UNIVERSIDAD LATINA DE CAÑAS.
What are the most common errors in English language?
"Common errors and variations in the spelling of
English as a second language."
Submitted by:
Alvarado Badilla Jeanette
Gonzalez Lopez Heiner.
Soto Rivera Sonia María.
Directed by:
MSc. Herrera Barboza Laura
Cañas, 2012
Department of Languages
1
INDEX
SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS CONTRASTIVE:
COMMON ERRORS AND CHANGES IN THE WRITING OF ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE
I. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 7
II. THEORETICAL ..................................................................................................................................... 15
1. APPLIED LINGUISTICS (LA) .............................................................................................................. 15
2. ANALYSIS OF SPEECH (AD) ............................................................................................................. 17
4. THE IMPORTANCE OF ENGLISH AS THE LANGUAGE OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN NATIONS.
LANGUAGE AND CULTURE ................................................................................................................. 27
5. GENDER, PROFESSIONAL AND ACADEMIC ENGLISH (IPA) ............................................................. 37
6. TECHNICAL WRITING IN ENGLISH / ACADEMIC ............................................................................. 50
6.1. LANGUAGE SPOKEN AND WRITTEN LANGUAGE .................................................................... 51
6.2. WRITTEN LANGUAGE, GENDER AND Dichotomy L1 / L2 ........................................................ 53
6.4. TECHNICAL LANGUAGE / ACADEMIC ...................................................................................... 58
7. ANALYSIS OF ERRORS IN THE WRITTEN LANGUAGE ...................................................................... 61
7.1. SOURCES OF ERROR ANALYSIS (AE) ........................................................................................ 62
7.3. CAUSES AND CORRECTION OF ERRORS. CURRENT STATUS ................................................... 65
8. THE CONCEPT OF interlanguage (IL) .............................................................................................. 71
8.1. ORIGINS AND DEFINITION OF THE TERM INTERLANGUAGE (IL) ............................................. 71
8.2. Processes and paradigms in the interlanguage ...................................................................... 74
III. OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................................................... 79
1. PRESENTATION .............................................................................................................................. 79
2. OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................................... 81
3. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................................................... 83
IV. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................ 86
1. SEARCH BY REFERENCE MATERIAL. THE SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS IN THE NEWS. ..................... 86
2. THE CORPORATION IN RESEARCH STUDIES ................................................................................... 93
3. DESCRIPTION AND JUSTIFICATION OF CORPUS USED ................................................................... 98
4. CORPUS ANALYSIS METHOD ........................................................................................................ 100
5. JUSTIFICATION AND APPROACH PROCEDURE ............................................................................. 106
V. RESULTS ........................................................................................................................................... 118
2
1. CLASSIFICATION AND FREQUENCY OF THE MOST COMMON ERRORS ....................................... 118
1.1. LEVEL GRAMMATICAL (morphological / syntactic)............................................................... 121
1.1.1. Noun phrase (NP)........................................................................................................... 121
1.1.2. Verb phrase (SV) ............................................................................................................ 126
1.1.3. Adverbial phrase (SA)..................................................................................................... 129
1.1.4. Connecting sentence ..................................................................................................... 132
1.2. Lexical.................................................................................................................................... 134
1.2.1. Interference of mother tongue (L1)............................................................................... 135
1.2.2. Misspelling ..................................................................................................................... 136
1.2.3. The wrong choice of a word .......................................................................................... 137
2. CLASSIFICATION AND FREQUENCY OF CONTRASTIVE CHANGES IN PRODUCTION WRITTEN
SCIENTIFIC-TECHNICAL NOT MADE BY NATIVE WRITERS (ENN) AND NATIVE WRITERS (EN) ......... 147
2.1. STATISTICAL DATA FOR CHANGES ........................................................................................ 148
2.2. GRAMMATICAL CHANGES..................................................................................................... 149
2.2.1. Variations in the noun phrase........................................................................................ 149
2.2.2. Variations in the verb phrase ......................................................................................... 152
2.2.3. Variations in other sentence structures ........................................................................ 155
VI. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................................. 161
1. GENERAL COMMENTS ................................................................................................................. 162
2. ANALYSIS OF ERRORS ................................................................................................................... 170
2.1 ERRORS MORPHOSYNTACTIC ................................................................................................ 170
2.2. Lexical errors ......................................................................................................................... 179
2. ANALYSIS OF CHANGES ................................................................................................................ 188
2.1. GRAMMATICAL CHANGES..................................................................................................... 190
VII. REFERENCES................................................................................................................................... 197
1. APPLIED LINGUISTICS AND ANALYSIS OF SPEECH........................................................................ 198
TABLES
TABLES PAGES
Table 1. Statistical data items included in the corpus of the corrected texts and
original ENN ………………………………………………………………………
147
Table 2. Morphological level of errors found in noun phrases scientific-technical
3
English produced by ENN ………………………………………………………..
150
Table 3. Detailed errors of the word forms ……………………………………….
151
Table 4. Errors found in noun phrases in English ENN scientific-technical from a
syntactic level ……………………………………………………………………
152
Table 5. Morphological errors made by ENN in verb phrases ……………………
154
Table 6. Syntactic errors committed by ENN in verb phrases …………………….
155
Table 7. Morphological errors committed by ENN in phrases adverbial …………
157
Table 8. Syntactic errors committed by ENN in adverbial phrases ………………..
158
Table 9. Syntax errors due to lack of connection in prayer ………………………...
161
Table 10. Lexical errors committed by ENN due to the influence of the L1 ………
163
Table 11. Causes of the formation of the words wrong ……………………………. 164
Table 12. Errors caused by distortions in the production of lexical ENN…………..
165
Table 13. Errors by wrong choice of a word by ENN ……………………………...
166
Table 14. Conjunctions mistakes by ENN …………………………………………. 169
Table 15. Errors due to lack of structural cohesion in prayer committed by ENN..
171
Table 16. Errors caused by the interference of L1 in ENN………………………..
172
Table 17. Statistical data items included in the body of IN and NNS ……………..
176
Table 18. Changes in use of the NS and NNS for IN ………………………………
178
Table 19. Variations of the use of EN and ENN SV ……………………………….
181
Table 20. Variations in the use of modal verbs made by NNS and EN ……………
182
Table 21. Variations due to relative and subordinate clauses conditional ………..
183
Table 22. Caused variations in the use of prepositions …………………………….
184
Table 23. Variation in the use of conjunctions by EN and ENN …………………..
186
Table 24. Variations between EN and ENN on the mode of prayer ……………….. 188
INDEX OF FIGURES
GRAPHICS PAGES
Figure 1. Discourse and text interaction and context ……………………
23
Figure 2. Classification according to professional area
63
Figure 4.The field study of interlanguage
102
Figure 5.Computational model of the acquisition of interlanguage
102
4
Figure 6. Percentages of errors made by ENN in the SN from a
grammatical level ……………………………………………………………
153
Figure 7. Percentages of errors made by ENN in phrases verbal ..……..
157
Figure 8. ENN mistakes in adverbial phrases …………………………….
159
Figure 9. NNS errors produced by the various phrases in the scientific
and technical articles ………………………………………………………
160
Figure 10. Comparison between different grammatical errors in the level
162
Graphic 11.Comparación between the various causes of errors ENN
lexical …………………………………………………………………………...
167
Figure 12. Causes of errors in sentence cohesion ENN ………………….
173
Figure 13. Percentages of errors occurring at different levels scientific
and technical articles by ENN ……………………………………………….
174
Abbreviations
Abbreviations used
AC ___________ contrastive analysis
AD ___________ Discourse analysis
AE ___________ Error analysis
IN ___________ Native Writers
ENN _________ Writer nonnative
IPA __________ English professional and academic
IL____________ Interlanguage
THE ___________ Applied Linguistics
L1 ____________ mother tongue, native
L2 ____________ Second language
RC ____________ Contrastive Rhetoric
SA ____________ Syntagma adverbial
SN ____________ noun
5
SV ____________ verbal Syntagma
SLA ___________ Second Language Acquisition
Acknowledgements
In the process of carrying out this work, there have been many factors or
people who have influenced, in its realization, as in his career end. First, we
appreciate the support, both institutionally, from the Universidad Latina, like that of
my colleagues and Teachers. We would also like to acknowledge the advice and
clarification of some terms, provided by the faculty of the University, I have been very
helpful at times when the light was difficult to see clearly.
Last but not least, we wish to acknowledge the support of the family for their
patience in the stormiest times, and both must be the achievement of this work.
The most important to God, because He helped us finish this work.
6
I. INTRODUCTION
Looking at the evolution of language from a diachronic perspective, it seems
that linguistic individualism has passed, when prehistoric people lived in small
nomadic groups and changes in language were quite limited, to the global
communication. This has resulted in a constant exchange of ideas, words, and ways
of being and cultures that would have been impossible without the participation of
language, since it is the vehicle that has served to express concerns and too different
transmit knowledge to our fellow men. Therefore, the tongue, or transmit knowledge,
has perpetuated through oral tradition and writing, why has not been relegated to the
background or neglected, for being our primary means of communication.
The importance of language in our social and cultural environment results in
the paper is crucial as the science of linguistics analysis and ongoing research,
language as seen from different points of view and for different purposes, practical
and theoretical. Of course, not be forgotten that for any individual not involved in
these studies, linguistics is largely unknown and no nothing more disconcerting to tell
someone you just know that it is linguist, because this profession immediately placed
between the uselessness and the absurdity (Van Lier, 1995:p,2). However, gradually,
the science of language has been recognized by an ever wider and has been given
the attention it deserves, especially in a time when communication, whether virtual or
not, mostly done through language, as noted by Fairclough (1994:p,6): linguistics has
won ... Widespread Acceptance Within the human sciences and beyond for the
centrality of language among human phenomena, and of language study among the
human sciences. It has done so by an impressive array of Developing Systematic
Techniques for the description of language Which Have Been widely drawn upon as
models in other human sciences, and any which approach to modern language study
can benefit from.
Linguistics is a science that yearns to be innovative and thus adapt to the
technological maelstrom we are experiencing, a fact that many of the changes
7
conceptions or theories of previous research. This process has been accelerated
recent years with the implementation of new technologies, since the language has
made significant changes and diverse.
The practical significance of the linguistic part of the concept that there is a
historical study (diachronic) of the tongue, but the study of language at a time given.
This involves assessing the state of the language and its place in society, as the
language cannot be interpreted as how to teach a language, or as to understand
some people not familiar with this field, teaching several languages. Nor should we
believe that linguistics is the critique of language, or its purpose is to evaluate, but its
main purpose is to study and observe the language behavior in different settings.
Finally, one should not confuse the language with traditional studies of structuralize
grammar, and which is a modern and flexible approach to language, as seen,
assimilates and integrates the changes it undergoes and also, tries to reason all
these variations.
Therefore, linguists have the function to observe how speakers of a language
behave, rather than trying to give a series of rules about language itself.
The application of the corpora, comparing the use of language to elucidate
how it evolves according to the person who uses it and if it is a language learned (L2)
or a native language (L1), are just some of the latest approaches to be included
within the field of linguistics.
In the early twenty-first century, we perceive that the language has evolved
and has adapted to the various changes including new technologies and the various
demonstrations and approaches that have emanated from the production of
language, studied, by nature in the field of applied linguistics. As this evolution
communication and ways of thinking has affected society, has also taken its toll in
linguistic studies and in general, philological, who have had to become more to suit
specific and clear as professional specialization. Widdowson (1996: p, 69)
emphasizes the changing state of the language as follows: Linguistics ..., like
language Itself, is dynamic and subject to change THEREFORE. It would Otherwise
8
STI lose validity, for like all areas of Intellectual Inquiry, it is Continually Established
questioning and questing after new ideas, insights. Linguistics is a science in
constant evolution, since the environment which is the current changes and through
these changes, enriches and profiles of more detailed written or spoken expression.
The traditional concept of language has evolved since it was issued by Saussure, as
currently, linguistics sees language as a social phenomenon used for communication
and influenced by their cultural and professional, making for in this dynamic and,
therefore, worthy of a synchronous and diachronic study. So also, the incorporation
of corpus analysis, using software to study the language, has had great importance in
the traditional concept of theories language, because thereafter data are available
that support the different observations. Not looking for a justification of linguistics, ie
what ultimate goal has and how much practice you can use it, but analyzes the latest
trends in their study, the important role of applied linguistics, discourse analysis,
contrastive linguistics, error analysis and interlingua (Widdowson, 1996: p, 76).
The literature on linguistics that have appeared more recently (Fromkin, 2000,
Aronoff and Rees-Miller, 2000), confirm that there has been an abandonment of the
theoretical aspect of linguistics. As a result, have opened new fields in the analysis of
language, such as collection data and the practical applications of language learning,
adapting more to the academic and social reality, while approaching a pragmatic
approach production of the tongue.
As a result, applied linguistics has a full role in the Today, as part of a practical
and applied perspective of language, in Consistent with the mentality and needs of
today. Studies of the tongue may ignore the social and cultural reality surrounding
any type of production, and changes between the different record types are present
in many of the studies being conducted at present. No wonder the special role that
discourse analysis has since spoken and written text is, the sequences language, are
the
basis
of
human
communication.
The
comprehensive
analysis
of
its
characteristics, from a pragmatic perspective, contributes to the development and
improvement understanding of the mechanisms of the tongue, to extract
considerations that are beneficial to the community that shares the same language.
9
Of course, the more specific this type of analysis, the better it is for a certain group
producer of sequences, since different considerations will focus on a more defined
feature type.
The plurality of manifestations of the same language need a study depth of its
features to determine their different characteristics and evolution. Similarly, all
linguistic manifestations must be taken into account to understand the nature and
course of action of the linguistic mechanisms involved.
Language is a social and cultural reflection of our surroundings, which results
in how to express, and be analyzed from this point of view, to determine patterns and
communication procedures. Therefore, in this linguistic analysis questioned the
causes of linguistic differences were observed in the sequences output. Not
understood as a negative trait, but ennobled language production instead of
impoverishing as through its various forms, there is greater communication between
speakers with diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds. This variation in the
expression language that has been given importance as contrastive linguistics
method of classification and detection of different forms of expression, made by
speakers with different cultural and social backgrounds. The contrast between two or
more productions of the same language that provides information in a way, helps
understand the intrinsic nature of their production sequences and the changes within
the same or different types of genres.
From this macro-concept of language study, this research focused on the
pragmatic approach of discourse analysis, enriching this point view to the application
of contrast analysis regarding the various productions of the same language. The
genus was specific field or scientific-technical language written and analyzed the
language was English, since its purpose and use as Pidgin is more than noticeable.
Its international dimension is an undeniable fact and recognized, so the need for the
study and analysis of its different types of manifestations, in this specific field is
evident. The multicultural influence suffering the English language, is favored by its
international aspect and therefore, in consideration of language commonly used in
events and cosmopolitan areas.
10
Language production is not now considered from a global point of view, but
the awareness that gender identity confer specific manifestations of language, is
increasing. Therefore, gender and more specifically linguistic, scientific and technical
English, they become very important now to confer traits that, when identified, define
the actions and help to writers who choose to express themselves in a L2. The
achievement of a textual cohesion and coherence within a specific genre, is the
aspiration of any writer who wishes to communicate your ideas clearly and
accurately. There are several authors who have defined a number of features in the
scientific-technical language (Alcaraz, 2000; Duke, 2000) that serve as guidelines in
the production of that particular kind of language, and that make the difference and
therefore characteristics that must be taken into account when producing a written
text. Of course, the whole concept of learning and teaching is linked to the error term,
since in the initial state and intermediate knowledge of a language; its appearance is
quite common. The types of errors that occur in the production of L2 are of different
nature (James, 1998) and therefore, there are several reasons to be linked to the
profile of producer of the tongue, but not be forgotten that, likewise, influences the
way of learning. This study identified and classified specifically as applied to a genre
Specifically, being able to observe that, according to the type of error is due to a
cause particular. If the error is due to a grammatical case, a review of the structures
and forms of language can greatly help the writer, but by Furthermore, the error is
lexical, may be due to interference from the L1 or an incorrect assimilation of the
meaning of words. Also the error may be caused by a lack of textual cohesion affect
the final realization of the ideas expressed by the writer and thus, its causes can be
of different constitution.
When the typical mistakes that the writer commits are corrected through
identification, correction and subsequent disposal, it creates what is known as
interlanguage, i.e. the writer's own production that enables you to communicate L2,
but without losing the cultural traits that are intrinsic to the way expression. This
analysis considered the term interlanguage and the target language that each
producer assimilates and therefore exteriorized at an advanced stage of his
knowledge of L2. Do not make mistakes, but there are certain characteristics of each
11
speaker of that language that survive in the communication, so that, despite the L2
domain that allows fluid communication between users of different nationalities,
production has certain differences. These differences or variations, as they are called
in this study are mainly caused by interference from the L1 or production patterns
leading to the choice of structures and expressions rather than others. Several
studies have assessed the differences in the writing of English over other languages
(Freeborn, French and Langford, 1986; Connor, 1996; Cmejrkova, 1996), but none of
them claimed that the variations that exist in the written productions may be
considered as legitimate in a production conceived increasingly in the field of English
as an international language of communication. Yes it has approached the concept
that arises in this study Mauranen (1996: p, 226 - 7), but it raises from point of view,
and claims that although there is increasing global structures in discourse, not
supported with data, but simply gives his opinion as a conclusion to their
considerations. Also Piqué and Andreu Posteguillo Kissed (2002) use the term
variation in the contrastive analysis of modality, but refer to the variation between
genres and not to variation in the production of the same gender.
Currently, the production of a language considered as an international, you
cannot adhere to a canon or expectations set by a number of individuals that give the
standard English more perfect. Language is a living element, linked to a cultural
reality and a need, therefore, like the customs or ways of life, must adapt to the
changes that are suffering due to the introduction of new customs or technological
innovations (Cmejrkova, 1996: p,150). Being aware of the international use of English
implies that it is inappropriate flirting attitude characteristics against criteria that
restrict their richness and variety. If the interlanguage produced by a writer not native
(ENN) is understood by any reader without missing any of the nuances that author
wishes to give, should not be corrected by a variety of a language understood as an
international, equally valid and recognized varieties as the British and American
English. Of course, this is the identification of changes of this language as correct,
without coming within the category of error, in which case would be unacceptable by
the linguistic community, as it would detract from understanding the production.
12
The purpose of this study was mainly to provide a data set that will support
and justify the achievement of the full range of objectives and reaffirm or contradict
initial expectations. First, one objective was to detect and classify the most frequent
errors committed by Spanish writers in the writing of scientific and technical texts in
English, and to identify their reason for being. Second, the goal was established
through the interlanguage of English was established in the Spanish writers, to
analyze the frequency and classification of the variations that were identified by
contrasting texts written by native writers (IN) and foreign ( ENN). Third and finally,
the causes were established, from a pragmatic perspective, based on the influence
culture and environment, the most common variations were identified in different
parts of the sentence that impacted more on the salient features of scientific and
technical English. He questioned the reason for the errors detected in what parts of
speech were committed more often, and thus we investigated whether these were
parties who were most affected by changes that were committed in a later stage of
the production of the tongue. Thus, it was determined what parts concrete were the
most contentious for producing written sequences. Our starting point was to assess
that, after removing the errors is considered positive social and cultural influence that
existed in the production of changes made in a formal, academic context, where not
interfere with the correct interpretation of the sequences. With this, wanted to claim
that the variation in the writing of an international language should be accepted as a
natural event in the evolution of languages that are used by a variety of producers,
since the use made by writers with different background’ s cultural and academic
inevitably leads to a range of linguistic variations.
The main driver of this study was to study the production of articles written in
scientific-technical to define the causes of errors across parts of the sentence where
they occur, while studying the differences between the interlanguage of ENN and
production of IN. No similar studies have found that could guide our steps, as other
analyzes related errors are about the language, but without specifying the gender nor
the specific classification was chosen in this investigation. When you make a
contrastive analysis usually focuses on the differences between two different
languages is not the differences that occur in carrying out the same target language,
13
due to the influences of the L1 or cultural. Therefore, with the intention of providing
our small contribution to linguistic research and discourse analysis different aspects
of contrastive linguistics applied to the IPA, was carried out research and analysis will
be presented below, based on the environment and error detection existence of a
proper and valid interlanguage. Our intention is to improve the development of
scientific-technical articles and detect features of its specific language, while claiming
the variety in the expression of a lingua franca. This task is somewhat painful at
times, especially for non-native writers, eager to communicate their research and
theories with colleagues with different cultural and linguistic backgrounds, do not
hesitate to adjust the fees to be created in the lingua franca standard , thus losing the
richness that gives you the versatility production of expressions and structures of
other languages.
Aware of the range that might meet this type of research and not wanting to
give ambiguous results or too large for proper interpretation, girded the working field
to typing errors and the variations found, taking into account the different parts of the
sentence and considering a pragmatic perspective of production to discern its
causes.
To this end, distinguished morphosyntactic levels or grammatical, lexical and
certain aspects that were considered relevant within the cohesion or the mode of
scientific-technical language. It was felt that these issues decisively influenced the
correct wording of scientific and technical articles in the L2, because traditionally it is
assumed that certain parts of speech are the more contentious for the NNS, so you
wanted to affirm or disprove this belief the corpus that was collected. Likewise,
attention was given to parts that have traditionally been considered irrelevant for what
we want to measure its importance as an error or variation in writing as well. This
was not the intent of this study belittle other features that will undoubtedly give it the
same way their identity and the production qualities, but chose to analyze in detail
their chosen fields and leave other areas for future research certainly exciting and full
of richness for the study of English applied to specific genres.
