceeds by means of frequent reinforcement of a stimulus-response sequence. It was
widely used in the States around the 1950s and the 1960s by the Audio-lingual Method.

The most important features are:

- No translation.

- The four skills are arranged in this order of acquisition: L, Sp, R and W.

- Frequent repetition for effective learning.

- Immediate correction of errors.

- Use of language laboratories (headphones, videos, etc.)

2.2 Mentalism

Chomsky, and in general the generativism said that thinking and learning were not
the result of habit formation but of rule-governing activity (generative grammar). We
have a limited set of rules that enable us to deal with almost all experiences we may
encounter. Thus, “learning is the acquisition of rules and thinking is rule-governed
activity”. Some representative authors are Ausubel and Piaget. Since language, as
imagined by nativists, is complex, subscribers to this theory argue that it must be innate

Many criticisms of the basic assumptions of generative theory have been put forth by
cognitive-functional linguistics, who argue that language structure is created through
language use. These linguists argue that the concept of a Language Acquisition De-
vice (LAD) is unsupported by evolutionary anthropology. The input, combined with
both general and language-specific learning capacities, might be sufficient for acquisi-
tion.

11
Since 1980, linguists psychologists following Jean Piaget studying children, came to
suspect that there may indeed be many learning processes involved in the acquisition
process, and that ignoring the role of learning may have been a mistake.
In recent years, the debate surrounding the nativist position has centered on whether the
inborn capabilities are language-specific or domain-general, such as those that enable
the infant to visually make sense of the world in terms of objects and actions. The anti-
nativist view has many strands, but a frequent theme is that language emerges from us-
age in social contexts, using learning mechanisms that are a part of a general cognitive
learning apparatus (which is what is innate).

This position has been championed by several linguists, such as David M. W. Pow-
ers, Elizabeth Bates and Catherine Snow. Philosophers, such as Fiona Cowie and
Barbara Scholz have also argued against certain nativist claims in support of empiri-
cism.

The new field of Cognitive Linguistics has emerged as a specific counter to Chomskian

Generative Grammar and Nativism.

2.3 Cognitive code (Anderson´s theory)

In this theory the learner is the central element as the active processor of information.
Learning and using a rule require learners to think in order to extract a generative rule
from the mass of data and to analyse the situations where the application of a rule can
be appropriate. The basic technique is problem-solving tasks.

Learning will only take place when the matter to be learnt is meaningful. But in itself,
a cognitive view is not enough. To complete the picture, we need an affective view too.

2.4 Affective factor

Now learners are emotional beings. They are not machines to which we introduce
data. The way in which we experience learning may affect what we learn, that is, can
have a positive or negative effect. For example affective factors that influence in a
positive way are: relaxation, self-confidence, extroversion but especially motivation.

2.5 Social interactionism

Social interactionist theory is a claim that lan-

guage development occurs in the context of so-
cial interaction between the developing child
and knowledgeable adults who model language
usage and "scaffold" the child's attempts to mas-
ter language. This type of theory is strongly in-
fluenced by the socio-cultural theories of the So-
viet psychologist Lev Vygotsky and Jerome
Bruner.
 2.6 Relational frame theory

The relational frame theory (RFT) (Hayes, Barnes-Holmes, Roche, 2001), provides a

wholly selectionist/learning account of the origin and development of language compe-
tence and complexity. Based upon the principles of Skinnerian behaviorism, RFT posits
that children acquire language purely through interacting with the environment.
RFT distinguishes itself from Skinner's work by identifying and defining a particular
type of operant conditioning known as derived relational responding, a learning process
that, to date, appears to occur only in humans possessing a capacity for language. Em-
pirical studies supporting the predictions of RFT suggest that children learn language
via a system of inherent reinforcements, challenging the view that language acquisition
is based upon innate, language-specific cognitive capacities.
2.7 Emergentism
Emergentist theories, such as MacWhinney's competition model, posit that language
acquisition is a cognitive process that emerges from the interaction of biological pres-
sures and the environment. According to these theories, neither nature nor nurture alone
is sufficient to trigger language learning; both of these influences must work together in
order to allow children to acquire a language, suggesting that language acquisition is a
more complex process than many believe.
2.8 ACCULTURATION MODEL

It was developed by Brown in 1980. He said that “acculturation” was the process by
means of which we become adapted to a new culture. We must consider the target
culture together with the target language. Acculturation and learning are determined by
the degree of social or psychological distance between the learner and the TL culture.

