Show Less

Variability in Learner Errors as a Reflection of the CLT Paradigm Shift

Series:

Joanna Pfingsthorn

In the last three decades the field of language teaching and learning has undergone a paradigm shift towards Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), which has put an emphasis on meaningful interaction and implied an abrupt departure from an extensive study of learner errors. Although learners in CLT classes are expected to be competent, yet not perfectly accurate communicators, the impact of the CLT paradigm on learner errors has not been investigated thoroughly. This study examines the extent to which the CLT paradigm shift has left its mark on learner errors. Written production is analyzed and compared with learner data recorded in the early stages of the shift to CLT. The data reveal that while morphosyntactic errors have not undergone drastic changes, discourse organization and lexical skills have improved.

Prices

Show Summary Details
Restricted access

Contents

Extract

1 Introduction 1 2 Learner errors 7 2.1 Defining key terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.1.1 Relativity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.1.2 The contrasts between L1 and L2 learners . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.1.3 Errors vs. Mistakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2.1.4 Measures of deviance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 2.1.5 Defining language errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.1.6 Identifying Errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 2.1.7 Error gravity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.2 Significance of errors in the process of language learning . . . . . . 27 2.2.1 Behaviorism and error eradication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 2.2.2 Behaviorism under fire: Universal Grammar . . . . . . . . . 28 2.2.3 Error Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 2.2.4 Cognitive approaches to language learning and errors . . . . 38 2.2.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 2.3 Pedagogical implications of errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 2.3.1 Error correction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 3 Errors and communicative competence 53 3.1 Canale and Swain’s model of communicative competence . . . . . . 56 3.2 Bachman’s model of communicative language ability . . . . . . . . . 58 3.3 Celce-Murcia, Doernyei and Thurell’s model . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 3.4 The Common European Framework of Reference . . . . . . . . . . . 62 3.4.1 General competences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 3.4.2 Language-related competences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 3.5 Models and competences: implications for error analysis . . . . . . 66 3.6 Communicative competence extended: What are we missing? . . . . 68 3.6.1 Interactional competence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 3.6.2 Intercultural competence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 3.6.3 Strategic competence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 vi Contents 3.6.4 Communicative functions and theories of politeness . . . . . 70 4 The CLT paradigm shift and its implications 77 4.1 Classroom changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 4.1.1 Learner autonomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 4.1.2 The social nature of learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 4.1.3 Focus on meaning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 4.1.4 Diversity and learning strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 4.1.5 Summary: Implications for the study of learner errors . . . . 86 4.2 Theoretical underpinnings of the paradigm shift . . . . . . . . . . . 86 4.2.1 The relationship between the CLT paradigm shift and modern curricula...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.

Do you have any questions? Contact us.

Or login to access all content.