14
II. THEORETICAL
Early in the analysis of variations and errors that were found in the production
of a target language and compare their meaning by observing the behavior of its
individual components, we could not ignore certain issues. First, the importance of
applied linguistics as a framework, as is the branch of production studios in writing
that is part of this analysis, focusing on discourse analysis from a pragmatic
perspective. Second, the implications it has the English language as an international
language and communication within the professional and academic gender. Finally,
we consider the contrastive analysis between two varieties of the language from the
perspective of the written production of scientific and technical English, considering
the concepts of error and interlanguage as pillars to identify the variations that give
the language from point of view of learning (error) and from the standpoint of claim
grammatically correct interlanguage establishing the speaker (variation).
The following are the background and state of affairs of the various lines of
research related to this analysis, we will, initially, as a general framework for Entering
and focusing increasingly follow more precisely the analysis that is taking shape in
the present study.
1. APPLIED LINGUISTICS (LA)
After several years of maturation of linguistics as a theoretical science among
the different traditions of language study, those already in the 80's it was aware
(Crystal, 1981) currently does not arise only approach of general linguistics, but
rather analyzes focus on different aspects practices adopted by this science of
language. Among them are to highlight the different branches that applied linguistics
(AL) led, such as translation, nuances inherent within the language and its study in
schools, etc.. If we realize the deployment of large fields of study, we detected the
evolution that has suffered the linguistic to the practical and specific. Part an
15
eminently theoretical concept of science, as some authors initially not conceive of the
language from the perspective of language learning, but as a separate study, but it
has adapted to the forms and requirements of a language production in a society in
constant evolution.
Most of the analyzes carried out today from the perspective of LA, focusing on
various aspects such as child learning a language, the linguistic application in data
analysis or in the various genres. The
language has adapted to the social and
cultural innovations, allowing themselves to be influenced by the different currents of
thought and new technologies applied to analysis, entailing the creation of subfields
within linguistics (Crystal, 1982: p, 2; Widdowson, 1996: p, 76). Consequently, LA is
not considered as a pure science and theory, but focuses on reality and
implementation of a language linked to a world of constant change. It has witnessed
the various areas of study that has diversified linguistics, such as translation,
language learning, lexicography, sociolinguistics, comparative analysis, writing,
multilingualism and endless fields that can be seen in the panels of any conference
on linguistics or language study taking place today.
However, one cannot discount the inherent complexity of the LA (Cook and
Seidlhofer, 1995: p, 7), since it involves several factors among which we name the
integration of theory and practice, abstract ideas and the real world.
It covers several topics, such as language teaching, translation, lexicography,
the
learning and teaching of language, etc.. The role of LA in linguistics is
increasingly important, as McCarthy (2001: p, 4) points us, attributing a large capacity
for the analysis of language from different points of view, "Applied linguistics can (and
should) not only test the replicability of linguistic and Applicability theory and
description, But Also question and challenge Them Where They are found Wanting ".
That is, linguists do not have to impose their theories to the LA or this has to
influence the basis of general linguistics, as each type of research must assume their
own responsibilities, and thus make a symbiosis of language to help enhance the
qualities of both the theoretical side and the applied.
16
One area of which has had a great impact, both from the point of view of
research, and from the teaching of language, is the analysis of discourse. In his hand
the tendency of language study focused increasingly on a specific part of your
application, ie, specialization in certain respects particular production. It then sets out
certain key concepts discourse analysis, as it is the second frame in which stands the
present study and as Widdowson (1996: p, 76) explains, "Both (Discourse Analysis
and Contrastive analysis) of These areas of Enquiry Have laid claim to Practical
relevance and so to be the of applied linguistics business, "so this will give way, then,
the analysis contrastive.
2. ANALYSIS OF SPEECH (AD)
Discourse analysis is considered part of the LA, as it focuses on the existence
of language as communication factor, and begins to take shape from the 80's, being
a very rich area, but at the same time, purposes with a very concise. Focuses on the
study of language, not from the standpoint of a linguist, but from the social role it
exercises, so the concept of language in discourse analysis has been described and
analyzed and broken down, mainly as communicate the fact to the other and the
vehicle that allows us to express ourselves and share our ideas and ways of thinking.
It was developed in two different schools, the British, led by Widdowson and
the U.S., whose instigators were Selinker, Trimble, and Todd Lackstrom Trimble. The
applications that are considered are those of Lackstrom pioneering, Selinker and
Trimble (1973), which were later summarized by Trimble's book (1985) English for
Science and Technology: A Discourse Approach. Were established four levels to
organize a text: level A, the objectives of discourse in the level B specific rhetorical
functions that are needed to develop the level A, in level C, the functions of speech
develop specific and general level D, the rhetorical devices that establish relations
between the functions of level C (Dudley-Evans and St. John, 1998: p, 22). This
introduced the concept of relating the form of the language to use and made use in
the basic criterion for selection of teaching materials. Hutchinson and Waters (1987:
p, 11) were telling us about the purpose of this analysis and structure "The Concern
17
of research, THEREFORE, WAS to Identify an organizational patterns in the texts
and to Specify the linguistic Means by These patterns are signalled Which ", so much
attention is paid to how the sentences combine in discourse to produce a specific
meaning.
Shortly afterwards he was Widdowson, along with Allen, which definitely
boosted this type of analysis within the Professional and Academic English, a fact for
which they were criticized (Swales, 1988), as was put in doubt its autonomy as a
form of research.
However, the term discourse has not had the same meaning for linguists and
students of the productions of the language, what is going on a quick tour of the
various concepts of the term discourse, maintaining a diachronic perspective.
Benveniste (1971: p, 208-9) defines discourse as follows: "It is every variety of oral
Discourse of every nature from trivial conversation to The Most Elaborate oration [...]
but it is the mass of writing Also That you play That borrows Discourse oral or STI
Manner of expression and Its Purposes [...] ", meaning that the speech is understood
as any written or oral expression of language, both formal and informal. It may be
added that exist in the academic discourses that have been created only to be written
as spoken understood them as too formal, a fact that is evident when reading, for
example, any item scientist.
Furthermore, Foucault (1972: p, 80) brings his personal definition of the term
discourse, as interpreted this word as its specificity:
Instead of gradually fluctuating Rather Reducing the Meaning of the word
'Discourse', I In Fact believe I have added to STI meanings: Treating it as the overall
domain Sometimes of all statements, Sometimes as an identifiable service group of
statements, and Sometimes Regulated as a practice That accounts for a number of
statements.
The author refers to the reduction that occurs sometimes the term discourse,
encircling specific aspects. Shows more interest in the rules regulating the speech in
its production, as it not only focuses on the final product, but also in the process. This
18
trend has been followed by many linguists, and already made a big difference to the
definitions provided by other linguists. The definitions framed in the period dominated
by structuralism and generativism did not provide the term discourse as understood
today.
Now one starts from a pragmatic paradigm, with an integrated perspective of
discourse analysis within the social and cultural reality of languages, taking into
account the reciprocal influences they suffer, both the discourse and culture. Then,
there was the term speech from the viewpoint of understanding and can have
different meanings within textology, ie of the different kinds of text. More suited to the
current approach, Brown and Yule (1983) defined discourse analysis as the language
in use, a fact for which has resulted in the plural use of language, creating wealth and
variety of language and expressions different language, so many sometimes, through
it, we can know the linguistic evolution of other cultures.
Sometimes defined discourse analysis in the same way that the text, but are
concepts that should not be confused, since you have to understand the speech as a
communication between speaker and listener, while the text is a linguistic
communication where no interaction is implicit receiver-transmitter (Leech and Short,
quoted in Hawthorn, 1992: p, 189).
Discourse analysis leads to the establishment of links between components of
language, but without tending to the simplification to not just become a fact which
serves to social or practical purposes (Cook, 1989; Cook and Seidlhofer, 1995: p, 6).
Therefore also be taken into account all other language functions involves not only
the communicative because if not, they could forget the implications arising from their
use. As well expressed Gee (1999: p, 1) "If I had to single out a primary function of
human language, it would be not one, But The Following two: to scaffold the
performance of Social Activities and to scaffold human affiliation within The cultures
and social groups and institutions ", language production is its own wealth, apart from
enabling our communication, we mark our environment and may even influence our
future, according to wealth or poverty of our vocabulary. Language production,
following the pragmatic paradigm must be recognized as a social act, as when we
19
speak or write, we always have some personal perspective of the world and we
communicate through language, trying to convince and influence (s) of person ( s)
closest to us, our ideology or way of thinking. We are in a social discourse integrated
into various disciplines, which marks the nature of our expression and inclines us to
improve it or impoverishing, hence the complexity of the interactions experienced by
the discourse (Barsky, 1999: p, 5).
When we use language, reflecting it in a speech, we record of who we are and
our role in a social setting. From this stems the importance of expressing adequately
and at the time and place, marking our way our personality, social group, ideology,
etc.. Gee (1999: p,19) gives us a very good example of the role of each person in the
middle according to their form of expression, citing the scientist: The scientist's "know
how" is the Ability to Coordinate and be Coordinated by constellations of
expressions, actions, objects and people. In a sense, the scientist is Both an actor
(coordinating people and other Various things, tools, technologies and symbol
systems) and a patient (being Coordinated by Various other people and things, tools,
technologies and symbol systems). The nature of speech itself shows the importance
of time is created and used, the social role that exercises and variations with which
we can find in different areas in influencing the use and users. Through the language
of the speech, we describe the society and cultures, yet, it undergoes its influence,
which is why our discourse is not objective to reflect the attitude of the individuals
who compose it. Individuals in a society identified and classified, albeit
unconsciously, the types of language exist, and thereby differentiate the speakers of
that variety of language, hence the Interest in the study of linguistic discourse and its
different meanings or subfields, as it reflects the social characteristics of the
language.
Many have been the meanings that have been outlined in the word speech,
but the most recent may be mentioned that of van Dijk (2000: p, 22). This provides a
concept that leads to reflection, explaining that the speech is not only a way of using
language, but that other factors within the discourse. These are who uses language,
how to use it, why and when it does and should be taken into account when studying
20
any language production. As Varó Alcaraz (2000: p, 85) points out, this view is rooted
in the paradigm of pragmatics, which studies the linguistic productions watching the
communication sequences, use and users. Jaworski and Coupland (1999: p, 3) are
of the same opinion regarding the concept of discourse "[...] Discourse is an
inescapably Important for Understanding society concept and human responses to it,
as well as for Understanding language itself ". Ie Discourse analysis involves not only
a linguistic study, but a study of influence it exerts on society, culture, environment
and the individual processes that address. This was the starting point of our study
and used to design and justification of the hypotheses of this study, ie, the influence
society, the professional or academic exercise on language and to the extent that
they do vary, taking into account the issues of who, what, why and when. The
pragmatic approach is relatively new, since its practice is exercised since the eighties
of the twentieth century (Jaworski and Coupland, 1999: p, 4), since the dominant
tradition in linguistics, until then, focused on providing definitions grammar and
pronunciation, that is, in structuralism and generativism. These approaches are
focused on the structures and studies of the mentalistic language, without
incorporating any aspect of the interrelationship between meaning, language and
society. The concept of discourse analysis, as discussed in the currently,
establishing, through pragmatics, or as a part of the applied linguistics or as a
separate area worthy of study by itself. The two trends that have emerged, ie the
pragmalinguistics and sociolinguistics, confirm the growing importance of this
perspective study of language.
The studies currently conducted under the name of discourse analysis are
very different nature, from the analysis of sentence structures, to studies of
conversations or the influences that different parts of speech suffer generic. Varó
Alcaraz (2000: p, 94-95) identifies discourse as language in action, which carries a
range of information that has a purpose and want to produce any effect on the
receptor, regardless of socio-cultural factors, but considering that is in action, we
understand that is transformed by the influences around you: "The terms text and
discourse are interchangeable in most cases, but sometimes can mean slightly
different." This statement is shared in this study, although production will be referred
21
to the text, and the latter term is general, while production is understood to be written
and associated with a specific genre. The term discourse differs from the text or
production be influenced by sociocultural factors as how to convey any information is
inseparable from its environment as it alters the production of speech be made
subjectively.
This study focuses on the pragmatic dimension of discourse, as when
assessing language development that suffers from a few decades ago (we could call
that linked to the modern era), due to the influence of television, telecommunications,
internet, advertising, etc.., we note that this phenomenon is shaping language and
discourse analysis. Besides, what is making it a very different area of research which
was raised at the beginning. As a result, language has become a means of
persuasion and a major part in the learning of certain professions, as the manner in
which the speaker expresses has become essential. As explained by Candlin (1997:
ix), reaffirming this opinion:
Discourse [...] Refers to language in use, as a socially situated process Which
is. However [...] we may go on to discuss the constructive and dynamic role of Either
spoken or written Discourse Structuring in areas of Knowledge and the social and
Institutional practices Which are Associated with Them. In This sense, Discourse is a
Means of talking and writing and acting upon worlds About to Which Means Both
constructs and is Constructed by a set of social practices Within These worlds, and in
so Both doing produces and constructs afresh particular social-discursive practices,
Encouraged by constrained or more macro Movements in the overarching social
formation.
The study of discourse analysis is plural as society itself, as it involves a
variety of fields and multiple perspectives. Today it is becoming increasingly
important, given the plurality of language environments and variability to which it is
subjected. Also, our environment is so variable and changes and innovations so
suddenly appear, every time it has to make a greater effort to analyze and address all
the variables that arise from language as a means of communication. This endless
variety of discourse, we must add that involves interdisciplinary discourse analysis,
22
as the areas covered or affected by this are numerous and intertwined. We can not
stick on discourse analysis at one level, ie the use of language, but we must be
aware of the influences language and suffering that can never, nor could, be an
individual fact or detached of reality or society. Fairclough (1994: p, 23) describes the
speech as a social practice which is very complex and almost impossible to
disengage when a linguistic sequence: Linguistic phenomena are social in the sense
That Whenever people speak or listen or write or read, They do so in Ways Which
are socially and Have Determined social effects.
Even When people are conscious of Their Own MOST individuality and think
Themselves to be cut off from social MOST Influences They still use language in
Ways Which are subject to social convention.
The importance of the influence of psychology and sociology in the study of
the tongue is obvious, since they have to consider the relationship that has the
speech with thoughts, societies, ways of understanding the culture, etc.., as made
from sociolinguistics. Fairclough (1994: p, 25) provides a framework in which shows
clearly how that occurs in the text and interactions suffering by social factors,
standing at the center of the production process, the interpretation and socially
conditioned variants of context production and performance, as shown in Figure 1:
Social conditions of production
Production Process
Texto
Process of interpretation
Interaction
Context
Fig.1. Discourse as text, interaction,
Social conditions of interpretation context
and context (Fairclough, 1994: p,25)
Social interaction experienced by the text, as well as in production
interpretation, is a patent fact, both general and specific level, so that was the result
23
of several studies (Bloor and Bloor, 1991; Widdowson, 1996; Connor, 1996, 2001,
Candlin, Bhatia and Jensen, 2002).
Thus we distinguish that discourse analysis can be approached from different
perspectives in the investigation, according to the desired focus outline specific
analysis of the production. On the one hand, I study the discourse itself, which would
be the structuralist approach. Furthermore, we study the speech and communication
and cognition, and finally, it analyzes the discourse within the social structure and
culture, from a pragmatic approach (McCarthy, 2001: p, 38 -39). You can analyze the
speech or production taking into account each statement, although it is quite difficult
to untie each other’s and perspective to be a purist. All of them are involved in the
speech itself and all interact and form part of it, being the two last approaches as
important as the first for the understanding or discourse analysis. As a result we face
that, for any analysis of discourse set within a context, we feel the need to turn it into
a multidisciplinary tool (cross-disciplinary) and integrating, sometimes be difficult to
separate the various factors that shaped the production language. The discursive
perspective, social-cultural discourse analysis arises from different points of view,
according to the interests being pursued or the dimension want to give the analysis.
One approach is the iscourse-functional, an area ideal for addressing issues as
isolated phenomena of communication or focused only themselves, such as grammar
and semantics. Cumming and Ono (2000: p, 173) commented on the influence of the
environment in the grammar: "[...] the social environment of language, its
communicative function and, particularly, management of information in the speech
are fundamental to understand the grammar. " This grammatical approach born in
the mid 70's and is influenced by social and communicative approaches to Firth
(1968) and Halliday (1985), as well as the Prague School represented by Firbas
(1966) or Mathesius (1975). Functionalism studying grammar in a given environment,
providing real examples, nonfiction, taking into account social and cultural discourse
that is developed and its influence in the production of language in context.
Moreover, functionalism gives importance of frequencies in the speech, as these
forms of language the user uses more and therefore, are more common, affecting
production and make the linguistic structure. This approach has resulted in two
24
aspects to analyze the speech. First, a quantitative methodology, focusing on
statistical correlations of different grammatical forms. Furthermore, analysis of
speech that is used every day, interactive speech, which is what causes the change
language and some forms are seen as outdated, while others are born. The latter
aspect is relevant since in this respect resembles the pragmatic paradigm to reflect
the influence of the cultural and social environment in the final production is done by
intervening in the form of expression and communication.
Another perspective to the discourse from the socio-cultural linguistic behavior
(discourse markers, formality, modality, etc..) is the pragmatic, which initiated a
paradigm shift in the early eighties of the twentieth century. The meaning of the parts
of the text as well as communication and context, are the main concerns of this new
type of analysis, relegating the former to the category of too focused on one aspect,
regardless of the cultural and social. The important characteristics are: the study of
communication as fact in action is conceived of language as discourse, there is an
interdisciplinary and a reference to actual production of language (Widdowson, 1996:
p, 61; Varó Alcaraz, 2000: p, 84). The stream of pragmalinguistics is adopting in this
study, since the term production is considered as a language in action and the focus
of studies of production will be formal. However, whatever it may be the type of
approach adopted in a study, it is considered that the language is actually an abstract
entity, which takes its reality and how to integrate into their own reality and context,
thus transmitting the heritage cultural and social development which is surrounded.
Fine (1988: p, 1) in his description: "Must Discourse analysis determines the units of
These larger Stretches of language, How These units are signaled by specific
linguistic markers, and / or the Processes Involved in Producing and Comprehending
larger Stretches of language" makes us realize the fact that a speech is structured to
be read or heard by other people, process consists of several steps in the production
of a second language. By understanding the steps and processes of articulation of
speech, we perceive how we can accelerate these processes, achieving a qualitative
improvement in production. As a specific audience which is supposed to get our
production, through discourse analysis shows if fulfills the mission of conveying the
desired message and how adequate. Likewise within the discourse has to take into
25
account the context, since this condition the production of a coherent, because there
are some constraints cultural be learned while the tongue. This was also observed
the difference between written and oral discourse, a dichotomy which is detailed in a
section later, and that must be taken into account when analyzing and producing
speech in L2, to facilitate a successful acquisition (Ellis, 1985, 1994, 1997). Neither
detract our attention the importance of new technologies in the development and use
of language in a speech, as this revolution information necessarily has to leave an
indelible mark on our way articulate. Certainly, the technologies themselves are not
the ones changing linguistic habits, but the cultures and societies that use them. infer
to through these technologies, important influences on the language, and of course
the formal and structural change. On this point, Kress (1993: p,1) explains the
implications of new technologies in language use, comparing this phenomenon to the
study of linguistics:
[...] There are Several features of social Whose Such effects technologies and
Implications we need to Consider: the increase in human-machine interaction in
communication which has multiple and diverse effects. For instance in the direction of
normalizing, normativization of language on the one hand, on the other hand social
Producing which relations are paradoxical in terms of the social relations Which Have
Led to present modes of language and forms of text: e-mail, as an example, instant
mixes absence of communication with the Participants.
You really cannot ignore this phenomenon that continues to innovate and
imposing our everyday reality, undoubtedly impacting on evolution studies and
linguistics. In addition to facilitating communication in a more common with people
from other areas, news of other places that did not know before, or simply access a
wealth of information language, in the same way broadens our perspective, while our
vocabulary and forms of expression. This makes for increasing use of a language
internationally unique and integrated into a single speech, with which exchange
information through the internet or new networks. Once defined the general
framework within which to situate this study, v replacing it within applied linguistics
and immersed in a discourse analysis to allow international and intercultural
26
communication perspective pragmatic, then outlined the theoretical and practical
studies of the writing which places the contrastive analysis. It focuses on errors and
specifically, the creation of an interlanguage writing favored by scientific technical
made by non-native writers.
4. THE IMPORTANCE OF ENGLISH AS THE LANGUAGE OFUNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN NATIONS. LANGUAGE AND CULTURE
The value has to use a language of globalization is an issue widely recognized
by both specialists in the study of languages, for those who do not are, as more and
more L2 is used for the daily work of communication. Without But despite
acknowledging the benefits of owning a global language, this does not disappears to
be aware of the disadvantages. Although in this study, the center of attention will be
discuss and itemize the benefits, not to get into issues such as known by the media
as the domain, the pride of nations, economic inequality, the disappearance of
minority languages and a long so that would fill the pages of this study. Several years
ago an attempt was made globalization a language linguistic newly created from the
existing Esperanto. Unfortunately, nowadays , we see the mention that the new
generations do not recognize, standing as an idea in his first time was welcomed and
applauded, but which has been overcome by evidence that only a minority has
learned talk about it as a utopia or a good purpose.
If we now focus our attention on the possible languages that could potentially
become a global language, we find that the most likely candidates by number of
speakers are Chinese, English, Spanish, Japanese and German. We can ask
ourselves when we hear the statistics, what are the values that determine the
acceptance or rejection of a language from the rest of humanity, and his
disappearance, which according to what data, is sometimes alarming (Montesdeoca,
2001). The most logical one would expect that it would determine the number of
speakers of the language and learn it easily, but with astonishment we see is not
always so. As Crystal (1997: p, 7) tells us: A language does not Become a global
language Because of STI intrinsic structural properties, or size of Because Of The
27
ITS vocabulary, or Because It Has Been a vehicle of a great literature in the past [...]
none of them to be alone, or in combination, can Ensure to language's world spread.
