Contrastive Analysis And Error Analysis

unfitting Analysis And shift AnalysisContrastive epitome is a method to distinguish between what are compulsory and not needed to learn by the south talking to learner by evaluating languages (M.Gass Selinker, 2008). In addition, discrepant analysis is a technique to rate whether two languages have any(prenominal)thing in common which assess both similarities and differences in languages, conforming to the belief in language universals. (Johnson, 1999). Both statements indicate that contrastive analysis holds a rule which is essential in order to identify what are required by the act learner and what are not. If on that point is no familiar characteristic in the languages, then it is not indispensable to compare the languages. While much could be said about analyze languages, a more important aspect is about influence from L2 in L1. Contrastive analysis stresses the influence of the mother tongue in learn a second language in phonological, morphological, lexical an d syntactic levels. It holds that second language would be affected by first language (Jie, 2008, p. 36). On the aforesaid(prenominal) score, Wardhaugh asserts that first language of second language learners can wrap up all errors that are constantly make them. These arguments prove that the common mistakes snitch by the second language learner are explainable in the first language if there is a relation in both languages. Indeed, this idea is conform to the rule of contrastive analysis which believes in language universal. On the other hand, contrastive analysis is white plagued to identify matchless language origin and connection between the languages with other languages if it does. In Robert Lados linguistic communication (1957p.2) The fundamental assumption is impartation individuals tend to transfer the forms and meanings, and the distribution of forms and meanings of their intrinsic language and culture to the foreign language and culture. I agree with Robert Lado sin ce the second language learner tends to use direct translation to make a complete sentence. However, this major power become a problem when the placement of the partitioning of speech is not the same. For lawsuit, Malaysian who use Malay language as their first language and face as their second language might have a problem in placing the adjective. This is because in Malay language, adjective is put after the noun, such asRumah yang cantikbut in English, adjective is placed before noun, for instanceA beautiful house(adj) (Noun)This whitethorn cause confusion for the second learner but if they make a sentence, it is still understandable. The degree of clarity of the sentence can be a positive transfer of negative transfer. This example is supported by Jie (2008)In the course of language learning, L1 learning habits will be transferred into L2 learning habits. thitherfore, in the fiber of L1 transfer into L2, if structures in the MT have their corresponding structures in the T L and L1 habits can be successfully used in the L2, learners would transfer similar properties successfully and that would result in positive transfer. Contrastingly, in the case of negative transfer or interference, certain elements of the MT have no corresponding counterparts in the TL, L1 habits would cause errors in the L2, and learners would transfer inappropriate properties of L1It is important to know that L2 learners be likely to apply their L1 grammatical system in L2 grammar (Smith, 1994). They would opt for L2 words those they familiar, blending them using L2 grammar to formulate a sentence. For example a Malay speaker would saySaya makan epal semalam(Pronoun) (Verb) (Noun) (Adverb)Or in EnglishYesterday, I ate the apple(Adverb) (Pronoun) (Verb) (Determiner) (Noun)If the L2 learners apply Smith argument, they would sayI ate apple yesterdayAs mentioned earlier, this statement is logical at one point but in other point, it shows that errors and transferred inappropriate pro perties those made by L2 learners are noticeable and this should apply the rule of contrastive analysis. However, this analysis has disadvantages. In Susan M. Gass and Larry Selinker words, they believe that this analysis is questioned because of the concept of difficulty as the canonic theory of the contrastive analysis is concerning the difficultness. If an error is made by a person, this shows that the person has problem in some area, not because of the native language. Thus, we cannot take on that fluency of a L2 learner in L2 is depending on the nature of L1. There are more aspects that related to this matter. There are other factors that whitethorn influence the process of acquisition such as innate principle of language, attitude, motivation, aptitude, age, other language known (M.Gass Selinker, 2008). Next, contrastive analysis cannot detect some difficulties experienced by the L2 learners. For example, Je vois les/elle/la/le . I see them/her/her/him(this give voice is n ot possible in French) (Choi, 2009).Error analysis is a lineament of linguistic analysis that focuses on the errors learners make (M.Gass Selinker, 2008). This analysis is almost the same with the weak version of contrastive analysis which is comparing the errors which made by L2 learners. However, error analysis is not evaluating the errors with L2 native language, but it compares with the target language. Error analysis provides a broader range of possible explanations than contrastive analysis for researchers/teachers to use account for errors, as the latter only attributed errors to the native language (M.Gass Selinker, 2008). I do agree with Gass and Selinker because as Corder (1967) says that by producing errors, it shows that the learners are progressing and participating.