Schumman analysed several factors involved in the efficiency of the learning

process from the social & psychological point of view:

 Socially, the first group and the target group must see each other as equal
cultures, must have congruent cultures and share social facilities

 Psychologically, we must consider: language shock, cultural shock and affective

variables.

2.9 DISCOURSE THEORY

Developed by Hymes and Halliday, it draws a parallel between native language

acquisition and foreign/second language acquisition.

The main principles are:

- Native speakers modify their speech to negotiate meaning with non-native speakers.
- This negotiation of meaning affects the rate and route of 2LA.
- 2LA follows a natural route in syntactic development.

11
- The natural route is the result of learning how to hold conversations.

2.10. CREATIVE CONSTRUCTION THEORY- Monitor

Model

It was designed by Krashen on the basis of Chomsky’s

ideas on first language. Learners are thought to “construct”
internal representations of the language being learnt.
Acquisition takes place internally by reading and hearing.
Speech and writing are an outcome of learning rather than a cause.

Krashen’s Monitor Model consists of 5 central hypothesis and several factors.

1. The Acquisition-Learning hypothesis. Krashen distinguished Learning &

Acquisition as 2 different approaches to language, already explained. For Krashen,
acquisition is by far the most important process.

2. The Monitor Hypothesis. The Monitor is a device that learners use to edit their
language performance. It acts upon learnt knowledge by modifying utterances
generated from “acquired” knowledge. To activate this we need to know the rules
to apply them, time to think, and focus on form. Learners use their explicit
knowledge of rules to improve and correct their acquired language. Learnt
knowledge will only be called upon if correction or modification are needed.

As the L2 learner develops competence, he conforms his productions to the speech

& written language of native speakers of the L2.

The focus of language teaching should be communication and not rules-learning.

3. The Natural Order Hypothesis. We acquire language rules in a predictable

sequence; but the order is independent of the order in which rules have been
taught. Linguistic forms emerge in L2 acquisition in much the same order as they
do in L1. This is what makes language assessment possible. It also calls into
question the "grammar syllabus".

4. The Input Hypothesis. Acquisition takes place only by receiving comprehensive

input.

There are 2 basic aspects:

1. Speaking is a result of acquisition.
2. If input is understood, and there is enough of it, the necessary grammar is
automatically provided.
For Krashen, comprehensible input is the route to acquisition but the affective filter
is also needed.

5.- The affective Filter Hypothesis influences the rate of development. It controls
how much input the learners come into contact with, and also prevents learners from
 using input. The main factors are motivation, attitudes, needs, self-confidence, and
relaxation.

To provoke learning the affective filter should be as low as possible. The filter is
down when the acquirer is not anxious and is motivated.

Finally, within the Monitor Model we must take into account some factors:

- Aptitude, which is related to learning and attitude, which is related to acquisition.

S. Krashen
- Role of the mother tongue: For Krashen it does not interfere with 2LA. The learner
falls on his L1 whenever he lacks a rule in the TL (target language).

- Routines and patterns: They are restricted to formulaic speech

and do not contribute to acquisition but they help to increase
competence.

- Krashen disregards any individual differences.

- Age: The younger you are the more comprehensible is the

input and the lower the affective filter. On the contrary, the
older you are the better suited to use “learnt” knowledge in monitoring.

Krashen has been very influential in communicative language teaching, but his
theory has been criticized for failing to meet minimum scientific standards and for being
too descriptive.