[...] A language Becomes an international language for one chief reason: The Political
Power of Its People-especially military power there.
Not always logical factors are what lead us to learn a specific language, but
generally we are conditioned by economic factors, cultural or image you want to
impart to others.
However, besides the economic influence, are also taken into account,
increasing the greater tendency to use other factors intrinsic to the language, such as
those mentioned even then Malmberg (1981: p, 215), when analyzing the importance
of using statistical methods in the analysis of a language. Notes that in 1948 an
international congress of linguists in Paris, he outlined the importance of statistics in
language, and tried to appreciate: "[...] the efficiency of different languages and felt
that using shorter words are more efficient. [...] In this respect the English proves to
be especially economical. "Others
We considered the importance of efficiency as a factor in linguistic change,
and this fact is unconsciously into account, since the L2 learning is often difficult and
complex concepts are assimilated more slowly, a feature which removes the
language popularity. However, in some respects, have adapted and patterns of
different languages used around the globe, culture-free (Carter and Sanchez
Macarro,1998: p, 41). This is the case of some words that are international and have
not been translated, but are used in the original language as loans, such as
television, roast beef, corner, and so on. not to mention all those from the new
technologies and used over the Internet (chat, mail ...). That is, there is no agreement
decide on the international language that has to represent us, but on the contrary,
has not caused any problem to accept a range of vocabulary that comes from other
languages, preferring to adopt the original word for translation, since almost all these
loan wordshave a translation into other languages, but the speaker, for various
reasons, prefer to use the original word. This phenomenon can be seen very clearly
in scientific language, where adaptations to other languages than the original word
28
are minimal, and we do not even dare to call translations, and often simply amending
termination the word to fit into another language. The reason for this is that as the
scientific world an area that requires international communication, it is more
convenient to use similar words in several languages to translate and thus lose the
international character of this term.
Despite this international lexicon, a fact evident is the need to know a second
language both in academic and professional, and this fact we can see by going to a
foreign country, connect your computer to the internet or even give us a around a
college campus, not to mention the tourist areas of our country. Due to the
importance of knowing foreign languages, are making significant efforts in regard to
the automatic translation of texts, to make it easier for many thousands of writers who
choose to communicate in a language not his own. However, by far, the results are
not entirely satisfactory, since the use of a language involves not only knowing all the
vocabulary and grammar, but also the idioms, the expressions that have a double
sense in the situation we face, etc. In short, the imperative to communicate in a
foreign language for to be understood, to master the language and expressions
characteristic of the vocabulary typical of the situation, etc.., is a palpable fact in any
context.
By the desire for communication between different peoples came the tradition
of using frank language (Crystal, 1997: p, 9) mixture used as simplified various
dialects, with which former residents of different areas could understand. A known
case is Latin, that after all the talk in the Roman Empire, came to shatter in the
original language varieties. Today, when traveling to anywhere on the planet, or
browse through the network of networks from our house is commonplace, when
contact with different languages is a fact of life, we realize the importance of knowing
other languages, to communicate with people who have lived in a different cultural
environment, and therefore, we may share ideas or new experiences, a fact that
could be conceived by a lingua franca. A fundamental fact to be considered from a
diachronic perspective is that a cultural change as we are experiencing today, in
which the
globalization of our cultures is a reality that moves so fast, we are
29
changing our thinking even without realizing, and we are forming a new
communication-based society has not been experienced since the industrial
revolution and the transport. Given these facts, the exchange between cultures is a
reality that must be both accept and delight in it as it is experiencing a historic
moment in the world civilized, at which the exchange of information should be
considered as wealth culture. The same opinion shared by Quirk and Stein (1993: p,
29), which discussed the about the need for a language of communication among
nations: "It is a convenience, as I we have seen, to speak across time and space in
what we can regard 'as the' same 'language, and it is a convenience That We Can
Achieve-through Developing a second kind of identity ", in the same way Crystal
(1997: p, 12) reiterates," And never has there more urgent Been A need for a global
language ". Therefore, even pleased to recognize our own cultural roots and identify
with them, so is able to travel and stay in touch with other ways of thinking and
acting, to expose our different cultures and fluent with it, understand and make
ourselves understood.
Accept the possible cultural differences is logical and sensible but also very
rewarding to contrast them with the consequences that brings this contrast in the
language, because language is never independent of culture (Nancarrow, 1982;
Nash, 1989; Blake, 2001: p, 1025; Finch, 2003: p, 215).
Therefore, all of these reasons lead us to call a language that helps us to be
able
to
communicate
between
different
countries,
as
economic
growth,
understanding between countries and clear communication between different
cultures, inevitably drag us to share, to communicate in a unique language. Before
the critics of the idea of globalization and the use of common foundations for a future
understanding, we must argue that it is not necessary a sacrifice of minority cultures
and native customs, but to share power with other inhabitants of the planet by
communication will not forget and remain more entrenched and enduring. Our
individual effort leads to faithfully transmit our cultural roots, which can always be
remember and practice as we have lived. Following the reasoning of Kramsch (1998:
p, 3), the language is an important element in our particular culture, and makes us
30
see how the world itself and also to contrast it with the third party: "They (words)
Extress facts, Ideas That Are events or communicable Because They Refer to a
stock of Knowledge about the World That other people share. Also Words Reflect
Their authors' Attitudes and Beliefs, Their point of view, That Are Also Those of
Others [...] language culture expresses reality. " Depending on how you use this
means of communication, it may provide the cultural reality of each group and the
context in which communication is established, reaching individual identification
through shared knowledge.
Thus, after establishing the importance of identifying a globalizing language, a
lingua franca, with which we can understand, we will discern the role played by
English in this controversial decision and the reasons that led to its designation as a
language Most international speakers. The English language has historically had a
favorable context for its designation as most used language around the world
(Brumfit, 1982; Bolton, 1982; Bailey, 1982; Graddol and Swan, 1995; Graddol, Leith
and Swan, 1997; Crystal, 1997 ; Kramsch, 1998: p, 76; Graddol, McArthur, Flack and
Amey, 1999; Finch, 2003: p, 216). Both for the colonization of other lands exerted by
Britain, as economic imperialism of the United States, has had the most favorable
circumstances for broadcast. This phenomenon can ratify (Quirk, 1982: p, 15; 1985:
p,1) to compare the importance of English in 1580 with its importance in 1980.
Today, many Anglophones, among the many that exist, not what we call native
speakers, but speakers who use English as a means to communicate internationally,
and living in so-called EFL Countries (countries that use English as a Foreign
Language) or ESL Countries (countries that use English as a Second Language),
which is why the English language has evolved greatly, not only because one group
uses this language, but a group that large part has a different cultural pattern also
uses it for business or communication.
It's just remarkable diffusion suffered by the English language as a lingua
franca in the twentieth century. The spread of English can be defined as a circle that
grows larger each time more (Widdowson, 1982: p, 9; Crystal, 1997: p, 53-4). The
circle starts in the places where they spoke first, ie USA, UK, Ireland, Canada,
31
Australia and New Zealand, and then go to the colonies enlarging the British Empire,
speaking with other tongues, incountries like Singapore, India, Malawi, etc.. Just
evolving into a much larger circle to join the nations that recognize the international
importance of English, where English is taught as a second language, among which
we include China, Japan, Greece, Poland, Spain and a growing number countries.
Fairclough (1994: p, 56), commenting on the phenomenon of standardization of a
language, in this case English, provides a possible reason for its importance, we
have already pointed previously:
There is an Economic basis for this Connection Between capitalism and
unification: the need for a unified home if commodity production is marked to be
FULLY established. This in turn Requires Political and Cultural unification.
Standardization is of direct Economic Importance in Improving communication.
Basically, all factors which have favored the introduction of English as a lingua
franca, point to the economy, referring to globalization or economic and cultural
standardization in several languages to facilitate communication between the various
economic and political forces on the planet. The factor more obvious to designate
English as the international language of communication was that large international
companies who started the technological revolution, the language used to
communicate with the other countries (Quirk and Stein, 1993: p, 62).
But that was not the only factor, but also possess the economic power to
develop all the technology that is changing the way of life of the speakers and
therefore influence the manner of delivery and use of language, and in the use of
loanwords.
Whatever the beginning or origin of the widespread use of English as a lingua
franca or global, we must consider also whether this will also lead to a culture of
globalization or on the contrary is not going to influence our native customs (Graddol,
Thomson and Byram, 1993, Goodman and Graddol, 1996: p,181). The reason why
the English came to have a dominant position as compared into other languages is
summed up the opinion of Umberto Ecco (quoted in Goodman and Graddol, 1996: p,
32
181) The predominant position enjoyed by English Currently is a historical
contingency Arising from the mercantile and colonial expansion of the British Empire,
Which was Followed by American Economic and Technological Hegemony. Of
course, it may be Also That English has succeeded Maintained Because it is rich in
monosyllables, capable of absorbing foreign words and neologisms flexibility in
forming, etc.., yet Hitler HAD won World War II and the USA HAD Been Reduced to a
confederation of banana republics, we Probably would use today as a German
universal vehicular language, and Japanese FIRMS would advertise Their electronics
products in Hong Kong airport duty-free shops in German.
For this reason, even if a language possesses all the requirements to be used
as a lingua franca, there is also variable, sometimes unpredictable historical events
that mark our future at all levels, including language. Despite being influenced by the
historical accident, we can not ignore the fact that English is learned and spoken by
non-native speakers, mainly in the hope of improving their economic position or to
increase their knowledge of new technologies. Because of this, the English language
has received a boost in the twentieth century, and everything seems to predict who
will continue in the twenty-first, lasting unless there is a change in the global
economy.
For situations where you need the English language as a communication
vehicle, Quirk and Stein (1993: p, 57) we cite a study by two linguists know where it
was giving the various uses non-native speakers of the language used for
communication with speakers of other languages. They conclude that through this
study could determine the contexts in which the language most commonly used, ie
English. These uses were, firstly as a means of communication in newspapers, on
the other, as a medium in higher education in some countries, and secondly, as a
means to communicate with the outside and finally, it is called official language in
countries where there is no common language that dominates the entire nation.
Unconsciously, but still greatly influenced by the United States, has been used
English as the language of international communication in various contexts, as when
a message is to transcend the international community, using English as the
33
language of communication, as in some international protests or in the transmission
of sports or international competitions.
As a result of the use of English in various contexts, we must also remember
that at present our ideas, although we use the same language, the different readers
may interpret it differently (Tannen, 1994: p, 20), as changing cultural environments,
as well as their language strategies or communication. The cultural heritage that
each speaker has its style and method of expression, a fact that implies a change in
the interpretation and in the language production, resulting in some contexts,
misleading to use cultural patterns different from those expected for the correct
understanding of text (Mufwene, 2000: 9; Seidlhofer, 2001: p, 42). From this we
derive the relevant that is to be attributed to society and culture that initiates the
message, since the correct decoding it has equal or even greater importance when
using an L2, about the implications or biases that can cause. Although many
countries accept the importance of English as transmitting knowledge between
countries with different languages and by default, you associated with the culture that
has more economic power and influence now, not we underestimate the fact that the
English language has also an acceptance varied by country and environment to
which we refer. Not always the language English is well received in different contexts
and is sometimes met with suspicion or even a refusal to accept it as the language of
communication international, representing reject at some point, colonization and
oppression of other countries and cultures. Authors such as Goodman and Graddol
(1996) and Swan (1997: p, 15) reflect this rejection, and the latter tells us in this
regard: English may be Welcomed, or resented, or Rejected. It may bring significant
social and Benefits to ITS equipment speakers. But historical STIs spread Also have
Been at the cost of other languages. In Many Countries Nowadays English is
Regulated: its use may be officially formally restricted by language or language
planning Policies in order to Protect languages, cultures and speakers seen as Being
Under Threat.
This observation realize that globalization faces serious opposition not to
accept the advantages provided no more, but the question, thinking of the minority
34
languages could disappear with it, as well as encouraging social inequality, and that
seems to speak English is in some areas associated with having a good social and
economic level, so that the social group dominates it would not discriminate.
Therefore, the benefits to which we alluded to earlier, are not seen as such, contrary
to what we might think to receive international news channels or by visiting any
website where the dominance of English is evident, leading to think that there is no
linguistic conflict. However, despite the opposition suffered in certain contexts, is a
become clear that currently, no other language equates linguistic English and be
sure, we need only look around us, both in a professional, and academic or social. In
Spain, for example, we can ignore the importance of the English language, with a
clear reflection on the internet, advertising, media, movies, music, the success of the
private channels international and English loanwords as abundant in sports, clothes,
new technologies, etc.. But this phenomenon is not considered an isolated event, as
well point to many examples of this reflex in other languages, Quirk and Stein (1993:
p, 84). English marks its presence in a variety of media at once influence a huge
number of speakers that also modify the language and loanwords added.
Academically, is now included as compulsory subject in the curriculum of the
Elementary and Secondary Education, possessing also an increasingly important role
in Spanish universities.
Therefore, the be surrounded by a foreign language (L2, English) is changing,
but sometimes we realize, our mother tongue (L1, Spanish), but at the same time, the
Spanish language is also influencing the English when executing any international
production, since the transform to apply our structural or formal patterns. Our
scientists publish their research in international journals, with an audience plural, and
as it says Swan (1997: p, 160-61): "[...] the mother tongue has a considerable
Influence on the way to second language is Learnt and used ". Spanish has been
influenced largely by the English term, but at the same time, different authors writing
in English not being their language maternal leave their mark on the existing variety
of productions, establishing clear formal and stylistic differences within the global
accounting language England. Remarked on this phenomenon and Malmberg (1981:
p,221)
regarding
the
transmission
of
information
and
the
importance
of
35
communication: "Variants heard are assigned to one of the types found in the mother
tongue of the individual transcribed, and not the appropriate element of the language
investigated. " The writers who use English as a second language sometimes
committed errors, sometimes caused by the interference of the mother tongue and
another by the structural complexity of the language. In general, Spanish writers
consider easy technical English vocabulary, especially from the Latin, used in
academic contexts, but instead, the syntax is the hardest part because the common
patterns are more difficult to identify and therefore, when applying the L1 production
is quite confusing.
After discussing the influence of English as a lingua franca and variations to
which has been subjected as a result of its use, there remains talk on the future of
English as an international language, so that after observing their past and present,
we are not too hard to imagine the importance that is going to attribute in the future.
As for his influence on the source of information to be determine further the linguistic
future, ie, internet, Crystal (1997: p,112) comments: [...] Will not be the Net like
anything we know today. Automatic speech synthesis and Recognition will be routine
[...]. For the immediate future, it is Difficult to foresee Any Developments Which Could
Seriously reduces the stature of English on the information superhighway. The
biggest setback to Potential as a global English language [...] would have taken place
a generation ago-if Bill Gates HAD grown up speaking Chinese.
For this assertion, it seems that the future of the English language is already
made, although we also think it could be rejected for various reasons such as: by an
antagonism to globalization unpleasant experiences due to the imposition of the
language in some countries by a deteriorating situation U.S. economic, not
considered a power, as has been the If the USSR recently, so resulting in a rejection
of the language spoken in a country that has no prestige that the majority language in
the United States was not English, but Spanish, the language now grows by
migration or be reborn a new concept of English, is said to be a mixture of several
languages, a phenomenon that has been mentioned as a reality in Spain, etc.. Ie
36
contact of English with other languages could also change the English, talking in
places like South Africa the English language not recognized by all but a dialect of
English, as has happened in parts of cities like London or New York. Another
possibility that could reduce the importance of English is the fragmentation of the
English language in several coming from her, as with Latin. Of course, everything is
pure speculation of what might be the future of English as a medium of global
communication, as it has not been known a phenomenon like the one we are living
now and the speed with which they are experiencing. By the same reason that would
not have predicted the present we are living fifty years, is also very complex to
imagine the future of a civilization as subject to changes like those being
experienced.
5. GENDER, PROFESSIONAL AND ACADEMIC ENGLISH (IPA)
In the previous sections has focused the study of applied linguistics from the
point of view of its influence on society, while also the sufferer, since certain changes
in language are rooted in social events and on the contrary, the type of language
used reflects the mastery of certain classes social economy. This has led to its
development and within it, the different approaches and perspectives of the analysis
of textual production, by field research and the target language, but a fact already
evident in any study is related to contemplate the English language as an
international language and high cultural and linguistic influence. The following is the
importance that the Gender and the Professional and Academic English (hereafter
IPA) currently therefore, we first discuss the importance of context in language and
then explain the concept of gender. Finally, the two will be described specific variants
of the study of English, professional English and academic major to finish framing the
scope of this study and that
its specific characteristics, deserve the attention
currently being obtained. It begins this discussion by considering the importance of
context in the evolution of language, which has generated much cultural variations,
social and professional (Halliday, 1985), a fact that has resulted in the existing
37
genres that has evolved in the division and specialization of language in various
fields.
An example is the professional and academic gender, given the great
importance of handle well the language in a society like ours that relies most of the
communication in written or spoken language.
Textual production, be very specific or generic, is determined by the context in
which it appears, a fact that influences the vocabulary (lexical field) that chooses the
type of structures used (morphosyntactic field) and the choice of forms of cohesion
for the production of any text. Focuses the production of One way or another as the
reader will interpret the text, changing the language and resources depending on the
context in which production is located, but also is must take into account other factors
that
influence the linguistic variety. These factors are the purpose you have to
produce a textual sequence, the subject on spoken, the people who directed the
production, the trust has to these people, if you talk to them or write, etc.. (Quirk and
Stein, 1993: p, 41). Nunan (1993: p, 7) distinguishes two types of context, the
linguistic and non-linguistic. Understood as linguistic context which develops the text,
based on especially in the linguistic system as non-linguistic context, the context
surrounding the the text. Ie, the purpose of the text marked in that way is organized
so that the context will make a production (non-linguistic context), and on the other
hand, context (Linguistic) mark the type of audience it is intended for production,
considerations be taken into account in the IPA. Varó Alcaraz (2000: p,109) defines
the context as follows: "[...] category that serves to differentiate the semantic
meaning, offered by the dictionary, the pragmatic or discourse, emerged Language in
use ", distinguishing it from the word meaning writing. The context is formed by a
number of variables that this author groups in
a) state-space dimension (formed by a series of descriptive index),
b) co-text (textual context of the sentence) and c) the extralinguistic context (the
ideas, beliefs, value systems and cultural knowledge). These variables affect text
production largely fact conditions results any analysis that will change completely if
38
the contexts are different, although start from the same starting point. The
extralinguistic context is the variable be considered in this study to justify some
variations in language, since many of these differences stem from cultural roots are
reflected in textual sequence.
Furthermore, the context is one of the key within the genus, as due to the
combination of its variables, we obtain different genera. The genus is ie, the
classifications of textual varieties of the language they have coined, among others,
Swales (1990) and Bhatia (1993), has been a key concept in the years nineties.
Swales (1990: p, 33, 58) is aware of the ambiguity of this term, and referred to as:
[...] Remains a fuzzy concept genre, A Somewhat loose term of art. Worse,
Especially In the U.S., has in recent years genre Become Associated with a formulaic
way disreputably of constructing texts-particularly a kind of writing or speaking by
numbers. [...] The Then issue is Whether as a genre for language teaching
Structuring device is doomed to Encourage the unthinking application of formulas, or
Such an outcome is Whether Rather Brought About by a pedagogical simplification
convenience.
[...] A class of Communicative events, the members share Some of Which set
of Communicative purposes. These Purposes are Recognized by the expert
members of the Discourse parent community, and thereby the rationale for the
CONSTITUTES genre. This rationale shapes the schematic structure of the
Discourse and Influences and constrains choice of content and style. Given the
variety in the form of communication, not surprised by the variety of different types of
genres that are classified considering its complexity rhetoric, preparation have been
beforehand and the means by which they are expressed. The language actually
differs in the production of its various genres, not only by the specificity of its subject,
but also how to express this kind.
This causes the variations which exist simultaneously within the same gender,
since all the factors surrounding the text influence the final production factor that is
reflected both in research as in teaching texts specific (Dudley-Evans, 2000: p, 10).
39
The genera are generally used in functional environments, rather than on social or
personal, and proof of them are kinds of laboratory experiments, scientific articles,
sermons, reports doctors, etc..
The definition offered by Swales, contradicted in some respects and analyzed
in detail by Bhatia (1993: p,16), which is summed up very briefly: "[...] Each genre is
an Successful Achievement of instance of a specific purpose using Communicative
Knowledge of conventionalized linguistic and discourse resources ". All varieties
professionals can potentially have a kind referred to each one of its varieties, both
oral and written, so the ramifications of genera are very numerous, since many times
the characteristics of different genera are repeated at certain times if the context in
which they perform is similar.
Whether there is a diachronic evolution, one must remember that it was
Swales (1988, 1990, 1996) who set a pattern to follow in the study of gender, ie
proposed to analyze different sections of scientific articles, such as results,
summaries, conclusions, and so on. He also studied other texts, for example, in tests
or generated in English professional such as a variety it deserves to have his own
studio. Influenced by this, Bhatia (1993: p,13) devotes their efforts in gender analysis,
but in a purely professional environment, offering a series of guidelines that can be
used to improve the use of gender variants as applied to business English, academic
and professional. Gender is a set of communicative purposes that shape and internal
structure in text production, so any change in the communicative purpose brings a
new genre, while small variations or modifications help to distinguish the sub-genres.
