Сборник материалов международного научного форума «филологическая наука в ХХІ веке: проблемы и перспективы»
жүктеу/скачать 2.33 Mb. Pdf көрінісі
|
| *And like this situation we have.
*For example, in the big cities is growing the theft of cars. *In my opinion, about these problems should think governments because they work to help people. *They have to understand that in modern life public transport plays a more important role. *About ways of tackling this I want to add that it possible to car share with your colleagues. The notion of interlanguage is closely connected with the notion of fossilization which goes back to the word “fossil” defined in English-English dictionaries as ‘a rock or mineral substance dug from the earth; a relic or trace of a former living thing preserved in rock’. The term ‘fossilization’ was also introduced into the area of second language acquisition by Larry Selinker in 1972 [7, 209-230]. The term is often used to underline the fact that the overwhelming majority of second language learners never achieve the so called native speaker competence. As L.Selinker states, the absolute success in a second language affects a small percentage – perhaps a mere 5% of learners. An excellent example proving the inability of second language learners to reach the target language level of native speakers is Professor Chien-Shiung Wu from the USA. ZhaoHong Han stresses that Chien-Shiung Wu, a famous physicist, known in the world of science for numerous honors for her achievements in physics, arrived in the USA at the age of 24 and worked there until her death at 83. She had 56 years of exposure to English, her second language, but was unable to overcome all of her early difficulties with English despite her undoubted intelligence [9, 95]. There are different definitions of the notion of fossilization available from ZhaoHong Han’s on-line presentation [10]. L.Selinker defines fossilization as a permanent cessation of second language learning before the learner has attained target language norms at all levels of linguistic structure and in all discourse domains in spite of the learner’s positive ability, opportunity, and motivation to learn and acculturate into target society. According to M. Lowether, fossilization is understood as the inability of a person to attain native-like ability in the target language. R.Ellis states that fossilized structures can be realized as errors or as correct target language forms. Taking into account definitions of the term fossilization, scholars note that the ultimate attainment of adults’ second language is fossilized interlanguage; fossilization is inevitable, and no adult second learner would ever be able to pass for a native speaker in all contexts. The ultimate attainment of individual second language learners greatly varies in its similarity with the competence of native speakers: some individuals may reach high levels of proficiency while other learners’ idiosyncratic dialect (S.Pit Corder’s term corresponding to the notion of interlanguage) is characterized by its obvious unnativeness. The interlanguage of second/foreign language learners can be different from the norms of the target language because it contains linguistic patterns and structures which are considered to be erroneous. For example, Kazakh and Russian university students can produce English sentences in which we observe the following typical errors: *I am agree with your statement. *I am read the text now. *He is play tennis very well. 153 *I know him for many years. *That is why when you enter in this university all responsibility lying on your shoulders. *From one hand, it’s plus, but from another it’s can be minus later. *From another hand, why it should be a problem when it’s can depend on the community. These data come from two sources. These sources are connected with production tasks - from English compositions written by native speakers of Kazakh and Russian languages and oral interviews with them in the domain of work-and studies-related talk and in the domain of relating life-story information [11, 94]. The above-mentioned sentences and errors made by students reflect the low level of learners’ linguistic competence. They know the rules of formation of Present Simple and Present Progressive (*am agree, *am read, *is play, *responsibility lying), peculiarities of Present Perfect Tense (*know for many years), the use of modal verbs (*it’s can be), however, they have not acquired the corresponding grammatical material properly and mix these temporal forms. Besides, students encounter problems with the use of prepositions (*enter in this university, *from one hand, *from another hand), it is obvious that in this case they rely on their native language. The analysis of interlanguage and errors contributes to revealing the learners’ knowledge of the language to date and to reconstructing their transitional competence. As S.Pit Corder states, it can provide to the researcher evidence of how language is learnt or acquired, what strategies or procedures the learner is employing in his discovery of the language.’ [12]. жүктеу/скачать 2.33 Mb. Достарыңызбен бөлісу:
|