2.11 VARIABLE COMPETENCE MODEL

Ellis designed this model considering Widdowson, Bialystok and Tarone’s

theories. This method is based on the way in which language is learnt as a reflection of
the way in which we use it.

It is based upon a two-fold distinction:

A) The process of language use. It is to be understood in terms of rules and procedures,

that is, linguistic knowledge and the ability to use this knowledge.

B) The product of language use can be:

- Planned such as discourse thought prior to expression.

- Unplanned. Discourse that is not prepared, eg spontaneous speech.

This method considers the way in which language is learnt as a reflection of the way in
which we use it.

2.12. UNIVERSAL HYPOTHESIS

11
 It is an ambitious project to find linguistic Universals, a Universal Grammar that
underlies all human languages. Linguistic universals seem to modify the 2LA as
follows:
- They impose constraints in the form that interlanguages can take.
- Learners find it easier to acquire patterns that confirm to linguistic universals rather
than those that do not, and
- When the L1 presents linguistic universals it is likely to assist interlanguage
development through positive transfer.
In any case this research is too weak to have sound foundations.

3.- NEW TRENDS: ACTIVE METHODOLOGIES

3.1 COOPERATIVE LEARNING

According to Deci and Ryan, all human beings have three basic needs: relatedness,
competence, and autonomy. Cooperative learning principles stem from this primarily
psychological standpoint: Because all students are humans, teachers can use cooperative
learning teaching methodologies to help students satisfy the three needs of relatedness,
competence, and autonomy in the
classroom. Teachers who do so will be able to
create a more effective environment for
learning and thus can help students reach their
learning potential. The eight basic principles
of cooperative learning in the classroom
(Jacobs, Power, & Loh, 2002) are:

1 Cooperation as a value

2 Heterogeneous grouping

3 Positive interdependence

4 Individual accountability

5 Simultaneous interaction

6 Equal participation

7 Collaborative skills

8 Group autonomy

3.2- Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)

It is a term created in 1994 by David Marsh and Anne Maljer. It involves teaching a
curricular subject through the medium of a language other than that normally used. The
subject can be entirely unrelated to language learning, such as history lessons being
taught in English in a school in Spain. CLIL is taking place and has been found to be ef-
fective in all sectors of education from primary through to adult and higher education.
Its success has been growing over the past 10 years and continues to do so.

Owing to its effectiveness and ability to motivate learners, CLIL is identified as a prior-
ity area in the Action plan for Language Learning and Linguistic Diversity by the Euro-
pean Comission.

Teachers working with CLIL are specialists in their own discipline rather than tradi-
tional language teachers. They are usually fluent speakers of the target language, bilin-
gual or native speakers. In many institutions language teachers work in partnership with
other departments to offer CLIL in various subjects. The key issue is that the learner is
gaining new knowledge about the 'non-language' subject while encountering, using and
learning the foreign language. The methodologies and approaches used are often linked
to the subject area with the content leading the activities.

CLIL's multi-faceted approach can offer a variety of benefits. It:

 builds intercultural knowledge and understanding

 develops intercultural communication skills

 improves language competence and oral communication skills
 develops multilingual interests and attitudes
 provides opportunities to study content through different perspectives
 allows learners more contact with the target language
 does not require extra teaching hours
 complements other subjects rather than competes with them
 diversifies methods and forms of classroom practice
 increases learners' motivation and confidence in both the language and the sub-
ject being taught

3.3- TASK BASED LANGUAGE LEARNING (TBLL) and PROJECT BASED

LEARNING (PBL) :

In task-based learning, the central focus of the lesson is the task itself, not a grammar
point or a lexical area, and the objective is not to ‘learn the structure’ but to ‘complete
the task’. Of course, to complete the task successfully students have to use the right lan-
guage and communicate their ideas. The language, therefore becomes an instrument of
communication, whose purpose is to help complete the task successfully. The students
can use any language they need to reach their objective. Usually there is no ‘correct an-
swer’ for a task outcome. Students decide on their own way of completing it, using the
language they see fit.