Although Swales has a crucial role in the study of gender, their statements are
heavily influenced by previous linguistic trends that have decisively influenced the
definition of gender (Eggins and Martin, 2000: p,345). These currents could be
established as the first so-called British contextualism, with Monaghan (1979) as
representative, with a marked influence of the anthropologist Malinowski (1935),
which included in this framework, the context more immediate issue of a situation and
the global context culture. Firth (1951) was based on these ideas to incorporate into
their model of context language with grammar, morphology, lexicon, phonology and
40
phonetics. To the After a while, this approach was developed in several directions,
and of these, the interpretation is made more important by Halliday (1989), which
sets out following distinctions:
1. Field of social action: what is happening, the nature of social action is occurring, ie,
what participants are busy, which is where the language acts as an essential
component.
2. Tenor, the structure of roles: who is involved, the nature of the participants, their
positions and roles, that is, what types of role relationships between the participants.
3. Thus, the symbolic organization: what is the role of language, what participants
expect that language to do for them in that situation, ie the symbolic organization of
the text, the position that it occupies and its role in the context, including the channel
of speech and rhetorical mode, which accomplished through the text in terms of
categories as persuasive, expository, teaching and the like.
Halliday, through his studies from 1960, noted that the meaning elections are
organized into three main components, which he called the ideational meta-functions
(organization of the reality around us) interpersonal (organization of the social reality
of the people you interact) and textual (organization of ideational and interpersonal
meanings within the texts that are coherent and relevant in relation to its context) that
influence the final production of the language. Similarly, Halliday and Martin (1993)
suggest that there is a kind of direct correlation between the organization functional
organization of language and the context. All these interpretations of the specific
production are actually the roots that led to define the concept of gender and also
serve to justify the previous statement is made of the strong link between the context
and gender.
Also considered as precedents the concept of gender and Sinclair Coulthard
(1975), who base their studies on gender, but on production in the classroom, trying
to build a generic structure, from the smallest units of analysis to reach the larger
units. On the other hand, Hasan (1977) and Halliday (1989) introduced the concept of
generic structure potential generalize the range of possibilities of organization in
41
stages associated with a genre particular, notions that are increasing the need for a
field that encompasses all these perspectives and design a way forward.
Among the latest developments within the European approach that led gender,
it has been observed that the design of the log Halliday emphasizes in the systematic
links between the organization of language and organization of context. Therefore,
systemic linguists use in an ever-closer to gender, functional description / semantics
of the grammar of the English language Halliday (1985) on the one hand, and the
concept of cohesion and discourse analysis Halliday and Hasan (1976) and Martin
(1992). Studies are also observed as the Christie (1991), Hasan and Williams (1996)
and Martin (1993), in which the analysis is focuses on explaining exactly what
combinations of variables field, tenor and as possible in a culture, and the way these
processes are projected as organized in stages and social-oriented goals, putting as
examples educational contexts. The culture in which language is involved, and the
language production methodology to follow should be considered as part intrinsic
gender, since the use of a suitable production method, focused on the specificity of
gender, but also aware of a cultural reality that can manipulate its meaning and form,
is needed to understand all aspects (Swales and Rogers, 1995: p, 224; Huckin, 1997:
p, 75). You can approach the genre from the rhetorical perspective, considering the
cultural and gender constraints, or from a dynamics, considering gender as a flexible,
targeted at an audience and purpose concrete. But always be borne in mind that
there are some constraints cultural be analyzed if we know their intrinsic
characteristics (Huckin, 1997: p, 77). Jordan (1997: p, 230) discusses the
development of gender from a viewpoint teaching, differentiating their application in
writing and speech, as it considers that the creation of gender is applied to different
areas that sometimes become scattered, stating that the business English and legal
English is what has had greater impact and studies. More recently, Kramsch (1998:
p, 62) explains the concept of gender follows: "Although viewed as a
universal
sometimes type, fixed by literary and other conventions, a genre in a sociocultural
pespective is always dependent on Being Perceived as Such Within a specific
context of situation or culture. " society is the which determines the existence of
gender and the controls, determining the theme and how to write. Therefore, each
42
genus applies its variety within the language and it follows the great wealth acquired
in the various meanings of each word and the idioms so complex to acquire a L2. To
illustrate this concept, Gee (1999: p, 46) puts us as an example the phrase 'How far
does the light go? 'that in a normal context could apply to the lighting or lamp, while
in physics, could be referred, within a specific context, the waves have different
magnitudes. This is given by the very nature of the human mind, which recognizes a
number of concepts and adapts what he perceives, to who has lived before, or
concepts associated with their past experiences, applying them to the written
production (Gee, 1992).
As can be seen when reviewing its travel, the concept of gender has been an
evolution in itself
not prevent, as it has expanded its view, subdivided into
specializations generated by professional and academic needs. But not all specialties
are given the same importance as set selection criteria, for example, its importance in
today's society, the stereotype and its application involving rhetoric and linguistics
(Swales, 2001: p, 15). Has also been evident in recent years the importance of
gender communication (Swales, 2001: p, 13), which has become a complex task
given the variety of purposes, objectives and outcomes that society demands of
language and gender. This has greatly influenced the traditional concept of gender
tentatively outlined twenty years ago, but has expanded its view influenced by
various social, technical and cultural.
One of the biggest advantages of gender analysis is its ability to relate the
findings that we see in the text with the characteristics discourse that appear where
there is gender (Dudley-Evans and St. John, 1998: p, 91-2), but nevertheless, there
is a risk of being anchored in the text, feeling interest only for the surface structures
irrespective of the deep. Another analysis of gender disadvantage may arise as the
group to be targeted too amorphous or is so divided that ultimately miss the
message. Faced with these Potential disadvantages of gender analysis, DudleyEvans and St. John (1998: p, 92)say "[...] genre analysis very Seriously Needs to
take the academic and Which genres in professional contexts exist and the
43
sociological research Into Those contexts ", as they believe that gender must adhere
specifically to a field determined and fully enclosed so as not to be vague.
Of course, gender analysis has also had its impact in several countries,
among which we mention Spain, where this study, in its various slopes, can be seen
in various publications (Piqué, Andreu-kissed and Viera, 1996; Posteguillo, 1999a,
1999b; Fernandez and Gil Salom, 2001, Fernandez and Soler Monreal, 2002; Carrio
Pastor, 2002). These include considerations Varó Alcaraz (2000: p, 133-4) which
stresses that genres are consistent with a number of formal and stylistic conventions,
as they have:
� same communicative function;
� an organizational scheme similar (macro);
� such a mode of discourse and discursive techniques comparable to serve to guide
the receiver;
� lexical-semantic level analog, consisting of units and functional traits and formal
equivalents and
� a common sociopragmatics conventions, ie by use professionals and academics in
similar socio-cultural contexts.
Gender characteristics required to be taken into account to distinguish it from
other productions, so that their features should be demarcated of others and be
easily distinguishable, since it is a reality that we can analyze each day by the trend
towards specialization that is suffering the textual sequence.
Because of the tendency of language to its specificity and define fields
concrete, the name that has been used more in the study of English, has been the
language for specific purposes, or more specifically, English for specific. However,
within this area the latest trend is being define or bind this field to two major areas:
professional and academic English (Jordan, 1997, Dudley-Evans and St. John, 1998;
Varó Alcaraz, 2000). These two groups that come from specific English general
44
concept actually encompasses all genres of English cannot be classified within the
general English, ie a more specific naming and clarifying the specific concept. This
term has its beginnings in the claims of Crystal (1982: p, 6), which emphasized the
professional aspect of applied linguistics "[...] the professional admits to Being:
unable to solve a problem, and the linguist Which Provides an analysis Constitutes
the basis of a solution ", pointing to the importance of an analysis of the language in
order to give some advice to professionals who are often asking questions, thinking
that no one can answer with clarity and precision, so the need for a specific study
was beginning to arise.
Similarly, Widdowson (1983: p, 6), was involved from the beginning in which
began to envision the idea of Academic and Professional English (IPA) 4 in its
definition and outline, trying to justify their existence, especially in the time of
publication to which I refer, which was not envisaged a future for this type of teaching
and especially its independence from the study of general linguistics or applied
linguistics. We can imagine the atmosphere that existed at that turning point of the
IPA, for the reasons and desire to justify Widdowson a fact that at that time was more
than obvious, but you could not still meet, namely an effort to further threshing fields
of study language. His argument is that the IPA is more specific than other courses,
but what sets it apart from general English is their purpose, ie, the academic and
professional. It really puts the training of professionals: "[...] ESP is Essentially a
training operation Which Seeks to Provide learners With A restricted competence to
enable Them to Cope with Un Certain Clearly defined tasks. " Widdowson IPA posed
a vision that clearly shows the change suffered by this field since then, as today is
one of the most important within the learning of English because of the economic and
technological development suffered. Subsequently, Swales (1985: p, 216, 1988: xiv)
commented on the growing importance of beginning to have English for specific
purposes, as more and were more articles written in English that dealt with specific
issues of an area, highlighting the art. Quirk and Stein (1993: p, 3), and more
recently, stress specific uses of language manifest in every language, but they call
them Exotic: "They might be Called Fairly 'exotic'-a particularly apt term for written
language, in Which we all need special training, Which cannot be said to 'come
45
naturally 'and Which Has Its own set of special rules and conventions ". After
considering the various definitions of IPA and its evolution diachronic different
classifications will be discussed or branches that have 4 effected through its travel.
Well known is the classification of Hutchinson and Waters (1987: p, 17, 1988: p, 177)
within the teaching context, which represents the Teaching English as a tree, to be
branching, whose center is the communication and learning. State that the English as
a Foreign Language (EFL) branches in General English (GE) and English for Specific
Purposes (ESP), and this Finally, in turn, divides into three branches that are English
for Sciences Social (ESS), the Business English (EBE) and English for Science and
Technology (EST). Having reached this stage, each branch is divided into English for
Academic Purposes (EAP) and English for Occupational Purposes (EOP), which in
turn is divided into more specialized and so on. It is interpreted that they want to
Figure establish the diversity of the specialties of the language, since it will
subdivided according to you wish to assign. This classification currently remains very
important, but the general pattern has been simplified greatly, so attributing no
specialties, but grouping them into fields generic.
Another diagram that you can see the various branches of the IPA is provided
by the Dudley-Evans and St. John (1998: p, 6), where the criterion has been the
specialization of the tongue, but distinguishing two groups from where the different
types of English:
46
English for Specific Purposes the term English for Specific Purposes (English for
Specific Purposes).
English for Occupational Purposes
English for Academic Purposes
English for professional
English for professional
Purpose
Vocational P.
English for
English for
English for
English
Academic
Academic
Academical
Management
English for
English for
Pre-
Vocational
Science
Medical
legal
Finance and
medical
Business
Vocational
English
and
Purpose.
purpose.
Economics
purpose.
P.
English
Technology
Purpose.
*P= Purpose.
Fig.2. IPA classification according to the professional area.
As shown in the figure, is followed by the traditional division of IPA, separating
into two distinct parts which serve to specializations that have nothing in common.
English for Science and Technology (ICT) is established as part of academic English,
not infer it a professional, something that is important to tress, as in many contexts,
it is quite difficult to separate the professional academic English as increasingly
intertwined appear more and more common characteristics. The figure indicates
clearly showed the divisions or areas of the IPA, but the boundaries between them
and other fields seem to be spaced as clear as we intend to present, as there is often
a common center in all these varieties the teaching of English and therefore are
interrelated, therefore, it is sometimes impossible to separate.
However, we cannot help wondering if in fact there must be as wide a division
between the different varieties of the language-specific and if you can group the
different variants in order to enrich their applications. As Dudley-Evans and St. John
(1998), we wondered: "[...] does to clarify classification Really Matters?".
47
With a more current Varó Alcaraz (2000) made a tour of the implications and
various currents that have influenced the IPA, setting this term to define the English
for specific purposes that is learned and used today on many occasions. Through its
analysis of the meaning and manifestations of IPA through the lexicon used in this
kind of language and linguistics suprasentential her pragmatics and discourse
cohesion, the typology and modalities of discourse, the text types involving the
analysis of gender professionals and academics, with variations sociopragmatic
courtesy, interaction and language limitation and finally the teaching of IPA, further
clarify the role of language production as a transmitter of expertise and therefore is
completely separate and independent study general English and even applied
linguistics. Salager-Meyer (2002)
1) likewise claimed the crucial role of the IPA, as it has characteristics themselves to
confer the need for an independent self-study, and its uniqueness requires it. This is
not to deny the dependence evident between the IPA and applied linguistics, as well
as analysis discourse and pragmatics, as it really is a specialization of a
comprehensive whole, but whose common purpose.
The following describes in more detail academic English, since owing to the
type of analysis is carried out, and the corpus used for the results is fully justified to
analyze its origins and characteristics subdivisions general possesses. From the
moment that Swales, in the late 80's and the early 90's of XX century, defended the
different parts specific to language production can be divided and thus arises the IPA
Intrinsically, academic English, little by little has progressed in its analysis.
Considering that is a part of the LA, but independent in its approach and
therefore, deserves a separate study, is one of the most controversial claims at
present. Academic English is considered as one of the ramifications important IPA,
led by their relevance and their use, subdividing it into two specialties (Blue, 1990,
Jordan, 1997), by topic or language that required. These divisions are for general
academic English and English school for specific purposes, although it is considered
more appropriate English word academic as unique and in it we can distinguish all
subfields exist when applied to different academic fields. Subsequently, Jordan
48
(1997) discusses various aspects of academic English, but basically pedagogical
approach, focusing on learning this language specialty, but some of the
considerations raised are interesting to understand the differences and errors in
language production , such as:
• the native writer must be aware that some aspects of the language is not acquire
naturally, but must learn any new concept, including various aspects of writing;
• consideration of cultural heritage as a predominant factor in the production and
comprehension of language, what Jordan (1997: p, 94) called culture academic and
on the other hand, interpretation and understanding of strategies reality surrounding
the non-native writer to communicate and be understood in a medium which is not
academic or culturally inherited; several interesting aspects to the research of
academic language are (Jordan, 1997: p, 279-80): "Aspects of academic writing-,genre
analysis
at
Different
Levels;-CALL;-disciplinary
cultures;-learner
Independence;-collaboration between Specialists EAP teachers and subject
departments ". The section of the academic writing is that arouse more interest in
having an impact on the professional environment and academically, but this topic is
discussed in more detail in the next section.
These three aspects show the relevance of academic English takes within the
field of IPA, and, of course, be influenced by the environment in which arises, why
has a considerable impact if done in situations where is a L1.
Dudley-Evans and St. John (1998: p, 35) are aware of cultural variation in
regarding the production of academic English made by different authors, but rather to
differentiate the type of language used, proposed different types of situations in which
there is academic English. Ie countries where the language is spoken, in countries
where English is the official language education, but that is another native language,
in situations where certain subjects are officially explained in English, while others in
the original language of the country and finally, which would place in Spain, where all
subjects education system are taught in the native language, although English is very
major in college.
49
Each of these situations create a production other than English academic,
since the linguistic and cultural pressure is of course different in each of these
environments, so it's not surprising that we find different varieties in the writing
(Coulthard, 1994). As they had done above Blue (1990) and Jordan (1997), also
Dudley-Evans and St. John (1998: p,41) distinguish between general academic
English and academic English specific, since production characteristics have different
language and we must treat differently, so we propose that the general academic
English alternates with the specific academic English. There is a fine line with respect
to the application is given to these two groups, since in certain productions, the
difference between them is very subtle.
Finally, Alcaraz Varó (2000: p, 61-71) briefly describes the English academic
and prefers further comment one of its sub-divisions, consider: "[...] the most studied
variety of IPA", ie the English of science and technology. Some of the characteristics
of this language from the point of morphosyntactic and lexical view, to accurately
determine the most common features of this variety as Jordan (1997) and DudleyEvans and St. John (1998) would be located within the specific academic English.
The specialization of language production is a fact already accomplished, and thus
the range of different types of studies is very wider, since the various types interact
with the different productions approaches have been applied to studies of language.
The result of this are studies whose interest is to help make the language more clear
and correct.
6. TECHNICAL WRITING IN ENGLISH / ACADEMIC
The moment it appears the writing is considered one of the most important in
the evolution of manmade caused by the need to perpetuate and even sometimes
differ, knowledge and traditions of existing ones. The written language was based on
spoken language, which initially was adequate for basic needs, but later decided to
adopt the expression speakers written to communicate with others residing in remote
areas, to record their progress to future generations, or to remind themselves of
decisions taken or suffered experiences (Kramsch, 1998: p, 56). So you'd think
50
writing emerged in different societies as a result of cultural changes that created new
needs for communication (Halliday, 1989), made probably true, because today is also
witnessed developments linguistic result of technological change. A key moment for
writing was the invention of printing, especially in regard to the dissemination of
knowledge, as it became all domain and can be expressed in a more plural, but also
fail to highlight the seductive power of mass and how it has influenced certain
aspects or critical occasions.
Traditionally it has been awarded the production dichotomy spoken / written,
and its characteristics and purposes are different, considering the spoken production
and informal, while most of the written production is considered formal. However,
differences in both uses are fading, since there is an increasing carelessness in
writing, even reaching popularized the expression (Varó Alcaraz, 2002: p, 14). The
various aspects of these two types of productions will be detailed below, since the
technical and academic English clearly distinguishes these two types of linguistic
expression.
6.1. LANGUAGE SPOKEN AND WRITTEN LANGUAGE
Although initially most language studies were devoted to writing, from the 80's
this trend changed (Brown and Yule, 1983: p, 4; Halliday, 1989, McCarthy 1991: p,
25 and van Lier, 1995: p, 88), performing studies focusing on oral expression or
comparing the two forms of expression, their characteristics and contexts. A virtue to
emphasize written language over spoken language is its ability to be static, so it
retains its own characteristics and leads to more reliable research, not to be so
predisposed to different interpretations and to be the larger corpus.
For this and other reasons, has reserved the written language to contexts
different from the spoken language, and in some respects, have been fully
differentiated from one another, although Nunan (1993: p, 9) notes that there are
circumstances in which the language spoken assumes characteristics of writing and
51
vice versa so that both forms of language are deeply connected. Nunan (1993: p,10)
specifies their differences this way: "Linguistically, written language Tends to Consist
of clauses That Are Internally complex, with spoken language Whereas the
complexity exists in the Ways in Which clauses are joined together," Also, the
complexity is also related to the different density lexical possess both, depending on
the frequency of occurrence of words called content words, it is ie, the nouns and
verbs, and function words, ie, prepositions, articles, pronouns, etc.. This idea that
spoken language is more basic than the written part initially Halliday (1989), as the
written language, unlike spoken uses what he calls grammatical metaphor, what is an
example of change verbs names.
Apart from the differences in spoken and written expression, also there is
variety within the written language as the situation in which we find ourselves (Nunan,
1993: p, 14), since the semantic, depending on which types of productions is written
above the other, so that the semantic indicates the type of lexical reader it is
addressed. This misunderstanding can lead to lexical density of the production, since
there is no interaction between writer and reader for not being this writer, but simply
acts only reader. Also, the writer should provide the reader to decipher the message
you are trying to convey, and as the reader must know which texts can be read and
the difficulties they have, and If not otherwise, the act of communication is thwarted.
This danger of textual interpretation of the sequence is avoided in the spoken
language, as contact between sender and receiver avoids any misunderstanding of
production.
Written language has an additional advantage to spoken language, because
understanding of the text is done more slowly and without noise, can happen in a
conversation on a street or in a discussion forum (McCarthy, 1991: p, 25). However,
the written language demands are always greater than spoken, and that as part of
the reflection of the writer, any inconsistency or lack of cohesion in the text is
considered a fatal error, while the language spoken can be corrected at that time or is
attributed to the obfuscation.
52
The purpose of this section is to show the differences between production
written and spoken, however, cannot be ignored that both productions share
characteristics indicating a common origin, for example, be totally linked to its context
by acting on its premises or training (McCarthy, 1991: p, 149), and in most cases
need a reference to its meaning.
They also use similar strategies to communicate in a specific way, although
the means of which each have to be different. When the language specializing in
different genres is where differences are appreciated more between the two types of
linguistic expressions.
6.2. WRITTEN LANGUAGE, GENDER AND Dichotomy L1 / L2
Its static and consequently, its significance in the transmission, has resulted in
the written production has been analyzed more frequently than the spoken, so it has
been possible to determine more accuracy a number of varieties within this type of
linguistic expression never cease to evolve and change constantly. That is why there
multiple groups or genera, such as the literary, commercial, scientific, advertising,
etc.., each time we stop to assess our surroundings, can find common features
between different or mixed linguistic manifestations. Dudley-Evans (1994: p, 219)
refers to the first use of the term gender, whose original intention was to study the
variety of specific language, with the purpose of communication that prevails in the
choice of grammatical and lexical level appropriate to each gender. This was
intended to make clear that the different kinds of language are the answer to a social
demand that has produced by the varied needs of each speaker, easy to claim check
if you look at the different specializations or professional English academia (Jenkins,
Jordan and Weiland, 1993; Ventola, 1996, Hyland and Hamp-Lyons, 2002: p, 7-8).
Likewise, also be found in common among the various manifestations of
gender in languages, especially similar structures or loanwords. A clear example is
the production-technical scientific writing characterized by sharing a vocabulary that
53
in many cases is international, and specialized vocabulary that is familiar to most of
the components of the world scientist. As discussed Quirk and Stein (1993: p, 95):
"Such a free market across Clearly linguistic frontiers is to the Benefit of us all, and
Its Existence is of the essence in human communication ", ie possess the common
lexicon
in
the
nonwoven
poorer
language
production,
but
enriches
the
communication between the different people.
