INTERLANGUAGE
INTERLANGUAGE.

 Analysis of a learners interlanguage shows that it has some
characteristics of the learners’ native language, some
characteristics of the second language, and some
characteristics which seem to be very general and tend to
occur in all or most interlanguage systems.. An
interlanguage refers to the L2 knowledge system that
learners process as they move towards target language
proficiency. Although they are transitional and continually
open to refinement, interlanguages are rule governed. They
show systematicity, for example in the occurrence of the
same errors over long periods , and they show variability
Order of Acquisition
 The problem with assertions about orders of
acquisition is that they may give the impression of a
linear, inevitable progression for the majority of
learners, irrespective of social and cognitive factors.
The interlanguage continuum is not like that. Progress
is mostly gradual and incremental, Development is
often not linear, but uneven, and ‘backsliding’ is
common. Occasionally there are sudden changes in
performances, suggesting a major re-structuring
taking place.
Five Central Processes of
Interlanguage
 Language transfer… in which features of the L1 are




projected on to the L2.
Over generalisation of L2 rules in which L2 rules are
applied too widely. Ie regular/irregular verb forms.
Transfer of training. In which language teaching itself
creates language rules which are not part of the L2.
Strategies of L2 learning, the means through which
the learner builds up the L2, such as repetition.
Communication Strategies the ways in which the
learnr tries to communicate in the L2.
THEORIES OF SECOND LANGUAGE
LEARNING 1
 If similar patterns of development exist among varying types of




learners, the theory should say something about language
learning universals.
If learners have different language backgrounds and are exposed
to different input, how do environmental factors affect learning?
If children and adults have different rates of
acquisition/learning, and proficiency levels, it must say
something about age.
A theory must take into account all factors, affective, linguistic,
cognitive.
If second language learners need to focus on form [accuracy] for
at least some of their learning, it must say something about
conscious and unconscious learning.
…2
 Second language learning must be based on something more
than mere exposure to input.
 If interlanguages give rise to non-target like forms that were
never modelled in the input, there must also be considerable
cognitive input on the learners part, so learning may not be
based on environment alone.
 If interlanguage development is gradual and U-shaped, [not
linear] learning may not be occurring as the result of “the steady
accumulation of generalisations based upon the learners
perception of the frequency of forms in input”.
 A comprehensive theory may be interactionist [Long 1990] since
individual learners vary, and so do environments for learning. As
a result, a theory of Language acquisition/learning must
recognise the importance of both learner variables and
environmental variables in language development.
FOSSILISATION
 A key concept in interlanguage theory is ‘fossilisation’
i.e. the state of affairs that exists when a learner ceases
to progress towards the target language norms. Such a
learner has an interlanguage which is fixed, and
impervious to continued exposure or instruction. You
may wish to consider how valid or real the idea of
learner language actually fossilising is. However its
existence is widely acknowledged
VARIABLE COMPETENCE.
 Nemser called interlanguages ‘approximative systems’
and Corder called them ‘traditional competences, but
the term ‘interlanguage’ is used both to describe a
learners language at a particular point in time, and its
continuing development over time. Ellis 1985 stresses
the system of interlanguage, identifying its horizontal
dimension, as a snapshot,a point in time in learner
competence, and the vertical dimension of the
developmental stages that the learner covers over a
stretch of time.
Monitoring
 Conscious monitoring of language may be called upon
by the learners and, when they are participating in
different types of discourse, they bring new rules into
their repertoire. Usage then leads learners to attempt
to bring items and rules from planned discourse for
use in unplanned discourse. Often there are
competing rules in a learners’ interlanguage leading to
free or systematic variation in their TL production.
REFERENCES
 Bada, E. 2006. Pausing, preceding, and following ‘that’ in








English. ELT Journal 60/2 pp125-32.
Selinker, L. 1992. Rediscovering Interlanguage. Longman.
Pit, Corder, S. 1981. Error Analysis and Interlanguage. Oxford.
Selinker. L. 1972. Interlanguage. International Review of Applied
Linguistics. 10/3 pp 209-31.
Stoynoff, S. 2004. Case Studies in TESOL Practice. ELT
Journal.58/4.
Corder, S.P. 1981. Error Analysis and Interlanguage OUP.
Tarone, E. 1988. Variation in Interlanguage. London.
Nemser, W. 1971. Approximative Systems of Second Language
Learners.
International review of Applied Linguistics 9, 115-23.
REFERENCES 2
 Tarone , E. 1989. On the Variablility of Interlanguage Systems. Applied








Linguistics 4/2 p142-163
Selinker, L. 1972. Interlanguage. International Review of Applied
Linguistics. 10/209-30.
Harley B. et al. 1990. The Development of Second Language
Proficiency. CUP.
Long, M.H. 1990. The least a second Language Theory Needs to
Explain. TESOL Quarterly. 24: 649-666.
McLaughlin, B. 1987.Theories of Second Language Learning. Edward
Arnold.
Corder, S.P. 1977. The Notions of Simplification, Interlanguage, and
Pidgins and their Relation to Second Language Pedagogy. Droz.
Ellis, R. 1994. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. OUP.
Ellis, R. 1985. Understanding Second Language Acquisition. OUP