Contrastive linguistics: an
introduction
Tadeusz Piotrowski
Contrastive linguistics: what is it?
 Contrastive linguistics is the systematic
comparison of two or more languages,



with the aim of describing their similarities and
differences,
focusing, however, on differences,
it is predominantly practical.
 The term “contrastive linguistics”

was used for the first time by Whorf in 1941.
Basics
 Form


lecture
attendance required
 Prerequisites

knowledge of basic linguistic notions
Textbooks
 Fisiak J., Lipińska-Grzegorek M., Zabrocki T.,
1978/1987.

An Introductory English-Polish Contrastive Grammar
 Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe
 Krzeszowski T.P., 1984.
 Gramatyka angielska dla Polaków.
 PWN. Warszawa
 Willim,E. and Mańczak-Wohlfeld,E., 1997.
 A contrastive approach to problems with English.
 Kraków: PWN.
CL and linguistics
 general linguistics

theory of linguistics

similarities in languages
 what is common to all languages in the world

comparative linguistics


differences between languages
typology of languages
 aiming at classification of all languages in the world


synchronic or
diachronic
CL and comparative linguistics
 comparative linguistics

contrastive linguistics (CL)

differences (and similarities) between two
(usually) languages
contrastive linguistics
 differences (usually) between two (usually)
languages


basis for typological description
mainly practical applications



translation
foreign language teaching and learning
bilingual lexicography (dictionaries)
 why differences?
 it is assumed that the two languages are
similar except for the points described as
different
CL in linguistics
 the languages being compared can be
related

Polish and English
 or can be unrelated
 like Polish and Chinese
 can be from the same historical period
 Polish and English in the 20th c.
 or can be from different historical periods
 English and Polish from the 16th and the 20th
c.
CL in linguistics
 usually, however,
 CL is synchronic comparative linguistics
 without the historical dimension
 CL can be
 theoretical
 applied
theoretical CL
 gives an exhaustive account of the
differences and similarities between two or
more languages,
 provides an adequate model for their
comparison.
applied CL
 on the basis of the theoretical framework
 provided by theoretical CA/CS,
 gives the researcher the information
necessary
 to conduct actual contrastive analyses.
CL: terms
 contrastive linguistics (or its methods) is also
called



contrastive studies
contrastive analysis
interlingual linguistics
the rationale for studying CL
 who:

prospective teachers of a foreign language
CL and a FL teacher
 why:





contrastive studies are (were) used as a
means of predicting and/or
explaining difficulties of second language
learners
with a particular mother tongue (Polish)
in learning a particular target language
(English)
however, CL does not explain all problems of
foreign language students
CL and a FL teacher
 other hypotheses to explain the problems in
learning/teaching a foreign language




error analysis
performance analysis
interlanguage studies
language awareness studies
 these belong to applied linguistics

foreign language learnign/teaching
methodology
advantages
 it is suggested that



when FL learners are made aware of L1:L2
contrasts
this makes it easier for them
to learn difficult FL structures
 L1 interference accounts for some 30% of
error.
what to compare
 early contrastive studies focused on
microlinguistic analysis



phonology/phonetics
grammar (syntax, inflection)
lexis
 today there are also

contrastive pragmatics


cross-cultural/intercultural pragmatics
contrastive rhetoric
what to compare
 microlinguistic analysis: examples

What are the consonant phonemes in
languages X and Y?



How do they differ in inventory, realization, and
distribution?
What is the tense system of languages X and
Y?
What are the verbs of saying in languages X
and Y?
what to compare
 pragmatic analysis: examples




How is cohesion expressed in languages X
and Y?
How are the speech acts of apologizing and
requesting expressed in languages X and
Y?
How are conversations opened and closed in
languages X and Y?
this course
 mainly practical


basic theoretical notions
a review of microlinguistic contrasts
how to compare?
 what is the basis for comparison?
 comparison of seemingly related phenomena:

“to compare them would be tantamount to
putting ten-ton lorries and banana skins in the
same class on the grounds that neither ought
to be left on footpaths”.