The specific vocabulary or technolect is divided on the one hand, in
vocabulary technician, whose meaning is defined by the context where it is used
(Alcaraz Varó, 2000: p, 42-44), on the other, in semi-technical vocabulary, whose
words can acquire multiple meanings within the same field, and finally the general
vocabulary often used in a specialty, which is essential in the production specialized,
but can appear in other contexts.
Respect to the structures, the genera used differently on the one hand, due to
a strategic goal, and secondly, in an effort to emphasize certain aspects or parts that
are vital to the idea that you want to express. Match does exist in the use of the same
structures within the same genus, even when production is CARRIED OUT speakers
with different mother tongues. Similarly, we have to follow a same patterns in the
organization of the different parts of the production as being overall, as evidenced
recently regarding the structure of the article Pique research Angordans, Posteguillo
Gomez, Palmer Silveira and Garcia Coll (2002).
However, despite having a generic part and in some cases structural common
within the same type of production, are obvious different that each individual makes
use of the language, according to their cultural, ideology and purpose and whether
the language used is the native (L1), where no interference by always using the
same reference frame, or conversely, is expressed in a second language (L2).
Expression in a target language happens frequently in publications and international
meetings and the lingua franca used, usually English, as mentioned previously.
Hamp Lyons (1990: p, 69) explains that many times we worry about grammar or style
the writer of an L2, but without regard to factors that also involve difficulty, such as
choosing a good topic and present ideas clearly. Neither consider that each writer
54
comes from a different cultural and social reality, with a variety of language skills and
some deficiencies which are expressed as errors, which are different for each writer.
This concept should be added that can there is some variety in the production of the
same writer if we analyze written different in that mood, that security has different
issues or hypothetical reader type, powerfully influence. Changes in the use of
tongue caused by the culture of each writer and do not interfere with understanding,
must be accepted as correct (Canagarajah, 2002: p, 38), as transmitting our
knowledge and thoughts we can only glimpse of our heritage culture and way of
structuring the language. This idea has been formulated recently as Brossell, (1986:
p, 176) 5 and shared this opinion: "Elements of culture, gender, ethnicity, language,
psychology and experience all the way bear upon Different People respond to a
writing task "because of the language changes caused by various influences have
always been patent.
Not to think that only makes changes NNS in their written of L2, since it
commits fallos6 IN or variations in standard use language. Although the native
speaker knows the rules of grammar or the formal use, sometimes there are gaps
which speakers amended, as reflected in Smith and Wilson (1983: p, 12): "[...]
speakers have some resources to distinguish between grammatical sentences and
ungrammatical sentences, and are willing to correct their mistakes, but they do not
present any risk to the communication. " However, these authors make clear that in
making these corrections, the speaker native is not applying linguistic rules known
but could be applying a series of conventions or habits that you dislike to see
changed, without based on a linguistic reasoning. Thus, variations in the production
we can observe both written in the productions of the L1 and L2 in the, since AT
sometimes do not share the same culture or social heritage, as the case of Britain,
the U.S. or the former British colonies. Quoted by Ham-Lyons in Kroll [ed.] (1990: p,
69).
Many of the studies on the use of gender language are related to L2 learning,
although some are concerned about the differences in the productions of the L2 in
the EN and ENN (Cohen, 1998). One of the concepts drawn from studies of non55
native productions is to be written and generate an L2 text in mind and not using the
L1 as a reference, as this leads to typical transfer errors due to the influence of the
mother tongue that interferes with a correct production of the language in question.
Friedlander (1990: p, 123) on the contrary, is convinced that there are contexts in
which it is more beneficial for use as reference ENN their L1 when text is being
generated, since the translation of ideas is always less fluid than direct writing in the
language mother. This idea is somewhat conflicting even a good educational
experiment for beginning writers, as the hypothetical flow does not justify the amount
of mistakes people make when using language as a reference, the problems come to
be understood by native readers or slow that may represent having to translate all the
written production arising out of an author. It is a fact undeniable that speak in a
language not their own, pass on the heritage culture in all of us (Connor, 1996: p, 5;
Atkinson, 2000: p, 71), made evident in the writing in another language and all that is
impacting the use English as a lingua franca, as we noted before, but the reference
to L1 as a model in the writing of L2 can be a mistake no benefit to reading
comprehension. Call failures and errors to productions that do not conform to
grammatical rules made by native writers are not considering that ignorance, but
through carelessness or lack of written reflection on the production.
Also, the formality of a text is also a relevant characteristic in academic texts,
which is in line with the genre in which we frame our speech or type of reader to
whom it may concern, as they usually combine, for example, scientific-technical
language with formal expressions.
When using an L1 or L2 must be aware of formal restrictions at that time he is
instilling the message, as citing the opinion of Fairclough (1994: p, 65): Formality is
one pervasive and familiar aspect of constraints on access to Discourse.
Formality is a common property in Many Societies of practices and
Discourses of high social prestige and restricted access. [...] Formality is best
Regarded As a property of Which Social Situations have unique effects upon
language forms. As a property of Social Situations, it manifests in an accentuated
form the three types of constraint upon Which I have associated practice With The
56
Exercise of Power: constraints on contents, subjects, and relations. The formal
language involves choosing a particular vocabulary or some approach by the author,
but express our speech focusing on the importance of the ways language and what it
represents within society. By which in some contexts can be decisive or exclusive.
The formality is a technique to be learned, it is not innate to any speaker, but is
required in some texts as being essential to a type of vocabulary and structures
specialized. The EN, in a sense, have more experience in its use, since have been
able to express or see expressed more frequently in their L1 that ENN, which must
learn its various forms and varieties. As a large and important field of study, has led
to a proliferation of studies on writing second language, embodied in magazines such
as Assessing Writing, Journal of English for Academic Purposes Journal of Second
Language or Writing8. Even created a forum International Second Language Writing
Research Network Forum or colloquium several linguists to discuss his future
(Santos, Atkinson, Erickson, Matsuda and Silva,2000). The different forms of
language are produced by a struggle for power that attempts get through the
linguistic domain and the art of persuasion.
Internet address: http://icdweb.cc.purdue.edu/silvat/jslw/toc.html.
To close this section, the dichotomy of using the L1 / L2 can be condensed in
the following points, which confer so essential in specificity (McCarthy, 2001: p, 27):
1) Humans acquire the L1 without a formal perspective;
2) humans can, with greater or lesser success, to produce other languages;
3) all languages have forms (syntax, vocabulary and phonology) and meaning in their
productions;
4) All languages are made of some form and the forms that do not have the writing
system, the copy of others;
5) no language is more primitive than another, since they work properly by social
context;
57
6) All languages have their social functions, many of which are universal;
7) All languages are a reflection of reality psychological, social and cultural life of
their speaking, as as it changes, so does the tongue. Therefore, such characteristics
bind the production process of the L1 and L2 and we reaffirm the influence of culture
and society in the acquisition and subsequent production of L2, because it really is
about the mechanisms underlying intrinsic structure of the language.
6.4. TECHNICAL LANGUAGE / ACADEMIC
Academic language and one of its sub-genre specific, language science and
technology, by its intrinsic characteristics has implied a number of features that give it
an identity quite different from other genres. It attributed to a number of features
inherent in scientific thought and expression impede the production and
understanding for those unfamiliar with this field. In This section will describe the
features of academic language and gender overarching sub-genre of sciencetécnico10. It was considered that English Academic shares many of the features of
the scientific-technical English used in international publications, so first consider the
characteristics common to both and then specify the features of Technical and
Scientific sub-genre. Can be distinguished (Jordan, 1997: p, 46-47, Dudley-Evans
and St. John, 1998: p,115) two types of approaches that involve a philosophy to be
followed in academic written and thus have a more objective view of the information
we are processing:
�Product approach, ie the final product concerned, the text. In of this approach we
can place the guided writing, which emphasizes the structures of language and
sentence patterns and current traditional rhetoric or approach functional, which is
concerned principally with the logical organization of speech within each paragraph.
� The process approach, which is a reaction to the aforementioned and deals with
the process of writing, which allows to obtain the product. These approaches are
useful to get some perspective on the written production and the steps in the
evaluation and organization within the text. In his comments academic writing on the
58
production, Jordan (1997: p, 240) mentions the importance of 10 shows the
classification to which we alluded in Figure 3 of this chapter (p. 88). markers of
vagueness (hedging) in scientific language, which also been discussed by other
authors (Selinker, 1979; Salager-Meyer, 1994) and the importance of being able to
express exactly the information a person wants communicate using accurate
vocabulary. A requirement to consider the specific writing is that it should be
knowledge of the genre you are writing to decide what kind of vocabulary and
structures that we will use to transmit a appropriate our thoughts to our target,
"Knowledge of genre Involves an Understanding of the expectations of the
community Discourse That reads the text and of the conventions That Have
Developed over time about the structure, the language and the Rhetoric of the genre
"(Dudley-Evans and St. John, 1998: p,115). These authors note focus the importance
of good writing skills to convince our readers our arguments: "Successful writers are
Those Who are Able to persuade readers of the validity of Their arguments by using
or Adapting the conventions of the genre They are using while showing an
awareness of the Needs of the readership. " Undoubtedly, the specific gender plays a
crucial role in production of writing, as it defines its terms, as well Varó Alcaraz (2000:
p, 138-9) notes, attributing to the scientific-technical language, in its expression as
research paper, the characteristics of:
a) "high density semi or conceptual composite lexical units;
b) the determination by the precision of expression, embodied in noun phrases
extended;
c) the emphasis on objectivity, shown in the relief given to processes or outcomes
research, with the consequent disappearance or concealment of the author [...] ".
These features can add that we provide more detailed Eggins and Martin
(2000: p, 336) Use of standard syntax
� no abbreviations;
� no reference to the author of the text;
59
� thematic prominence, that is first placed the subject;
Embedding
� often used, ie different subordinate clauses together;
� structures lexically dense noun phrases, with a heavy
Post modification;
� noun vocabulary, with words of action expressed by nouns;
� use of high vocabulary;
� limited use of adverbs;
� use of terms that have specialized technical meanings in the field academic.
Features are best appreciated text attributed to academic or scientifictechnical when contrasted with the parameters of an informal text:
• Frequent references to the author
• simple nominal phrases
• Use of idioms
• Nominalizations few
• Frequent use of action verbs
• Frequent use of adverbs
• Vocabulary daily
Consequently, if we compare the two lists of attributes, we can appreciate the
different purposes that are intended to use one of the two, since the language
60
scientific-technical is more specific and has high lexical density, while informal
language is more dynamic, general and less dense sentences.
Another important feature of scientific-technical written English is that the
author not explain the precise terms or specialized and are assumed as known, we
could even establish that they are a sort of secret code between reader and writer, as
the profile of the audience it is addressing such article is restricted. As a result, when
a foreign reader to this read an article gender science and technology, just without
understanding their meaning depth, as no previous knowledge or know the terms
associated with this specialization, but this is a common phenomenon when we faced
with texts that are not aimed at a general audience but to a specific one. The
following will discuss the concept of error analysis and within the written production
and their different meanings, considering that this term inevitably is linked to the
production of L2 by ENN. Will be explained with more detail the reasons for error
analysis is adopted as add to contrastive, as although budgets are based on similar,
their purpose is different. Through analysis can be categorized contrastive errors that
although the ENN corrected with a desire to improve their written, give way, through
the interlanguage creation of variations influenced by culture and society surrounding
the science writer.
7. ANALYSIS OF ERRORS IN THE WRITTEN LANGUAGE
It will start this section discussing the origins of error analysis (AE from now),
his philosophy and why he was born. The end sought is to analyze the steps taken in
this current to apply their consistent basis in the present study, to serve as a means
to classify the errors have been detected through contrastive analysis and as further
justification of the assumption by the creation of a interlanguage influenced by factors
such as L1, culture and society. It will continue with the relevant categorization of
errors that have been advanced through its evolution and end up with possible
causes and strategies that arise for avoid them.
61
7.1. SOURCES OF ERROR ANALYSIS (AE)
In this section we follow a diachronic order of the evolution of AE (Santos,
1993: p, 75) so it will locate its beginnings in the seventies, when the AC between
two languages was already considered as inadequate to really know the intricacies of
the language and to clarify the difficulties that included production. The AC does not
considered within its scope the frequency and types of errors that appear in the
interlanguage of speakers, so it became clear the need to remedy that deficiency in
the study of the production of L2 (Well, Carini and Linde, 1992: p,18).
Described and discussed in the third section of this chapter the evolution
suffered by the contrastive analysis and thus, the rise of other trends that were meant
to learning a second language in order to fill gaps in other types of analysis within the
LA, between which lie the error analysis. AE serve as a bridge between the AC and
the study of interlanguage, the latter with great importance in the evolution of
comparative studies between two languages, why which will devote special attention
in the next section (Ellis, 1994: p, 47).
Error analysis emerged inspired by Chomsky's generative syntax in 1965
questioned the psychological behaviorism was the basis of contrastive analysis and
headed the study to a new treatment of errors from a more tolerant (Richards, 1971,
1974). However, had already been studied before the mistakes made by speakers of
L2, as shown by publications Corder in 1967, but was in the early seventies when it
was found the need Corder (1967, 1971) pointed out, through errors in L2 could
determine the rules of the language in question, essential to improve the production
of any language, and that by detecting its most difficult or expensive, it helps better
determine their nature. This identification of errors in the language is useful to
understand the intrinsic mechanisms of the language system, but have to follow
specific steps to serve for a specific purpose through its cataloging.
Initially Corder (1974, 1981) and later James (1998), set different steps in
identifying errors in order to correct them:
62
1. Collect examples of productions
2. Identify errors
3. Describe the error
4. Explain errors
5. Evaluate the errors
These steps actually summarize the guidelines to be followed in any study of
research based on samples or examples, so that once applied to the AE, would
demonstrate their effectiveness to achieve a comprehensive analysis of the errors.
James (1998: p,129) specifies, not only identifying, but proposes specific
criteria for classification, mode, medium and level. The mode refers to whether the
attitude of the production in the L2 is productive or receptive; the middle indicates the
type of production to value, if written or spoken and finally the level specifies the type
of error, if substance (relative to the coding production), text or speech. Actually, for
error identification and subsequent classification criterion is considered essential
level error, while the other two criteria established by James are not critical to
determine their type, but provide information about the type of text.
The causes of the errors made in the specific level of the text are the lexical
and grammatical errors. Carter (1998: p, 73) notes that the lexicon is another of the
reasons why you can make mistakes; you have to check for any interference in its
production:
[...] Errors may result from a mismatch in morphophonemic correspondence,
from inserting the word in the wrong slot or grammatical failing to locate
dependencies, from inaccurate first-language transfer and from intralingual
confusion, that is, as a result of failing to Distinguish Between and among lexical
Appropriately items in the target language. Lexical errors can be classified in turn,
63
taking into account aspects formal vocabulary or semantic aspects of meaning. The
causes more frequent formal errors are:
1. The wrong choice of a word;
2. The formation of words that do not exist in the L2 but in the L1;
3. Distortions in production, making up words without reference to the L1.
Regarding semantic errors that can be seen, there are two types mainly,
confusion of the meaning of the word, using it in contexts where you should use a
similar, or a misplacement of the word next to another that does not belong.
Regarding grammatical errors, there are several causes that can ENN route to
making mistakes that although in principle, would have no reason to be known as the
rules appear in the language for various reasons and will be context or circumstance,
as well as the profile of the author of the text. The grammatical errors are divided
(James, 1998: p, 154) in morphological errors, determined by matching words, failure
or excess, and errors syntax, which can be divided according to the structure of a
term, the subordinate clause and the sentence.
Syntactic or structural errors are also altered in their production end by the
lack of cohesion, which influences the decline in production adequate. The internal
cohesion of a sentence or a text has an essential role for the production and
understanding of the significance, so also is a part consider regarding the
identification and categorization of the errors. According to Halliday and Hasan
(1976), the organization of a text depends on the relationships between parts of text,
which can be semantic or grammatical and which can be referred to as links
cohesion (cohesive ties) or cohesion strategies (cohesive devices) as Kramsch
(1998: p, 19). These links serve to unite and give coherence to a text can be divided
into five types: conjunction, reference, substitution, ellipsis and lexical cohesion. To
avoid possible errors that can make both the sentence level as in the text, you should
review these types of cohesion to verify compliance with the criteria to avoid any
64
errors that may be committed. With regard to errors made in speech, are
distinguished by a hand committed by a lack of coherence in discourse, which may
be due to the subject, relationship with other parties or the specification of
sequences, and secondly, the tasks pragmatic nature of errors, ie those caused by
differences in the expression inferred by the taboos, the different time values and
power and social distance. Also within the speech receptive include errors, ie, those
caused by an incorrect understanding by the receiver.
Although the classification of the various errors discussed, based on James
(1998: p, 129), is sufficiently broad and includes most of the errors committed in the
process of L2, it would be pretentious to say that she will be ranked errors, as the
diversity and nuance of the errors are very large, a statement that it has been found
in this study. However, this classification, which in turn includes those made by other
scholars, is consistent and valid for detecting the vast majority of errors in what is to
be used as the basis of the analysis classified the results of this study, although they
added those types of errors specific corpus own handle.
7.3. CAUSES AND CORRECTION OF ERRORS: CURRENT STATUS
THE QUESTION
This analysis focuses on the concept of error from the viewpoint of the NNS,
but why can not ignore the terms you inflict variety and define the causes error
analysis. One reason that influences the detection of errors is to have a preconceived
idea of the perfection of the native speaker, which that determines the rules of a
standard language (James, 1998: p, 46). Thus, for a side we have the term native
speaker, ie the person who is able to a discourse of perfect form. On the other, are
semi-native speakers, articulating a language with a perfection almost equal to that
articulated as L1 (Davies, 1995: p, 147). Even at times has been reached ends, in
certain sometimes, if the domain of L2 is almost perfect, it is best to establish that it
ENN is because it can produce any expression which is itself correct, but may
65
understood differently or cause a native grievances, and can be avoided if you know
outset that his partner is not, and therefore accepts the differences cultural.
The error term is necessarily linked to its opposite, the term perfection
(Proficiency) in a foreign language, since the defect produces one another, and
according the degree of error or improvement, can produce different interpretations,
and can be interpreted as a good knowledge of a language, the ability covering
certain aspects of a particular language or as the results can be obtained through an
examination system to indicate the degree of perfection in a particular language. For
the idealized native speaker's competence and its influence, the concept of linguistic
perfection, there is the concept of error in a tongue, as most of what they want ENN
is to produce L2 as a AT and peak level of perfection, although not making mistakes
is a very difficult task. Long (1990) and Selinker (1992) argue that speakers do not
natives never can have the same output as a native, while other authors, among
which we quote Birdsong (1992: p, 742), we prove that also non-native speakers can
acquire knowledge as if they were native but really, the idea that it would have to
postulate is that the EN and ENN used the same rules, regardless of having to be
produced by native or non-native, develop a set of international rules to follow that
the share all (James, 1998: p, 43).
The discussions that would arise from the desire to have common language
could be endless, but will not go deeper into this aspect, and that alone would require
a full study. Other causes that can cause errors in a language, are listed by
Mukkattash (1980: p, 333):
1. Some linguistic structures are more difficult than others for certain speakers;
2. There are two types of difficulties in a second language, first, those that are typical
of speakers of some language and second, those that are shared by people who are
in an L2, regardless of their mother tongue;
3. Although there is no correspondence between the difficulty and the same error, the
errors are symptomatic of a systematic learning of inappropriate language;
66
4. As it is very difficult to know the mental processes of the speakers, linguists should
base their assumptions of error in observing the behavior of speaking.
There is a clear correlation between the difficulty you have in the production
and in that it has on the recognition structures, so often make mistakes because of
these shortcomings (Al-JARF, 2000; Levinson, Lessard and Walter, 2000). The
causes of this difficulty inherent in the person can have them produced by the biased
language or come by the structural basis of the L1, which hinders the creation of
interlanguage as a basis in production. Frequently also cause error in the production
of an L2 is to use the translation method for teaching a language. In the early stages
of language learning is very useful for the development of short phrases or
stereotypes, but as learning is complete and the ability of L2 produce a greater and
freer, the student is considering translation as a burden which is difficult to detach,
since it has been assimilated, and therefore becomes a habit, that the fastest way to
be understood is through translation. However, the speech is fluent; always tend to
repeat same buildings and the style lacks naturalness that wants to give the speaker.
It reflects the native language in the L2 and before it reaches the failure of not
being able to articulate a discourse that seems natural and fluid, but full of structures
that are unusual in L2 but in the L1.
Webber (1993) states that the most common causes of error in the NNS is
found in the lexicon, articles, prepositions and verb tenses. Can be observed a high
incidence of errors in the lexicon due to interference with the L1, although this
interference is not so clear when we focus on other areas, while mistakes in the order
of the sentence were caused by the lack of cohesion text or failed to meet the
rhetorical devices of scientific and technical text.
In summary, the errors have different causes can be divided into two
categories: interlingual errors, ie those that are committed by an interference mother
tongue of the learned, and intralinguals errors that are made regardless of the mother
tongue and are committed by a deficiency in the learning (Larsen-Freeman and Long,
67
1991: p, 58, James, 1998: p,179). Errors intralinguals can also be caused by a
learning strategies incorrect, because guidelines are available that do not benefit
learning but what harm, acquiring certain customs that are not at all beneficial to the
individual producer of the language and which may even discourage. Also be
produced as a generalization of the rules, ignoring the limits of the rules or simplifying
them, hurting their strategy learning and errors which are based on the
communication or are induced for an explanation from a teacher or materials that
cause confusion for the student. In errors are generally not a single cause, but rather
there are several reasons that lead to incorrect production of the L2, making mistakes
compounds, ie, they possess more than one cause or ambiguous, which can not be
classify the cause that actually causes (James, 1998: p, 200).