11
Tasks can be as simple as putting a list of animals in order from fastest to slowest and
then trying to agree with a partner on the correct order. Or it could be something more
complicated like a survey to find out which parts of town your classmates live in and
how they get to school, ending in visual information presented in the form of pie charts
and maps. Or it could be something really complicated like a role-play involving a
meeting in the Town Hall of the different people affected by a new shopping centre de-
velopment and the consequent demolition of a youth centre and old people’s home.
Whatever the task, it should always have some kind of completion; and this completion
should be central to the class - the language resulting naturally from the task and not the
other way round.

The advantage of TBL is that it allows students to focus on real communication before
doing any serious language analysis. It focuses on students’ needs by putting them into
authentic communicative situations and allowing them to use all their language re-
sources to deal with them. This draws the learners’ attention to what they know how to
do, what they don’t know how to do, and what they only half know. It makes learners
aware of their needs and encourages them to take (some of the) responsibility for their
own learning. TBL is good for mixed ability classes; a task can be completed success-
fully by a weaker or stronger student with more or less accuracy in language production.
The important thing is that both learners have had the same communicative experience
and are now aware of their own individual learning needs.

Another advantage of this approach is that learners are exposed to a wide variety of lan-
guage and not just grammar. Collocations, lexical phrases and expressions, chunks of
language, things that often escape the constraints of the traditional syllabus come up
naturally in task-based lessons. But this can also be a disadvantage. One of the criti-
cisms of TBL is this randomness. It doesn’t often fit in with the course book/syllabus,
which tends to present language in neat packages. Some teachers (and learners) also
find the move away from an explicit language focus difficult and anarchistic. Many
teachers  also agree that it is not the best method to use with beginners, since they have
very few language resources to draw on to be able to complete meaningful tasks suc-
cessfully.

The PBL approach takes learner-centredness to a higher level. Whereas TBL makes a
task the central focus of a lesson, PBL often makes a task the focus of a whole unit,
term or academic year.

There are generally considered to be four elements which are common to all project-
based activities/classes/courses:

1. A central topic from which all the activities derive and which drives the project to-
wards a final objective.

2. Access to means of investigation (the Internet has made this part of project work
much easier) to collect, analyse and use information.

3. Plenty of opportunities for sharing ideas, collaborating and communicating. Interac-

tion with other learners is fundamental to PBL.

4. A final product (often produced using new technologies available to us) in the form of
posters, presentations, reports, videos,
websites, blogs...

The advantages and disadvantages of

PBL are similar to those of TBL, but
the obvious attraction of project-
based learning is the motivating ele-
ment, especially for younger learners.
Projects bring real life into the
classroom; instead of learning about
how plants grow (and all the lan-
guage that goes with it), you actually
grow the plant and see for yourself. It brings facts to life. The American educational the-
orist John Dewey wrote “education is not a preparation for life; education is life itself”. 
Project work allows ‘life itself’ to form part of the classroom and provides hundreds of
opportunities for learning. Apart from the fun element, project work involves real life
communicative situations, (analyzing, deciding, editing, rejecting, organizing, delegat-
ing …) and often involves multi- disciplinary skills which can be brought from other
subjects. All in all, it promotes a higher level of thinking than just learning vocabulary
and structures.

3.4- SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION AS A CHAOTIC/COMPLEX SYS-

TEM

Despite all the research, we still do not know how languages are learned. It is difficult to
reject any of the aforementioned theories as all of them seem reasonable. They also
seem incomplete though, as they do not describe the whole SLA phenomenon, only
parts of it.

The previous attempts to explain SLA should not be disregarded because when they are
put together they provide a broader view of the phenomenon.

In this new perspective, an SLA model should be regarded as a set of connections within
a dynamic system that moves in the direction of the “edge of chaos” , which is
understood as a zone of creativity with the maximum potential for learning.