Carl James (1980). Contrastive Analysis. London:
Longman, p :167
how to compare?
 object A
 object B
 either have something in common


and we can compare them
or do not have anything in common

and we cannot compare them
 it is arguably difficult to find objects that do
not have anything in common

but:

God and ...
how to compare?
 that something in common
 is not A
 is not B
 is C

C is called Tertium Comparationis (TC)
Tertium Comparationis
 what is common in comparison between
languages
 is probably the meaning of a pair of
sentences,


in other words,
their translation equivalence
translation equivalence
 there is one big problem

CL


translation is not about systems


studies the systems of two languages
it is about texts
this is a basic distinction in linguistics



system and text
langue and parole
competence and performance
translation equivalence
 text translation



translation of a particular sentence depends
on other sentences around it (context)
on the function of the whole text


its stylistic level
the user of the text
 system translation

translation of sentences without any context

though the most probable one is used
translation equivalence
 Eng.:
 I loved you.
 Pol.:
 Kochałem
 kochałam
 kochałom
 cię
 ciebie
 was
 Panów
 Panie
 Państwa
kochałom: an example
 „...to chybam ja się przesuwało dalej i
wchodziło w krąg następnego spojrzenia... w
miarę postępów [mej wędrówki]
powiększałom się i rozpoznawałom siebie...”

Stanisław Lem Maska
system and text equivalence
 that is why
 system equivalence can be called

correspondence
 text equivalence can be called

equivalence
Equivalence/Tertium Comparationis
 What is, in fact, equivalence?
 we know it is based on a Tertium
Comparationis
 but what use as a TC?
TC: requirements
 TC should be

external to both languages


a category based on one language has no
counterpart
usable

for teachers: can be used without extensive
theoretical studies
TC in lexical equivalence
concept
(word) sign- - - - - - - -referent (object)
TC in lexical equivalence
 Either referents or concepts can be treated as
TCs.
 We can reject referents as a TC because,



there are no pure references,
the very act of distinguishing a referent
depends to a large degree on the relevant
language
Engl. finger Pol. palec
TC in lexical equivalence
 Concepts can be also rejected.
 They are not suitably external to any
language


an English word has an English meaning
a Polish word has a Polish meaning
 They are theoretical constructs depending on
a language.

Other views.
TC
 TC should be external to the two languages

but it should include them
 language use?


situation of use of both languages
translation is used in situations when both
language are used
situations
 "How meaning X is expressed in L1 and L2?„
 This is a question based on meaning.
 This question goes from the vague notion of
meaning,

about which there is little theoretical
agreement,
 goes to two unknowns:
 L1 and L2 items.
 We can say that we have to do with three
unknown objects here.
situations
 How else can one find similarities/contrasts in
meaning between two languages?

"In the situation S, when an expression X is
used by the L2 speaker to speak of Z, what
would be the most natural expression Y used
by the L1 speaker?".



This does not depend on any theoretical
assumptions.
it includes two known entities (S and X), which
are used to reach the third entity (Y).
Competent bilinguals can easily answer such
questions.
Situations
 Situations are either typical of L1 or of L2,

and linguistic expressions are included in the
situations, not vice versa.
 Situations, in turn, cannot be separated from
wider contexts,

ultimately from the context of culture.
Situations-applicability
 Lyons (1977). Semantics. CUP.
 a particular lexeme (or expression, or whole
utterance) is applicable (i.e. may be correctly applied)
in a certain context, situational or linguistic ...;
 it is applicable to individuals or properties of
individuals.
 We may use the term 'applicability', in fact, for any
relation that can be established between elements or
units of language ... and entities in, or aspects of, the
world in which the language operates.
Equivalence: other types
 Tomasz Krzeszowski





statistical equivalence
system equivalence
semanto-syntactic equivalence
rule equivalence
pragmatic equivalence