We will end this discussion of the various positions AE commenting to adopt
respect to error correction, as our aim is not only expose the problem existing in the
production of errors, but also to propose a series of measures to prevent their
production. Upon detecting an error, there is always the tendency unconscious to
correct, making it immediately after noticing it, or While all errors observed in the
case of a written text, analyzing the end all the points at which errors have been
committed. The two techniques can be criticism, since it depends on the tolerance of
the editors, as well as the shape and tone correction (Chaudron, 1983: p, 434-435).
The error correction generally has a didactic purpose (Gimeno and Koller,
1991: p, 303) as it helps improve production written through the information and
delimitation of the errors that have occurred. The correction can be directly by
teachers placed in context, or indirectly, by sticking to the investigation a group of
errors, so that it defines its importance, but the effect is not Theoretical Foundations
immediately, but needs a maturation process of the researcher and reader who is it
for the study.
Errors may also be prevented before they appear, preventing them (James,
1998: p, 241). By studying errors in the same genus and with the same
circumstances of production, provide a range of errors typical help a group avoid
them. This method would be especially effective in a group that already has a certain
68
level of L2 and that is enough to communicate, so it has no direct contact with a
learning environment. These corrections could help determine the types of errors are
more likely to commit, so that would focus as guidelines to help them reflect on the
L2 written production and thus to avoid common mistakes.
The correction, therefore the approach that arises in a study determined, can
be oriented in different ways. Aspects can be corrected formal or structural seen as a
source of error, or you can focus correction in the meaning or end of text cohesion.
You can also make both corrections, but a correction may occasionally overly
ambitious mix aspects that would not be clear to the receiver end of the study. The
focus on structural correction and classification errors more accurately, providing
data to catalog the most common mistakes and therefore advise to avoid them.
Formal or semantic correctness is actually more extensive and dispersed, as they
could delve into aspects that vary according to the L1, culture and even the writer
could play as features of an international language or lingua franca, so it would not
be clear whether this is a mistake.
In the analysis at hand, is not to correct or comment on the type of standard
errors of the classroom that relate to most linguists focused on that field of study, but
focuses on a kind of difficult to correct mistakes. These errors occur, not in a
classroom, but in the specific written production of L2 with a level of intermediateadvanced English. We use the term variation language, but connected to the
formation of the characteristic of each speaker interlanguage as are variations that
can be seen between the writing produced by an EN and a NNS, but not included in
the error category.
After several years of research within the field of error, in which considered
foolproof way to determine the linguistic interference and to solutions to variations in
the tongue, the investigation of left error analysis practiced. He identified the
speakers that were bad, but they did not solutions for the root of the error was very
difficult to explain, since the error detected, but the cause could be varied. In many
cases, did not mention the L1 influence, simply because researchers did not know
the characteristics of this language. Many general and provide data analysis based
69
on impressions, without quantification of the frequency (Well, Carini and Linde, 1998:
p, 35-6).
Also, the error analysis only covers some areas of language proficiency then
being very limited (Schachter, 1974) and does not follow a strict methodology (Long
and Sato, 1984). Details the weak points detected in the analysis of errors Harley
(1980: p, 4): The study of errors L2 learners That can make vital clues Certainly
Provide as to their competence in the TL, But They Are only part of the picture [...] It
is Important to EQUALLY Whether the learner's determined use of 'correct' forms of
the native That approximates Speaker. Does the learner's speech contrasts Evidence
the Same Between the Observed unit and other units related That Are in the target
system? That there are Some units have frequently use less than the native speaker,
Some That I does not use at all? Burt, Dulay and Krashen (1982: p, 138) but listed
the advantages of this type analysis, also admitted the shortcomings of AE, such as
on the one hand, the lack of detail in the description of the categories of errors and
the other, the simplicity in its categorization, as it confuses the inter-and intralinguistic
errors. Ellis (1994: p, 68) specifies that the AE has three disadvantages, but it always
from the point of view apprentice: first, that does not give a complete view of the
language of the learner; second, that the studies are synchronous and therefore, their
results are static and third, not just to define the process by which learners avoid
some aspects of the tongue.
However, all these criticisms to be conferred the EA did not make the interest
in this type of approach should wane, but merely supplemented the study of error
analysis to other aspects of lacking, as other identification of errors (Lennon, 1991:
189) and now appears to be taking place again, as evidenced by publications
Webber (1993), Connor (1996), James (1998) or Yates and Kenkel (2002). The AE
should be considered as approach that has helped see the error as an undesirable
phenomenon in the language, but as a source of information to help improve learning
and production of L2.
70
8. THE CONCEPT OF interlanguage (IL)
This movement arose initially to discern the mechanisms that leading to the
variation in the production of the NNS L2, being an evolution in the search for
improving learning and production of the tongue and therefore stepping beyond the
contrastive analysis and error. Then its origins are discussed, as well as the various
definitions made in its evolution to reach the end of this section to the state of the art
of investigation.
8.1. ORIGINS AND DEFINITION OF THE TERM INTERLANGUAGE (IL)
This term was coined in 1969 by Selinker and subsequently reworked 1972,
after acquiring diffusion as the denominator of the language system that speaker
individually created based on the language you want to learn. But according the
same Selinker (1992: p, 6), this term came from and Fries in 1945, although indeed,
not understood as such until the date mentioned above. Shortly thereafter, we are
aware of this same idea in Lado (1957: p, 2) defines when the in that Corder in 1967,
but already begin in Fries (1945) when comparing urges L1 L2. His colleague Side
(1957) subsequently follows the same course, giving much emphasis on the
contrastive analysis between recognition and production of L2, and to the different
production of the same language.
Adjemian (1976: p, 299) claims that there is a common structure in all
languages, as interlanguage behave as natural languages and therefore should have
the same rules, so that the task to know all the structures should be to get to know
the universal language (Ellis, 1994: p, 417), hence the importance to elucidate the
basis of the language we all share and that would help to fix the errors or variations
we produce in different languages.
Other researchers who describes Selinker (1992: p, 26) is Weinreich, which
defines it as "[...] the scholar Whose Have Proven Most Important insights to the
71
continuing discovery of interlanguage ". Weinrich (1974) we are interested in this
review of previous literature the concept of interlanguage, for the comprehensive
analysis that makes Bilingualism and introduces concepts such as the identification
interlingual, in which a speaker identifies two sounds or letters in two languages other
as equals, so that sounds the same or even copy the same order grammatical than
their original language. Ie, the ability possessed by the speaking in their L1 is
transmitting when learning the L2 and other language-based learning to copy or
establish a cross-linguistic equivalence between the two languages, creating their
own language model, and therefore independently an understanding of language and
transmit it.
All linguistic studies have suffered a division or specialization of its field of
study, and this process could not be indifferent interlanguage as an aspect is the
Interlanguage Pragmatics (IT) (Kasper and Blum-Kulka, 1993: p, 3). This
specialization focuses on the study of the use and acquisition of linguistic models of
L2 that have made non-native speakers, ie speakers of two languages can get to
create a style that reflects intercultural own but at the time is different from the ideal
or standard production of the target language. Within this can link current studies that
integrate the influences of various cultures in the language (Connor, 1996) and have
become aware of the formal differences and structural used by different speakers.
These formal differences or variations not be seen as negative influences on the
tongue, but can the term transitional is used by the same Ellis (1997: p, 33) rather
than 'dynamic' used in 1985.See how a different style, which can denote a
fossilization in L2 speaker or simply as a mark of cultural identity. In the context in
which lies our cultural reality, changes in the language should be accepted and
cultural, since the views are plural while, ironically, some of them are universal.
We mentioned at the beginning of the paragraph above the tendency to split or
specialization of linguistic theories or approaches, while IT has also rise to three
different currents (Kasper and Blum-Kulka, 1993: p, 12), of which highlight the
contrastive pragmatic identifying similarities and differences between groups
contrasting languages, but especially the current (ILP) that is dedicated to compare
72
the production and comprehension of language in order to determine which aspects
of the L2 and differs in that parameters is influenced by the L1. Considered these two
approaches, it is considered that a good combination to detect variations in the L2
and interlanguage that is created from that phenomenon, is to contrast the two
languages and with that welcome us to the principles of contrastive linguistics, but
improve the identification of variations when comparing two productions of the same
language that start from different speakers based on the interlanguage concept.
Ellis (1997: p, 140) recently defined the term as "A term coined by Selinker to
Refer to the Knowledge of an L2 Systematic That is independent of Both the target
language and the learner's L1 ", paying special attention to their interlanguage
publications, as he sees it as the basis for understanding the responses to changes
in learning and the deep structure that each person formed when learning a L2.
Assume three features inherent to the concept of interlanguage (Ellis, 1985: p, 47),
on the one hand, interlanguage is created starting from the L1 is different created in
the L2 on the other, forming a series always developing and finally the interlanguage
that is created in people with the same profile rarely coincide, although produce the
same situation.
Today, however, the term most used is the interlanguage to refer to the
phenomenon of production of a particular system of each person to produce an L2,
being a mechanism that goes through various stages within the learning and each
has certain characteristics. Leaving from this concept, we understand the reason for
focusing this type of study learning process, since the success or not depends on the
individual and develop learning skills. Data which are available productions of the L2
and these generally differ from those produced by the AT well as those produced by
the same ENN each other, so that can be given as the existence of a valid
interlanguage, ie, that each speaker is created with models L2 based on the concepts
and practices that receives and performs. If in contrast the differences between the
production of an L2, of the native language of that production and production made
by a native speaker could understand the psycholinguistic processes that are the
73
bases of L2 learning. Then we analyze these processes, and the various readings
that give different authors.
8.2. Processes and paradigms in the interlanguage
The learning process according to the principles of interlanguage and quoting
Santos (1993: p, 128) would be:
LANGUAGE ... IL1 IL2 ... ... IL3 ... IL4 ... ILN ... TARGET LANGUAGE
Therefore, learning a target language goes through several stages in which
increasing the complexity of the structures that are learned from the L2 is larger, to
reach their full knowledge and building their own structures by the speaker some of
them have not been learned, but configured from the already existing. Selinker
(1972) think about that a few (not many) Adults come to achieving mastery of the
language with a native speaker achieving universal grammar transform the structure
of the grammar of the target language and adapting well as their own patterns of L2.
James (1980: p,5) refers to the interlanguage is the basis on which they operate the
three branches that depend on it, the theory of translation, error analysis and
contrastive analysis, ie the concept of interlanguage it would cover everything
concerning the creation of a parallel system of language and can be studied starting
from one of these three branches. The NNS is gradually approaching the production
of the target language, with features that are common or different from the language
that is thinking of buying. This concept can be clarified by the following figure:
INTERLINGUA
NL
FL
SL
1-2-3-4
TL
Figure 4. The field study of interlanguage (James, 1980: p,5)
74
In this figure one can see how the native language (NL) or initial (SL) goes
through steps or through the construction of the tongue interlanguage foreign (FL) or
target (TL), whereby the paper interlanguage is decisive.
Ellis (1997: p,35) identifies the acquisition of interlanguage with the mind
works as a computer, as we see in the following figure:
Input
intake ------L2 knowledge--------
output
Figure 5. Computational model of the acquisition of interlanguage (Ellis, 1997: p, 35).
The person who is acquiring an L2 is exposed to a number of information
(input) is processed in two steps, first some parts are stored for a period of time
(intake) and second, a part of this knowledge is stored in memory permanently,
becoming part of knowledge of the L2 (L2 knowledge). Finally, this knowledge is that
used to express in the L2 (output). Of course, this scheme is simply a basic approach
of the elements forming part of storage and process of L2, since these elements are
factors you can add social, gender, cultural, etc.. as we have explained in previous
sections, influence final production of the language.
The hypothesis is to describe the interlanguage grammar is learned in a L2,
based on the psycholinguistic process of students, but sometimes these processes
are not what might be expected, due to deviations in the process of interlanguage
quoted above, so that is not as systematic interlanguage and Ellis (1997: p, 33)
claims. We must not forget that the basis of the IL is psycholinguistics as it seeks to
define the internal mechanisms that are responsible interlanguage development, so
great attention has been paid to aspects interlanguage social and all that entails.
Highlights in this aspect of interlanguage to Tarone (1983, 1988) which interprets it
as an endless succession of styles, or to Schumann (1978) with his theory of social
distancing or more Peirce recently (1995) which determines the interlanguage social
identity held by the person who created it.
75
Also, besides the social factor, there is also the factor of the aspects of speech
that must be taken into account as they also influence the formation of the
interlanguage even more profound than the social aspects. Focusing on this aspect,
we consider the one hand, the factors that influence the way acquired in the rules of
discourse and grammar, and secondly, the how the rate affects speech errors being
made and in the stages through which it passes.
Ellis (1997: p, 51) also considered important psycholinguistic factor of
interlanguage, since it determines the transfer of L1 on L2, a key concept for
interlanguage and communication strategies are often the responsible for the
mistakes made in the expression.
Finally, another factor to consider in the development of interlanguage is the
nature of language itself, ie, the linguistic aspect of the IL. In this area we frame the
concept of universal grammar, which we have spoken before and which later will
expand and the concept of linguistic structures marked or unmarked which influences
language production apart from factors that determine the IL, a phenomenon that
Selinker (1972: p, 215) raises the fossilization, limiting the realization of the whole
system of the IL, as heIt explains:
Linguistic phenomena are linguistic to fossil items, rules and subsystems
Which speakers of a
particularly NL (native language) will Tend to keep in Their IL
(interlanguage), relative to a particularly TL (target language), no matter what the age
of the learner or amount of explanation and receives instruction in the TL.
Although the L2 speaker has learned all the features of a target language that
wants to dominate, in some contexts there are structures of their native language
reflected in the language you are learning and if you try, you can not avoid.
Ellis (1985: p, 48) describes it as "They stop learning when to their
interlanguage contains some rules at least Different from Those of the target
language system "or (Ellis, 1997: 139) "The process responsible for the cessation of
learning Some way short of target language competence ". According to Selinker
(1972) few students are equal to the level of competence of a native speaker, as they
76
suffer one or another type of fossilization, being unable to process or acquire the
universal grammar that there is latent in every speaker, so that to provide adequate
language production in L2, should use other learning strategies.
We must also consider the interlanguage that may come a time that after
learning a language for a certain time, in which the speaker not improve and in his
mastery of the L2, having reached the desired level, their eagerness to refine the
language disappears and thus never reach the target language, but remain in an
intermediate step of learning.
The interlanguage is to construct a linguistic model of speaker-listener ideal
and the data available are those produced by the insights the student, but this goal
can be truncated by the variety of learning each student and the difficulty of
establishing what is known as universal language (Ellis, 1985: p, 201, 994: p,417).
This concept of universal linguistic based on Chomsky's distinction between what we
call an external focus (Descriptive grammar varieties) and an internal focus (based
on the intuition of the natives of what is grammatical or not). This second approach
attempts to elucidate Native language proficiency, and thus the common ground that
exists for the structure of all languages, so it is argued that just as there is a structure
common, there may be a common language or grammar or universal for different
languages. Therefore, the theory of linguistic universals has a great important in
learning and production of a tongue, as well as correction errors, since (Ellis, 1985: p,
210) "[...] That Are Such That universal features or show a tendency to be strong will
be universal and easy to learn so early will be Learnt. " Have a number of studies on
the subject (Greenberg, 1966; Hawkins, 1983; Croft, 1990) intended to compare
different languages in order to determine the features that have in common and could
be the characteristics of language universals and grammar. However, despite this
being a very interesting study language, not given any further in this study, because
our commitment is demonstrate the varieties or erroneous productions of the same
language but from producers or different subjects.
We can not ignore in this section, but did not consider high interest in this
study, the theoretical paradigms that were created to strengthen the analysis
77
interlanguage and incorporate it as a field of study. Let's name them together
linguists with more representative of these paradigms, although we will enter in his
explanation for not being our direct field of study. The paradigm 1 is the competitive
homogeneous represented by Adjemian (1976), where argues that interlanguage
should reflect the principles common to all mental language systems, the paradigm 2
is the continuous capacity, represented by Tarone (1988), which postulates that we
start from a vernacular style, careless and ungrammatical and arrived at the end of
learning style care, the paradigm 3 is the dual knowledge advocated by Krashen
(1981), which states that there are two subsystems knowledge on the one hand, an
implicit in which we are aware mode of carrying out utterances and other
metalinguistic knowledge of language is being learned.
Regarding the current status of the study of interlanguage study, Eubank,
Selinker and Sharwood Smith (1995: p, 8-9) made several reflections that are,
without a certainly indicative of the state of affairs, among which include, first, that no
it has a general theory of how Universal Grammar and language match to form the
interlanguage grammars, second, that definitely is not acquires the same as the L1
and L2, so that a task of interest is the find out how they are alike or different; third
fossilization of interlanguage grammars is a process that acts in a variable and finally,
some L2 are harder than others, and in the same way, some structures the same L2
are more complex than others. This can be seen that studies on interlanguage still
have several gaps and areas on which to study, being some very complex, affecting
the deep structure of language. Are many scholars interested in this and every
decade meet to share their research and observe the state of affairs, so one hand is
positive it is an area still under investigation, but otherwise, it is also certainly does
not possess the theoretical foundations entrenched, resulting in more uncertainties in
investigating any area related to interlanguage.
And finally, to enumerate the criticisms that have made the analysis
interlanguage on the one hand, its theoretical foundations are not very stable and the
other there is a paucity of empirical studies in this field. If the analysis of the
interlanguage be incorporated more systematically with respect to methodological
78
procedure, and undertake a greater number of empirical studies could overcome
these two deficiencies are detected. However, we believe that a successful
combination of the three types of analyzes presented in this chapter of the theoretical
foundations of our study may, on the one hand, help in the contrast between two
types of productions through the AC, to detect, describe and provide the guidelines to
avoid the mistakes made in writing through scientific and technical the AE and then,
lastly, from the concept of IL and language universals, outline the processes or
linguistic model that builds on your ENN learning L2.
III. OBJECTIVES
1. PRESENTATION
When processing or produce any text enclosed in a general context, generic,
or more specifically, technically, we are faced with two tasks to take account (Tomlin
et al., 2000: p, 110). The first is to integrate the information to be pass into a coherent
whole, ie have to synthesize the concepts to communicate to organize in a way
understandable to the receiver. This effort, although seems simple, it involves a great
capacity of synthesis and knowledge about the type of receptor to which directs
production. The second challenge or task to be addressed is managing the flow of
information between the writer and the receiver, which has to focus as a dynamic
interaction. Thus, the writer helps the reader to process the information that it
provides, by using knowledge that both share, and which in turn serves as a prelude
to the assumptions or presentation of ideas being raised below. The consistency of
the knowledge gained by the reader will be affected by the degree of cohesion of the
information that the writer offered and prior knowledge on the concepts that reader is
trying to understand. All this makes us aware of the difficulties that facing any writer,
both in producing speech in L1 and in L2, reason, the mere fact of making any written
79
production actually carries a prior ripening, while many corrections in the case of an
international scientific journal.
Since there is an inherent complexity to the written production in contexts
specifically, this study arose in order to establish and define the factors that text give
the quality of being understandable and acceptable for most readers as well as the
features that make complex becomes the understanding of the information that is
produced. Because certain variations in the speech may be the causes that although
the idea for the writer is outlined perfectly clear to the reader can become a confusing
concept and some degree of misunderstanding. The latter situation as little desired
by both parties has several reasons to be. On one hand, the inexperience of the
writer and therefore non- exploitation of the variety of formal or stylistic that are held
in the writing and secondly, the overuse of the resources of language to
communicate with his audience, a fact that would produce a text that is too loaded.
Another cause of Connection failure or writer-reader understanding may be that the
first expressed in a L2, a factor that makes the production of cultural ties that
transmitted in written discourse, a fact discussed in Chapter II and marked the
development of all our research.
Focused around the analysis to find answers to a series of questions on the
practical application of the language as written discourse from a focus materialized in
the specific scientific and technical academic English and contemplating pragmatic
reasoning. No extended or nuanced traditional responses linguists on the origins of
language, the ramifications of linguistics or studies of the various parts of the
sentence, but the simple analysis was extrapolated text structure and component
parts of the speech written to pass the border of mere sentence or phrase and thus
analyze how they are conditional sentence structure and components of cultural
influences and academic authors.
It proceeded on the basis of applied linguistics and pragmatics, focusing on
academic discourse from a perspective of English as a lingua franca and
internationally. Therefore, it raised a number of objectives adduce sufficient
information to determine certain fees to be followed by ENN in the production English
80
texts written in scientific-technical, with an aim to better collaborate understanding
and application of written language in some specific aspects. The concept of gender
as an expression or specific understanding within a global framework of language is
of great importance in the different linguistic studies in the today, more specifically,
the academic and professional English. Treatment Generic production is conceived
as an essential ingredient in this analysis, given internationalization and increasing
specialization of the English language.
2. OBJECTIVES
The written production of language has traditionally been the most analyzed
by linguists because, due to the narration of various events history, writing has been
and is of great importance. Another reason is that the writing is easier to analyze the
vast amount of information, so static do in small parts or study, providing references
and examples in order to have evidence of the facts that we argue. However, this
wide range of studies sometimes an obstacle, given the breadth of material available,
the various classifications of the written language or the many styles and theories
language based primarily on the textual language. Therefore, it is becoming more
surprisingly difficult for the researcher or even arouses curiosity in the minimum critic
or reader, since many studies and has a wide range of possibilities.
The initial challenge in this analysis was to think that the issue was intended
analyze and had awakened our curiosity, could conclude with results interesting and
useful for teaching the scientific community and the specific field.