Chaos theory and the studies on complexity have been influencing many different
research fields, including Applied Linguistics. Larsen-Freeman (1997), sees “many
striking similarities between the science of chaos/complexity and language and SLA”

Thornbury (2001) also argues that language and language learning share some features
with other complex systems. It is dynamic and nonlinear; adaptive and feedback
sensitive; self-organizing; and emergent. There seems to be periods of little change
alternating with periods of a great deal of flux and variability, and even some
backsliding. In this way, process grammars are not unlike other complex systems which
fluctuate between chaotic states and states of relative stability.

4. INTERLANGUAGE

11
 This label was first used by Larry Selinker in 1972. Interlanguage is a system that
has an intermediate status between the L1 and the L2, it contains elements from both. It
might be understood as a continuum along which all learners traverse. At any point, the
learner’s language is systematic, i.e. rule-governed, and common to all learners. Any
difference is due to their learning experience.

Interlanguage presents three principal features:

- It is permeable: the rules that constitute the learner´s knowledge are open to
evolution at any given time.

- It is dynamic: it is changing constantly, but rather slowly, thus the idea of a

continuum.

- It is systematic: it is based on coherent rules which learners construct and select in

a predictable way.

Selinker suggested five main processes that operate in interlanguage:

1.- Language transfer – items and rules which are transferred from the L1 to the L2. For
example: 'This books likes me'.
2.- Transfer of training – items resulting from particular approaches used in training, as
when they a rule enters the learner´s system as a result of the overuse of a word or
expression by the teacher.
3.- Strategies of L2 learning – approaches to the material being learnt, eg simplification:
student´s use all verbs in the present continuous tense.
4.- Strategies of L2 communication. They are:
-Avoidance: when certain structures are very different from L1, students simply avoid
using them.
-Overuse: students use the forms that they know rather than those that they are not sure
of.
5.- Overgeneralization of L2 linguistic material. The learner uses a L2 rule in situations
in which a native speaker would not, s/he uses rules in situations that are not permitted:
'what do he want?'.
They are all devices to internalize the L2 system.

Interference of L1 on L2 can be positive, neutral or negative. In the case of Spanish

and English we have to pay attention to the interference in Phonology, Grammar,
Spelling, False Friends …

Around 95% of L2 learners fail to reach an adequate TL competence. They stop

learning and become fossilized (not reaching the end of the interlanguage continuum).
Fossilisation occurs in most language learners and cannot be solved by further
instruction. It can be:

- Internal, due to no further brain development, or

- External, due to reaching a sufficient level of understanding (pidginisation).

Fossilization can be prevented by correcting repeated errors or by practicing

problematic language.

The main principles underlying interlanguage are formulated by Ellis (1990) as

follows:
- The learner constructs a system of abstract linguistic rules.
- The learner’s grammar is permeable. It can be penetrated by new linguistic rules.

- The learner’s competence is transitional and variable. Each stage constitutes a

restructuring continuum.

- Interlanguage development reflects the operation of cognitive learning strategies,

such as L1 transfer, overgeneralization and
simplification.

- Interlanguage use can reflect the operation of

communication strategies.

- Interlanguage systems may fossilize.

Interlanguage theory attempted to find explanations

for the errors in language learners´speech. One of the
main ways in which the processes involved in
interlanguage were analysed was the Theory of Error Analysis.

5. ERROR ANALYSIS

5.1. CHANGES ON THE VIEWS OF ERROR

For a long time errors have being a sign of breakdown in the teaching-learning
process. Behaviourist psychologists emphasized the importance of massive
manipulative practice of the language. The drills were structured in such a way that it
was difficult for the student to make many mistakes.

The mentalists have put forward a different view of errors, which has gained wide
acceptance. They think that errors are inevitable and necessary.

There has been a change from preventing errors to learning from errors. Nowadays
FL teachers don’t insist on error-free communication but on communication itself.