This analysis was performed with the intention to apply the knowledge to be
extracted and open a new field in research, to go deeper so progressive specific
written language and the factors influencing its correct final production.
The research question arose from the difficulties that wielded the write a
scientific paper in English, led by the constant doubts our fellow teachers, dedicated
81
to the field of research scientific technical, had to write in an L2. This second
language is used for scientific and technical communication is mostly from English,
as it is considered as a lingua franca or communication tool to share knowledge
between scientific researchers who have different L1. Thus, once it was found the
problem we knew existed in this large group, the following step was to structure the
field of research, consult the literature on this specific analysis and planning relevant
goals.
The main objectives of this study or general are synthesized in two. In First,
identify the errors that the NNS, with a high intermediate level of English, committed
in different parts of speech to produce the L2, and we analyze the various
components morph syntactic, lexical and cohesion this speech writing. This, apart
from detecting the most common mistakes and typology, reasoned the different
causes that lead to produce and if they were traits NNS characteristic of that
language is Spanish, or, by contrast, is due to difficulties inherent in the English
language. The purpose of error analysis was identifying parts of the sentence that
cause more problems for NNS and thus define the various types of errors that are
attributed specifically to the language Professors. By this analysis, the ENN are
aware of the points should reinforce in writing and know the parts that deserve
special attention when production takes place.
Second, comparing the written production of scientific-technical authors they
write in their L1 (English-speaking IN) and authors who write in an L2 (NNS of
Spanish language), English, to extract and systematize the variations in the
discourse. These variations in the production of the tongue is not classified in the
same so that the error categories (Ellis, 1997), as could not be included as errors not
be a misuse of language, or fault (mistake) for not being a carelessness in
production, but this concept was designed to consider difference in use of language
made by authors and linguistic backgrounds different cultural, even if they were from
the academic point of view. To do this, priority was observed and,
therefore,
classified in a frame itself, the any differences between the production of scientific
articles in English made by the two groups were established, ie, native English
82
writers and non-native authors had as the Spanish language. The purpose of this
objective was to assess the significance of these variations occurred in the
interlanguage of ENN and sees what had caused it, weighing their importance. The
wished to test hypotheses in this study was that changes are actually result of the
interference of L1, and since they do not interfere in the understanding of text should
be respected as with the AT, which also yields show variations from the standard
language. Given the conclusions sought to remove it might take two points of view or
attitudes, or know the NNS variations and, therefore, reject and try to emulate
productions of the EN, or, conversely, claim the right to exercise variations on a
language which is considered internationally as the heritage of all countries that
adopt it as a lingua franca. In the
present study supports this last position and
therefore want to provide data to ratify that variations are minimum and therefore
must be respected as cultural variations, as is done with American, British,
Australian and endless varieties of English standard.
The overall objective is to determine the most frequent errors produced by
ENN their causes, and how, despite their interlanguage correction, factors cultural
and fossilization of certain structures persist as changes in the production of writing.
These variations are or are not caused by the choice determined in a particular style
or form and by a kind word or structure from among several similar inherited by the
influence of the L1, but to discern is the
based on this research. With these
objectives in mind, our aim was to help written production, and to the various
questions that any writer Technical and Scientific of international articles, whose
native language is not English, you have surely has been questioned.
3. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES
The next step was shelling and itemizes all issues related to this particular
type of specific written production. Objectives were addressed specific on the basis of
the two purposes that were raised in the objectives general, as detailed below.
83
The search and identification of errors focused perspective sentence and has
focused on various phrases and traits that influence the achievement of a correct
text, or grammatical levels, and lexical cohesion. First Instead, the frequency analysis
and classification of grammatical or morph syntactic pursued the following specific
objectives to be sought determine:
1.1. The frequency and detailed classification of morphological and syntactic errors
produced in the noun phrase.
1.2. The occurrences and varieties of morphological and syntactic errors produced in
the verb phrase.
Objectives
1.3. Identification of the variety and number of errors in the adverbial phrase from a
morphological and syntactic.
1.4. 1.4. Establish the classification and observe the frequency errors produced by a
gap in the sentence connection.
Secondly, we analyzed the mistakes made at the lexical level, with the order:
2.1 Determine the type and frequency of errors that were committed by interference
of the mother tongue of the writer.
2.2 Locate, classify and identify the importance of the mistakes that were made by
terminological confusion, that is, a misspelling, or by choosing a word wrong.
Third and last in regard to the errors, the errors were studied due to a lack of
cohesion sentence, in order to delimit following objectives:
3.1 Define a classification and identify the frequency of errors due to use different
conjunctions incorrect sentence.
84
3.2 Sort and thus determine the most frequent causes of errors caused by disorder in
sentence structure.
3.3 Delineate and analyze the frequency of errors produced by the interference of the
L1 to L2 production.
Regarding the category of variations were noted in the written language of the
NNS, to contrast it with the production of the IN, it wished to achieve the following
specific objectives:
4.1 To establish the different types and frequencies of grammatical changes detected
within the noun phrases and verbal prayer, and in certain structures that could have
some importance for production.
4.2 Classify and analyze changes that occurred due to a different cohesion and
interpretation of modality.
The various objectives established with this arrangement to
analyzing the
most essential parts and susceptible to errors or variations in the use of English
language in scientific and technical context. This is ratified or denied assumptions or
initial expectations expressions written in L2 is have been discussed in the
introduction and theoretical framework of this study, using the data that have ratified
the findings because it was based on an actual corpus.
So, once detailed the aims and objectives that established in the analysis were
listed the assumptions from which it was based on this study, in summary:
I. The determination of the various mistakes made in writing scientific and technical
articles, classified by their frequency and importance in written discourse from a
grammatical, lexical and cohesion to are used by different authors and self-correction
strategies. So, determining the frequency and causes of these failures.
85
II. Discern the causes of variations in the interlanguage establishing the NNS for able
to communicate in a language not native, and thus identify the influences culture that
still survive, after being identified and corrected errors due to their identification.
III. Sort variations in the writing of scientific and technical texts made by authors with
different linguistic backgrounds to determine their importance and if there is a
fossilization of the most common mistakes that have been reflected in the variations.
Whether that variation, be minimal and not exist that prevent interference understand
the text, must be respected as inherent feature of cultural diversity because it
enriches any language production and is inevitable due to globalization linguistic and
social.
The ultimate goal pursued with the specific objectives is to define the two
states in the production of written texts in the scientific-technical field, the error and
variation, to determine their causes and thus help NNS striving to write in an L2, and
often wonder about the root or importance of their errors or variations in language.
IV. METHODOLOGY
1. SEARCH BY REFERENCE MATERIAL. THE SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS IN
THE NEWS.
The material in a research study as this is essential for is representative, at the
same time, to grant validity to the results. The importance and decisive nature of the
material is a palpable fact to Crystal (1982: p, 9): But Before He (the linguist) can get
on With His analysis, I must obtain historical first data which means making a
decision as to the level of technical abstraction at which I Should make historical
initial intervention. This is Possibly the Most Important That decision Applied the
linguist has to make, In His early professional contact, as it will Influence not only
86
have the kind of data is likely to Receive, But Also the willingness-of the Translate
from English, Spanish, French.
Discussing with professionals about to cooperate providing their problems and
illustrative data.
It is therefore crucial for carrying out a study that has access to the necessary
data, and that the practitioner can provide not always shown receptive to the analysis
of their work. To validate the studies based on data published, it is important to
discuss certain aspects of their written productions authors, as it helps in categorizing
certain traits or linguistic nuances. Without but that is not always possible, because
despite the current media international communication, contact with these authors is
very complex, since in the scientific, technical writers, travel by several universities,
and it is even sometimes impossible, for the reluctance to discuss their products or
not found in college who left as a reference.
We planned the collection of material would be used to justify, an accurate and
objective, the assumptions are sensed and wanted to verify. Not all texts can be
material from a corpus for study, for a extracting data from a corpus that does not
inspire confidence, not be representative for the purpose is desired, can lead to the
unreliability of the work being done, and lead to failure. The reference materials
referred to in this section delineated in the written productions published in research
journals scientific technical, so any statement is made on the cover material this
specific genre. A condition which limits the material to be chosen in any study is the
purpose or end sought, so that they establish priorities, and possibilities are
eliminated, to find the representative material for the analysis. This requirement is,
therefore, a preliminary to be met to narrow increasing the range of available and to
be each time delimiting set priorities and focus of the study.
Therefore, not only has to select a corpus being a mixture and, therefore, a
representative number of the texts but also must take into account other factors
decisive in itself, but sometimes difficult to verify and to be enumerated below:
87
1. the source from which are extracted to be considered reliable and high factor
impact within its scope, and that because it will have more impact on their disclosure
of the language and influence more on the written production of other authors;
2. Articles written by NNS or EN may not be reviewed by a spell before publication,
but are accepted by the importance of the discovery for the scientific community. This
fact is taken into account for its linguistic significance, as transmitted to other
researchers errors or ways not entirely correct, a fact that appears later in the
analysis;
3. journals that are selected or not demanding about the quality of language the
authors perform a review of style and language correction made by inexperienced in
this work;
4. The EN or ENN first signatory in the articles are really the authors study, a fact that
affects the case of valuing the cultural influences of the mother tongue of the writers;
The magazines are alluded to in Annex 1 of this study. Not name the journal in
which are going to publish articles in the NNS at the express wish of Coordination
Languages Foreign Polytechnic University of Valencia.
5. in the case of text without corrections require, in order to analyze the Possible
errors are made, it must check that there are second versions or previously revised
editions, as they would lose all their data reliability and to draw conclusions;
6. in the case of wanting a contrastive analysis between two versions of the texts, as
for example, the original production and corrected, it should be especially provide
caution and verify differences between each group, as a misleading or confusing
distinction would lead to the invalidation of the results. Therefore, the searches for
reference material in certain cases become a more arduous task for which we
assume, because as linguists, the move into the scientific world is not always easy.
The specific criteria to be considered essential to determine the quality and relevance
of written work in a context a scientific-technical is part of what is known
internationally as Journal Citation Reports (JCR) of the listings are arranged by
88
specialty, listing them by their impact factor and providing us also the number of
magazine articles published in that year, and that this fact must be taken into account
to assess the impact factor determined by the total number of citations of these
articles in other publications. Internet, of course, has greatly facilitated the ability to
access this type of data classification and, as currently through Web of Science is
accessible through the IRIS server to the incidence or impact factor of any article
published in a recognized journal. Others servers that can help us find the
importance of material that we are working ERL, Host STN, via Silverplatter
WebSpirs, etc.. can be locate on the Internet or libraries of different universities.
Due to this circumstance, the most reliable way to obtain a linguistic corpus
representative of a research community is to use a search engine or server tell us the
impact factor possessed by each publication, as this get a sample of individual pieces
which influence the production of various writers as the most cited and recognized in
the scientific field. The http://www.ISIHighlyCited.com website describes it this way
indices of citations and their importance: "ISI has now Identified The Most highly cited
Researchers of our time-the top Influential Researchers from broad subject
categories in life sciences, medicine, physical sciences, engineering and social
sciences Who Have Contributed to the progress of science-through insight and Their
Accomplishments ".
After establishing the different findings regarding the selection material
collected, we investigated the characteristics and status of publications cientific to
determine the profile of the material being analyzed, as this study, the relevance of
the corpus and the results that are removed are essential. It was believed relevant to
consider this aspect of the specificity of the corpus in question and, for this reason,
so different than we're used as philologists.
First, it must be borne in mind that the scientific literature linguistically studied
within
the
field
of
IPA,
are
fundamental
to
(WoS)
(http://www.isinet.com/isi/journals/inde.html) scientific community, since they involve
89
communication and dissemination of discoveries made in the scientific world. The
fact that converts a communications group in a genre, is that there are a number of
purposes communicative matching (Kramsch, 1998: p,63), and in the case of articles
scientists, other researchers reported the findings in a clear and convincing at the
same time encouraging further investigation. But although this genus is recognized
by all, has much obvious intrinsic differences, for example, how to present a research
paper. This factor varies depending on the Anglo-Saxon or French author, as the
French authors do not consider important one introduction of the previous literature
or membership of a school of knowledge, while whites do. These differences within
the same genus mark that some scientists who wish to publish in English, not to use
their own cultural style, and that publishers impose a set of rules to be followed by all
authors, whether native or nonnative.
Second, when writing any scientific paper is important consider the
relationship between writer and audience, which is connected with the terms of
reference, presupposition, implication and inference within the discourse, we
establish the different reflections that an author must determine before writing to
choose a certain tone and words (Brown and Yule, 1983: p, 27). Respect to the
reference, the writer must keep in mind that the reader understands what the term is
reference, as they may be misleading. Moreover, the assumption is based on the
reader to know and the terms referred to the author, since without they have no
communication. The implications that can be seen in a text are the words used and
denoting another sense than we could expect them if used in a different context. The
implication is a term that appears typically in conversation and tells us the
circumstances surrounding this text, written but do not appear anywhere, but are
known to all. By Finally, inference, are expressions that we suggest above or other
ideas we do assume a number of terms.
Thirdly, scientific publications require a tool, language to communicate your
message, along with what it represents, because if analyze their impact on social and
economic environment, we realize meaning power. On this point of view of speech, ie
speech as useful weapon for the wishes of the speaker, Fairclough (1994: p, 1) says:
90
I have written it [the book] for two main purposes. The first is more theoretical: to help
Widespread correct to underestimation of the significance of language in the
production, maintenance, and change of social relations of power. The second is
more practical: to help increase consciousness of how language contributes to the
domination of some people by others, because consciousness is the first Step
Towards emancipation.
Language has a great influence on our neighbors and one of the optimal ways
to influence and communicate is the writing, because the texts are can re-read, refer
to them, reflect on these ideas, while conversations, but they are written, and even
forget sometimes misunderstood. However, we will not expand on these
considerations for having tried and in the second chapter. Among the most
prominent innate characteristics of the language written can wield the importance
acquired scientific publications, since they have a great influence on other people.
This is because other researchers refer to them to confirm the importance of their
studies, so cultural influences that they exert, fact which is reflected in his writing, is
patent. Fourth, the process of publishing an article or study is in itself difficult and
requires great perseverance and patience on both sides, by the editor or editors and
the writer or writers. In the previous step to publishing, corrections seem never to
expire, there's always post a comment and versions are countless. In this long and
difficult road we derive a consequently involved also impact on the linguistic study of
these texts, ie they have been so revised that often features author's own range, so
that in analyzing these texts must be taken into account undergone revisions and
possible changes in expressions. If we consider the texts by writers native language
revisions will, of course, minimal but reviews of non-native writers are therefore arger.
This data should be considered when using any text for linguistic analysis, as not all
can be seen with the same criteria, or for purposes identical. Fifthly, an aspect to be
considered also in the publications scientific language is used in prestigious
international journals, and impact it can have on scientists who wish to publish them.
Is well known in the scientific community that the language requires regular is
English, which has become the lingua franca of the scientific world, as we widely
discussed in the first chapter. It is used at conferences or events International, which
91
shows that each individual has a national or regional language, a fact which is
reflected in the productions of these authors, but it deserves all the respect and
consideration, and varieties, that are inherent in the evolution of language (Quirk and
Stein, 1993: p, 39). Sixth, more and more important scientific publications appear on
the Internet, as it is considered a fast and much more free to give learn the
knowledge, ideas, etc.. The disadvantage that we see in use indiscriminate network
as a transmitter of knowledge is that texts are transmitted as the author sends,
without any filter at times, and therefore not undergo a linguistic review. But this
understanding of man's future with the machines it was somewhat predictable, as
mentioned Wiener, professor of mathematics at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, who believed that society could only understood by studying the
messages and communication facilities of its own, and in the future (now a reality)
would examine the messages between man and machines, between machines and
men and even from machine to machine (Malmberg, 1981: p, 222). Finally we refer to
the objectives of the research paper science and technology, about which Varó
Alcaraz (2000: p, 139) explains: "[...] as communicative event has a very clear
objective: to move to the forums professionals, through a magazine, the results of a
investigation.” This objective is one that will mark the character of the scientific paper
international and thus the material chosen in this research study, and that is vital to
know all its implications for an industry determined within the IPA. This author
continues to explain the intended purpose of an author of a research article: "[...] is a
study aimed at colleagues and specialists of a material to communicate an advance
in scientific knowledge or technical.” On scientific-technical article, the author
emphasizes its structure (or macrostructure as he calls it), on which several studies
have been made between those who can name Swales (1990), Piqué and AndreuKissed (1998), Posteguillo (1999) or Fortanet (2002) which attests to the importance
of these items and professional and academic impact they have. Other aspects to
note in scientific articles are on the one hand, the scientific claim something that is
developing other, rough language, used when the facts affirm need for approval and
finally, academic civility covering clarity of exposition and references to other
research. The linguistic features of research articles are, as we have seen, varied,
92
but at the same time, are clearly defined and repeated in most cases. Its importance
in an increasingly steeper of technical progress is every justification, therefore,
following this importance, emerged a few years ago, the analysis of texts or corpus
linguistic purposes, to give a more accurate support to the speculation on a question
concrete. Then we will make a brief statement of the characteristics and state of the
corpora analysis, since the focus and material used in this study warrant.
2. THE CORPORATION IN RESEARCH STUDIES
The need to rely on the frequency of language to obtain data reliable linguistic
research, is a fact that goes back and several decades and is considered an
essential aspect of contrastive analysis and error by the inherent nature thereof, as
the results are improved through contrast of real data. Linguistic research aspiring to
any rigorous scientist (Stubbs, 1995: p, 245; Rebolledo, 1999: p, 339) and have a
view target (McCarthy, 2001: p, 125) should be based on actual data rather than
intuition language, allowing to perform adjusted descriptions of the phenomena exist
in the language and to make better-informed theories. Is a way appropriate to
investigate the rules of language use, as through a corpus provide actual data so that
the gap in perceptions and views language is zero. Through the analysis of language
and patterns that follow, we find the developments that make your speakers, since on
the one hand, data can be extracted are based on the reality of a language and not
just theories and ideas without foundation justifiable and, secondly, based on the
external evidence, namely the use of language, and not on internal evidence, ie, the
native speaker's intuition (McCarthy, 2001: p, 125). Clearly there are forces that drive
and regulate the activity and linguistic balance, but by the early opinions Whatmough
(1956), the problem in the instability of the linguistic system is a matter of the
application of statistical theory and the calculus of probability (Malmberg, 1981: p,
223). Thanks to these instabilities, can predict certain linguistic changes based on the
evidence based on the quantitative aspect and probabilities statistics.
93
Therefore, Huizhong (1985: p, 93) justified the use of the corpus for study of
language like this: Corpus linguistics is Able to provide a better model for the
description of the English language, which Because Of The very large amount of data
can not be Studied Involved Directly by human observations. In language study the
sampling of linguistic data is indispensable. [...] Language study based on sampling
must close.
So, even then, to get a reliable study of certain linguistic features, the right
thing was to have a corpus as large possible. The larger the corpus, the more likely
will have to provide a reliable conclusions and departing from the results drawn from
a suitable data the study being done, as we increase the forecast results. This author
identifies three basic requirements for a suitable corpus, the first being corpus that
sampling is done on an always uniform, the second the ability to obtain samples must
be large enough, both from a single sample, and the overall corpus and the last, that
texts must be systematically organized, so that is not only important to use a corpus,
but get it.
Through the use of the corpora in linguistic studies was underlying theories or
assumptions. The analyzed data allow to examples, while giving real numbers, textbased chosen from a sample specific. Through scientific analysis, statistically based,
language, endowing the philological research more accuracy and credibility, as there
are few data supporting actual research. Beaugrande (2000: p, 75) tells us: The
language of large corporations, of which JM Sinclair and his team pioneered [...]. The
computer allows us to distinguish patterns that do not arise or set modest sample and
the introspection and intuition, and is an "order underlying "very different from the
sets of" notional units "and" rules syntactic ". Instead of just making general
statements about the "English language", we can use the database to explore how
general or our statements should be specific.
But this does not mean that the importance of the corpus in the analysis
language has not always been well understood by other linguists. Chomsky, for
example, has traditionally been one of his detractors (Coulthard, 1988: p, 2):
Chomsky not only suggested that was a corpus unnecessary, It Was Actually
94
counterproductive. No corpus, however large, can be Adequate Because It will never
Contain examples of all possible Structures and will Actually Contain misleading
data, performance errors [...].
It has to recognize the significant role played by transformational grammar,
but over time, Chomsky has been outdated in certain aspects. Evidence has been on
the side of those who established and based their investigations and rules based on
the examples of language use and analysis of a corpus as a means of bringing
scientific results.
The analysis of a corpus can be raised from two points of view. On one hand,
considering a perspective lexicographical (Carter, 1998: p, 167; McCarthy, 2001: p,
125), such as COBUILD project from the University of Birmingham, led by Sinclair,
who has built tools for the classification and lexical information search. The most
significant achievements of using a corpus for COBUILD project are, first, that the
quotes are examples of English is commonly used, and secondly, that the differences
between written and oral or American or British English can be stored separately,
also the relative frequencies of different words indicate, the technique also properties
show consistent placement of words and Finally, the corpus is continually revised to
incorporate variants of English worldwide. Following the COBUILD project have
emerged other como16 ELRA (European Language Resources Association), ICAME
(International Computer Archive of Modern and Medieval English), The Oxford Text
Archive, The Cambridge International Corpus, The British National Corpus, Linguistic
Resources on the Internet Centre for English Corpus Linguistics, Corpus de l'IULA
(C. Bach, etc.).