When the student does not know how to express himself he makes a guess on the
basis of his mother tongue and on what he knows of the FL. The process is about
hypothesis formulation and refinement (The learner is no longer a passive recipient of
TL input, but rather an active processor of input, generating hypotheses, testing and
refining them). As the student develops competence, he moves from ignorance to

11
mastery through interlanguage, and the errors are seen as a sign that learning is taking
place.

There appears to be affective and cognitive justification for tolerating some errors.
Experimental evidence suggests that only a minority of errors are caused by mother
tongue inference.

5.2. ERROR CORRECTION

Corder (1971) said that learners also progress by actively constructing a series of
hypotheses about the language they are learning from the data they receive. This
suggests that learner´s errors do not have to be considered as signs of failure. On the
contrary, they are a way the learner has of testing his hypotheses about the nature of the
language he is learning. They constitute the clearest evidence for the learner´s
developing system and can also provide information about how learners process the
language data.

The information that EA (error analysis) provides about the learner´s interlanguage
is of two types:

1.- Linguistic type of errors that L2 learners produce, linked to the sequence of
development the learner experiences.

2.- Psycholinguistic type of errors made by learners and is related to the kind of
strategies they apply within their interlanguage.

Corder established a distinction between lapses, mistakes and errors.

Slips, or tongue lapses, that are immediately detected by the speaker him or herself.
They can even occur to L1 speakers.

A mistake refers to a performance error that is either a guess or slip in failing to use
a known system correctly. It is corrected with the help of an external source.

E.g.: I goed there yesterday. (irregular past not explained yet)

An error is a noticeable deviation from grammar. Thus, errors are the result of a lack
of knowledge and they reflect the learner’s interlanguage. It reflects lack of competence.

E.g.: I going there tomorrow. (the continuous present has been explained)

To deal with errors we must establish first what the error is.

Secondly, we need to establish the possible sources of the error. This will help us to
work out a more effective teaching strategy.

Thirdly, we have to decide how serious the error is. The more serious it is, the
higher priority it should have in remedial work.

We must distinguish communicative errors from non-communicative errors. We can

classify errors into 2 categories: those that cause a message or sentence to be
incomprehensible (global errors) and those that do not significantly interrupt
communication of a sentence (local errors)

Most errors are caused by inadequate lexical choice, misspelled words, misuse of
prepositions and pronouns, etc.

Errors can also be analyzed according to the skill involved as:

-Mispronunciations ( involving Speaking).

-Misspellings (that involve Writing)

-Misperceptions (when Listening is involved).

-Miscues (that occur in the act of Reading)

The fourth stage is when to correct errors. This is one of the most difficult
challenges of language teaching.

There is no easy way to know how much to correct, when or how often. Perhaps, we
should consider this in relation to sensitivity of the student and the nature of the task.
But apart from this, the teacher must decide first the seriousness of the errors in relation
to the particular aim in view, then whether to deal with the most important ones
immediately or later. Perhaps we should reserve error correction to manipulative
grammar practice, and tolerate more errors during communicative practice.

The last step is correction. Explanation of mistakes is more effective when followed
by extra practice.

We provide next some different correction techniques:

1. The teacher gives clues to enable self-correction.

2. The teacher corrects the script.

3. The teacher deals with errors through marginal comments and footnotes.

4. The teacher explains orally to individual students.

5. The teacher uses the error as an illustration for a class explanation.

Immediate feedback is possible as the teacher moves around the class supervising the
pupils’ work. In any case, it is always best to avoid the red ink all over the writing; an
alternative is to put single code letters as: T- tense mistake; V-vocabulary; W.O.- word
order, etc. This procedure forces the student to think out the error himself and to provide
his own corrected version.

The teacher is expected to be a source of information about the target language and to
react to errors. However, he should not dominate the correction procedures. Students
should be responsible of self-correction. And we must also promote peer-correction. The

11
teacher must handle sensitively the groups, and the best students can work with the
weaker ones in pairs.

6.- CONCLUSION

Having a good understanding of learning theories is essential for the FL teacher on the
grounds that the current educative legislation established by the Common European
Framework of Reference and Spanish LOMCE include many of the theories
explained. According to RD 1105 and Decree 111 (Andalusia), for instance, the
student-centered cooperative together with project-based learning are the best option to
develop the key competences in our students and attend diversity. Active methodologies
based on the development of critical thinking, significant learning and the presentation
of challenges in order to motivate students are the new trends. Therefore we should
make use of all these learning strategies in our classes.

Teachers need to be sensitive to all factors involved in the learning process. Yet, we
should combine our theoretical knowledge with our teaching situation, because none of
the theories or factors mentioned before is enough to account for the complex process of
language learning; context is essential.

Error Analysis is very important. Errors were for a long time forbidden, but they are
now crucial to see the development of the students, the best proof that learning is taking
place.

This topic entails a great importance for FL teachers, since it allows to know the
influence that other disciplines have had in the didactics of foreign languages, how the
process of learning of a language is organized, the treatment to cope with errors, etc.,
that is to say, our daily routine in the class.

In reference to all the theories studied, they show the evolution that the didactics of
languages has suffered along the 20th and 21st centuries. And thanks to that evolution
we can justify an entire series of current methodological strategies, as cooperative
learning, CLIL, the acquisition of the key competences, the measures of attention
to diversity, interdisciplinary links, autonomy in the learning process, gamification,
flipped classroom, design thinking or the implementation of the ICTs, that the
educational administration demands us to put into practice.

L2 learners & teachers need to build up a good atmosphere in the classroom, and
learners need to be relaxed to facilitate the language learning process. The practice of
positive discipline and mindfulness can be good means to reach this aim.

Errors should be seen as a natural part of the learning process and they don´t have
to be avoided. We must help them extract all the information they can, and make them
reflect and work on the right structure by themselves. Obviously it is not an easy task
for most of them think errors cannot be made and are often ridiculed by their partners.
So, we must develop certain: for instance a possible procedure for writing can be to
establish for the very first day a system of symbols in order to develop a way to find out
errors (Wf=right word, wrong form; Sp=spelling error; nº= number sing.-pl., /=omit
this, etc.)
 If the error is aural, we should consider if the error interrupts communication or not.
If it does not affect communication, we should not mention it. But if it does, we must
take into account to ease fluency. So we can write down the mistake in order to talk
about it later in a positive way.

In any case, we must always be very tactful when dealing with error and must
encourage them not to be afraid of talking or writing. Errors are the proof that learning
is taking place. We can make use of achievement badges, stamps, etc. to make
correction more fun.

Finally, we should consider that the new methodological trends are student-
centred: they have an active role in their learning process by means of investigating,
sharing, participating in projects, discovering....they are the protagonists of the
learning process. So the role of the teacher and the role of the student have changed
drastically in the last decades and there is much more to come...

7.- BIBLIOGRAPHY AND WEBLIOGRAPHY

- Corder, S. (1981) Error Analysis and Interlanguage, Oxford, OUP.

- Krashen, S (1981) 2LA and 2L Learning. London, Pergamon.
- Larsen-Freeman, D. (2011) Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford:
OUP.

-Littlewood, W. (1981) Communicative Language Teaching. An Introduction.

Cambridge: CUP.

- Richards & Rogers(2003) Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching, C.U.P.

-Saville-Troike, M. (2012) Introducing Second Language Acquisition, Cambridge,

C.U.P.

11
- Selinker, L. (1991) Rediscovering Interlanguage (Applied Linguistics & Language
Study), London, Pearson education.
- Stern, H.H. (1991) Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching, Oxford: OUP

- www.cal.org (Centre for applied Linguistics)

- http://ec.europa.eu/languages/language-teaching/content-and-language-integrated-
learning_en.htm (European comission on CLIL)

- homepage.ntlworld.com/vivian.c/SLA/ (a very exhaustive Second Language

Acquisition website)