Furthermore, applying the actual data analysis by a computer, redefining the
rules of grammar and adapting to the actual use made of them, and which as noted
above, the English language is, at present, being influenced by many aspects such
as the Internet, its use as a lingua franca, and so on. A through a corpus, one can
determine the variations and evolutions of the language, compare production carried
out at different times or by different speakers. The conclusions drawn, or ratify the
use made of the language in particular contexts, or lead to the conclusion that there
95
has been an evolution or change; fact should be reflected in the teaching and
application of the language. This flexibility of the English language is an obvious fact
to Halliday (1992: p,31), as the rules are not always followed so that we can not be
categorical, to which he adds "[Probabilities of occurrence are] an essential property
of the system-as essential as the terms of the Opposition itself ". So important are the
conclusions drawn from cases, such as those extracted from that do not occur, but
however, the most complex analysis of the corpus collected for Differences or
variations use of language is to find an answer to this phenomenon, because in
reality, cause different factors intertwine.
The application of these variations in the frequencies of the tongue is essential
in some ways, because you can confirm or deny rules or assumptions sometimes
practiced without questioning its accuracy. Using a frequency analysis we can verify
the use of certain structures and thus help both from a pedagogical (Aston, 1998) as
a researcher. Sinclair (1991) was aware of this fact, and from a global view of
language and lexical analysis of its components, wanted to establish a link between
the sense and structure. McCarthy (2001: p, 127) tells us about Sinclair and his
research: [Sinclair's Proposal] stands as a good example of how to 'neutral'
technology can throw up key questions for theory, and how to Practical, 'Applied'
problem, In This case writing a dictionary using computer Evidence, can bounce back
and challenge theory. That We Should not doubts galloping Technological Change
will bring many more Such Upheavals over the coming Decades.
There are two ways to process a written corpus to extract the frequencies with
In order to compare them, and thus apply the findings to actual use of language. By
one hand, can perform a manual count, ie with printed text of which scoring are the
characteristics that are to be determined, which is exposed to various causes of
inaccuracies caused by subjectivity and error human, to count the occurrences when
working with a large corpus. By furthermore, software can be used include the
labeling of categories or words, to count the occurrences and get the data you want.
We have included the citation of these programs are responsible for the collection of
corpus, whether for economic or research. Software can be cited as Tagged British
96
National Corpus (Leech, 1997), IULA, (Morel, 1997), MonoConc Pro (Barlow, 1998),
WordSmith (Scott, 1998) or CFIA (Gil Salom et al, 2001), which labeled the body that
makes it easier to extract by counting data, frequencies previously selected. These
programs also have a margin of error, but it is always much less than we could get to
the human body count. Regardless of the how to process the corpus we get for our
research purposes, a fact is now vital to the achievement of reliable data in a study,
is the validate theories or hypotheses outlined, although not all linguists are of the
same opinion. Thus, the advantages of having a body to investigate and define the
frequency of certain words in the language is recognized by all, but should not be
overextend its merits. In this regard, Carter (1998, 233) tells us: Allow access to
corporate computer and quantifiable detailed syntactic, semantic and pragmatic
information about the behavior of lexical items. There is little doubt that such
corporate data offer valuable materials for vocabulary development. But there are
obvious Dangers in using Carefully Such data without interpreting it as data and
without careful assessment of the kinds of pedagogic criteria which might inform ITS
use. A well treated and used corpus we can have many benefits, but mistakenly
interpret a corpus that can lead to deception and mistrust these methods to test
hypotheses language. Widdowson (2000) also considered as distorted from reality
the material is created using a corpus, since when separated from its context, it loses
the ability to be real and immersed in linguistic environment determines certain
characteristics vital to the justification of the study.
However, one can not discount the importance of the corpus and processing in
the field of applied linguistics, discourse analysis, the pragmatic and, as part of this,
the measurement of errors and delimitation of the interlanguage compiled by the
various speakers of the same language. We understand that these areas of study are
significant enough, both in production, well as in teaching a language to be
considered vital parts of any study that seeks to provide a scientific basis. It is entirely
aware studies of Holmes (1994); Kourilova (1996); Ceirano and Rodriguez (1997),
Biber, Conrad and Reppen (1998); of Monnink (1998), Marti Guinovart (1999);
Oostdijk (2000) and Cortese (2002). Then, as the last section of this chapter, we
described and thus justified, the body which was selected for this study, thus, on the
97
framework of the importance of research articles and the corpus, outline the strokes
that finally gave us the overview of the methodology.
3. DESCRIPTION AND JUSTIFICATION OF CORPUS USED
The intention of this analysis was, first, to identify and evaluate the errors
committed in the production of scientific and technical texts written by NNS, in
Second, determine and assess the variations observed by contrasting the final
productions made by EN and ENN. Therefore, the material selected for this purpose
was chosen according to the profile of the study was conducted. With to specify and
describe, in this section, the type of material that had used in the study were
established, first, two categories, the error and of variation, because although they
share
the
same
basic body,
was subdivided
by different
classifications,
characteristics and consequences, which wanted to remove. By this, first described
the material used in the error category, then proceeding to describe the material used
in the category of variation.
Regarding the error category, sixty articles were selected Scientific and
Technical of a hundred written by NNS, who distinguished the two groups (Annex 1).
Group 1 was composed of thirty original scientific papers
1). Group 1 was composed of thirty original scientific papers, without suffered any
human or mechanical correction, written by researchers from various scientific and
technical areas with a high intermediate level of English. To select the different items
that eventually formed part of the corpus of the errors, we rejected those that did not
meet the profile of language skills English had been established as the basis for the
study. The author had to have the enough power to express themselves in English,
but with a level of knowledge of the high-intermediate language, which was
established by half about 100 errors per article, for what is left a margin of variation of
98
excess or deficiency of 10 errors. The tongue base, ie, breast, these authors was
Castilian, which started from the same budgets and schemes of the L1. The Group 2
consisted of the same thirty items, but after review by various correction linguistic
experts in the field, and therefore ready to be sent to international scientific and
technical journals. The source of which is arranged to achieve this corpus, of great
value since it is not easy to collect in the manner has been done, was the ACLE
(Area Coordination of Foreign Languages) of the Polytechnic University of Valencia,
which uses several correction specialists this purpose. As will be seen to describe the
body of the variations, the number used in the error search was different variations,
since it had to rule out several original articles by the authors to be written largely
terms in Castilian or have multiple errors. In other cases, were not available originals,
although the articles prepared for shipment, as the criteria varied according to how to
work the spell of language. In Annexes 1 (Groups 1 and 2) the present study we have
detailed the names of items used for error detection, but have omitted the names of
the authors express wish of some, in some cases, or Area Coordination Languages
Foreign (ACLE), a fact which has led to the failure to mention any author. With regard
to the level of variation, were selected hundred articles scientific-technical, with which
also made two groups, as seen in Annex 1 (groups 3 and 4). Group 3 consisted of
fifty articles by authors non-native English speakers who had Spanish as their mother
tongue, prepared for publication in international scientific journals, after proofreading.
As mentioned in the preceding paragraph, the language of these reviewers
items were several people who were dedicated to this task professionally, but their
mother tongue, like that of the authors of the articles was the Spanish, with which
errors were corrected, but the possible variations caused by the tongue mother
continued to exist. Group 4 consisted of fifty articles British American authors
published in international journals from different fields scientific and technical. These
items were selected from research journals more scientific impact factor within its
scope, since, as discussed in the previous section, it was considered standard acting
in scientific language to be read and cited by other researchers. The selection criteria
of the authors, respect to language, was established by the name of the author
principal and the university from which the article had to study.
99
The corpus was available for that number of articles for considering adequate
to provide reasonable half of the data to analyze, since the amount words overall,
and the variety of occurrences, gave an adequate picture of the frequency and the
occurrence of certain structures. Once collected the material studied, we proceeded
to put in different text files, eliminating the formulas previously, quite common in this
kind of language and literature references, graphics, annotations, and the
acknowledgments. Removed all these parts of the articles consider not relevant to
the study, as rather in the analysis of results hindered their study in the calculation of
percentages. As the end of this process, he became our full-text corpus to analyze
using computer programs that were found for this Finally, because it was faster, and
in some programs was essential. Without However, for the analysis of certain
aspects and parts of variations where the context was necessary, the material was
kept in document format writing. Having described the material is then passed to the
description of method was applied to the study to achieve extraction of the results
and conclusions.
4. CORPUS ANALYSIS METHOD
The methodology followed is drawn in advance in linguistic research that
follows a pattern determined above. Arises when one considers how they will justify
the results or conclusions that are targeted, as it should outline the strategy or
method to be applied to provide adequate exposure and reliable. Thus, the
methodology is designed as a back, which shows the type targets to achieve, since it
depends on the purpose and theory raised to achieve certain conclusions later.
They provide various possibilities, weigh the approaches that will provide more
scientific reliability, and ultimately a decision regarding the methodology appropriate
to continue in the study that is being developed, all tailored to the conclusions are to
lead. We may be inclined by a methodology more empirical and make general
observations of the tongue to reach the concretions, which are the hypotheses we
100
want to try, or we can decide by a more quantitative approach, focusing on statistical
data and percentage that lead us to test our hypothesis, but supporting them with
factual and accurate. That is, we detail our hypotheses or theories based in earlier
ones, or with figures and facts that lead us to conclusions evident based on the
results. Each investigator chooses a way to support your study, while some
researchers defend their theories and speculations isolated examples of the
language, without providing specifics or frequencies (Ellis, 1994; McCarthy, 1991),
other scholars and Malmberg (1981: p, 206) thought, and at that then, that: Any
scientific description of linguistic phenomena, all conclusions about these, any
attempt [...] to describe a state of language presuppose some form of statistical
processing of data acquired, however simple it [...] the philologists are supported
mainly compared the frequencies of different linguistic features [...].
You could say that today the statistical study of data supporting expectations
of the researcher is the trend more prevalent among language researchers and even
those studies that do not add frequencies of cases is because at that time did not
believe it appropriate or that the figures seemed were better suited to the technical
studies of the philological. Of course, with this statement we are not belittling the
work of many writers who are dedicated to theorize certain aspects of language, but
we refer to investigations that provides new data on linguistic features, backed by a
series data or corpus (Carrio Pastor and Algilaga Ila, 1999: 63), and studies conclude
with simple concrete examples. As noted by Malmberg (1981: 207): "The description
language style of an author can no longer rest on an approximate assessment of
their linguistic habits, but must be firmly based in numerical frequencies, ranges of
variation and average values. " There are many examples of authors who are
increasingly using statistical methods and mathematicians to support their
expectations, adopting more and more to provid linguistic data supporting hypothesis.
Also in the teaching of languages, not only in research, we can see that every day is
given greater prominence to calculating the frequency of words in the languages, to
emphasize the most vital for students. Also, a teacher must know the vocabulary
basic must teach their students and in that vein, the teacher and even writer for
101
teachers, should be applied statistics and know exactly vocabulary and structures
common in everyday use of language.
In contrast, Chaumier (1986) indicated that the frequency analysis is a step
prior to the claims of linguists, as the analysis that was presented was a bit superficial
though it may be completely valid in other study, data it provided were superficial and
unwieldy for linguistics. The author preferred linguistic analysis, an automatic method
we classify the elements taking into account semantic and syntactic
information,
and discussed more extensively in the previous section. However, we note that this
view is based on studies that were made about twenty years ago and advances in
statistical methods or programs have greatly improved since then, thanks to new
technologies. As a result, it is certain to observe any current study based on corpus
analysis, the data are reliable and provide a scientific basis for linguistic theories.
The statistical method or corpus analysis provides vital information for the
frequency and use of different parts of the sentence, but it is certain that each
problem that we face in linguistic studies required different methodology, so
sometimes you have to include several strategies to discuss any aspect in depth.
Error analysis, part underlies this study, you need a specific method to be followed to
structure their results, so we will stick to that found by Ellis (1994: p, 48-9) which has
the following steps as essential parts in the method to be followed error analysis:
1. Collection of material samples to be analyzed.
This first step aims to collect the material that we suitable for analysis of the
errors to be carried out. Can be collected samples of various kinds, taking into
account the objective and the aspects that are to delimited. The key criterion in this
first step is the magnitude of the samples, being able to collect a very large sample or
just a specific sample of few copies as you want representation to our results. The
collect material must also follow certain criteria, if samples of speech or writing,
whether to compare two languages or two productions of the same language, etc., so
that the collection of a suitable material is very important, since the results may not
be valid if they are not properly defined frames analysis of action and under what
102
conditions errors occur. Finally, another factor in the method of collection of the
material is considering whether to group the text has there was a spontaneous
production or if, by contrast, has been modified, since this also influence the results.
2. Identifying errors
Once the corpus collected will be used for analysis, the following step is to
identify, as it is very important to establish patterns indicate that a trait is deemed
error and the procedure to be followed to recognize it. We establish criteria to
consider everything as error not meet the standards set in the language, although
this idea has had its detractors. Another aspect to consider is that we have explained
in Chapter II in the section on language errors, which have commented on the
differences between concepts mistake and error (mistake). This analysis will consider
the notion of error, ie when there is a wrong use or production of language by
ignorance of the rules or misuse of the same, and also considered the notion of
variation, which are the productions that are not wrong, for having an appropriate use
of language, but do not follow the guidelines established by the term Standard
English (Bex and Watts, 1999). Also should consider, in identifying errors, if the error
can be detected simply by observing the sentence or whether, indeed, the author has
intended to express other ideas and by mistake, says another. Finally, we must
consider whether mistakes have been made affecting the correctness or even the
formality of language. The interpretation of the various errors are also required to
follow strict, identifying as Corder (1971, 1974), which may be normal (when we can
identify the error and know what you should), authoritarian (you ask the person who
committed the error and thus recognize it) and plausible (referring the context in
which the error or translating the L1). Unfortunately, no always possible to identify the
exact origin of the error and in many cases, the person who committed the error is
not within our reach, as is the case of this analysis, so the guidelines suggested by
Corder are somewhat difficult to put into practice.
3. Description of the errors
103
The simplest description is one that is based on linguistic categories
recognizable by all, subdividing them by type of errors made. Corder (1974)
distinguishes three types of systematic errors by:
a) errors pre systematics are occurring because there is no knowledge of that rule
particular language, b) systematic errors occur when using a rule but wrongly, and
b) errors occur when post systematics known rules, but they are used improperly.
The problem that this type of description involved is to be in contact with the person
who produces, as it has known whether or not the rule, therefore, if there is no
contact, as in this analysis can not determine the type of error. The way to describe
errors in this study, given its characteristics, was to have two versions of the
production and go comparing it with each other, implying a process laborious, but
also very rewarding.
4. The explanation of the errors
This step is critical and is what holds the key to eliminating production errors,
why should plan well implemented. Taylor (1986) provides a variety of sources for
errors, such as psycholinguistics (Knowing the knowledge system of the L2),
sociolinguistics (language set the social context), epistemic (lack of knowledge of the
world) or the structure of discourse (organizing information into coherent text). Prior
Richards (1971) distinguished three causes that are more suited to the linguistic
analysis:
a) interference errors occur when using the elements of a language while talking
another.
b) Errors intralinguistic reflect failures such as incomplete application the rules or
failing to assimilate the conditions under which these rules apply.
c) development errors occur when attempting to create a hypothesis regarding the
target language on a limited basis of experience.
104
The first cause of errors is also subdivided (Lott, 1983) into three categories:
1. Supra extension of analogy, ie, when a term is used so inadequate because it
looks like another of the L1.
2. Transfer or structure, which happens when you use a feature of the L1 instead of
L2.
3. Intralinguistic errors, which occur when there is a specific difference in
L1
therefore used interchangeably.
Despite having made these divisions and subdivisions in the description of
errors, many linguists are unclear about the limits of some types of errors, so their
categorization is often difficult.
Ellis (1994: p, 61-2) summarizes the major findings with respect to the error
description with the following:
� Most of the mistakes made are initially mostly intralinguistic.
� Transfer errors are made when it has a more elementary level, while intralinguistic
are performed when a level has intermediate or high.
� Transfer errors are more common in lexical levels and in phonological grammar.
� Transfer errors occur more in adults than in children.
� Errors can have more than one cause.
These are the different categorizations of different errors that have been have
observed that the boundaries between transfer errors or intralinguistic are often very
confusing and therefore have been widely discussed, hence, in this study provided a
new approach from the pragmatic interpretation and application to the type of errors
to give more validity to the AE in the process the corpus.
105
5. The evaluation of the errors
This section focuses on the design of test errors, but taking into account the
person to judge the errors (native, nonnative, expert, etc..), which errors will have to
judge (semantic, lexical, grammatical, etc..) and how will have to judge (in
decontextualized or contextualized sentences, written, oral, etc.). This section has
also been a point of contention regarding the fees follow, but we expanded more in
detail because they did not expand our analysis with the evaluation, but we focus on
the identification, description and explanation of the errors committed by the NNS.
5. JUSTIFICATION AND APPROACH PROCEDURE
Followed the procedure described by Ellis (1994: p, 48-9) on the method in
this study, both in the category of errors and in the variations, as track all the steps,
identified the desired result extract with respect to material that was available. We
applied the same pattern in the method, in the detection, classification and reasoning
errors, as the 'bidding detect variations as the four steps are achieved the objectives
proposed.
Therefore, it is first started with the collection of material to analyze, to
continue the identification of errors or variations, then proceeded to his description,
and finally we focus on its explanation arguing our various hypotheses, steps below
detailed for better implementation.
First, the method is initiated with the collection analysis of the material,
process has already been extensively discussed above, which we extend
excessively. One can only comment that the criteria to follow in the collecting the
material in the error category were different from those followed in the category
variations, since in the former case, it was on the same production texts, but the
basic difference was that we distinguish what we call the group 1 and group 2. Group
1 consisted of original articles written by the NNS and Group 2 consisted of the same
106
items, but corrected and prepared for shipment to an international journal. Respect to
the category of variation, the same two sets were collected form of text, on the one
hand, the group 3, ie the articles corrected for the NNS and prepared for publication
and on the other, the group 4, IN articles published in international scientific and
technical journals.
Once compiled the material used in the analysis, the second step was raise
the identification of errors found in the texts written by NNS when expressed in
scientific and technical English. Chaumier (1986: p, 8-10) tells us about:
The
analysis data is the key operation without which it is fully impossible to use such
information. We can say that the analysis of information is recognition and
classification of information content. The problem that arose in the first place was the
truth or not to own data end in line with our expectations, in order to extract a suitable
support confirm the estimates noted in the conclusions sought. Ellis (1997: p, 15)
comments on the identification of errors: "This is Easier Said Than in Fact done ",
comments with which we completely agree. It also suggests that compare the two
statements made by ENN on the one hand, the original and another, corrected, and
completely logical procedure is followed in this analysis.
The problem that we face (already discussed in Chapter II of this study) was
how to differentiate the error of judgment, ie, if produced by an ignorance of some of
the language or if there was a way unconscious by the writer.
Aware of this assessment and to avoid falling into inaccuracies in our results,
the method used to distinguish and classify the frequency of errors was the use of the
software WordSmith Tools17 that allowed us to compare the production of group 1,
the original author, and group 2, the same production already corrected and prepared
for international publication. To the observing a sentence above the other with one of
the tools of this program, able to sort and count the errors based on their different
features, calculating then its frequency. Using the same program, was made count
frequencies of various words that we provided information for the study statistical
corpus. Also be used for the typographical error detection incorrect order of the
107
sentence, the spelling of the language available in Word and software Wordcorrect of
Windows '98.
This work of identification of errors, rather than knowledge, was reflection and
maturation of the results, so they consulted the related literature analysis was
conducted to verify that the approach was right, because in some cases served as a
benchmark to establish the The 'Wordsmith Tools 3 0' has been prepared by M.
Scott
and
published
by
(Http://www.oup.com/elt/wordsmithtools).
Oxford
University
Press.
Classification and reaffirmed budgets
(Quirk et al., 1972; Swan, 1980, James, 1998; Radford, Atkinson, Britain, Clahsen
and Spencer, 1999). In order to classify the data found so that benefit the further
analysis and discussion of the results, first, detailing the mistakes made by ENN,
identifying them from a grammatical and dividing them into the morphological and
syntactic aspects.
The morphological aspect localized distortions suffered by a bug in the way of
words, use or omission of a word in the phrase or inadequate matching of various
elements of the sentence. On the syntactic side, ie, structural, were counted
anomalies detected in noun phrases, verbal and adverbial the well as improper use
of subordinate clauses or error in the union of the phrases from the point of view of
coordination or subordination.
Second, errors identified exposed from a lexical perspective, considering the
formal errors, incorrect formation of a word for different reasons, lexical distortions,
the use of a word meaning general rather than a specific, erroneous placement next
to another word and use of a word by confusion of meaning.
Third and finally, detailed the occurrences of errors due to the lack of cohesion
in prayer, by improper use of conjunctions, disorder in sentence structure, poverty or
excess elements as well as by the influence of the production of L1 L2.
These steps are embodied in the following template, which was used for
identification, counting and sorting errors corpus. Consideration was given to its
108
preparation, considerations of James (1998), but also added some distinctions were
found when analyzing the corpus, adapting to Technical and Scientific language:
ERRORS
Grammar
Morphological:
1. Error in the form of words:
a. Name
b. Adjective
c. Verb
d. Adverb
e. Pronoun
f. Article
2. Using a formal category over another
3. Agreement
a. Noun phrase
b. Verb phrase
c. L1 Influence
Syntax:
1. Internal structure of sentence phrases
a. Noun phrase
109
a.1. Articles
a.2. Excess elements
a.3. Poverty of elements
a.4. Wrong order
a.5. Excessive use of the preposition of
a.6. Lack of use of the Saxon genitive
b. Verb phrase
b.1. Using incorrect tense
b.2. Using modal verb
b.3. Using incorrect verbal preposition
b.4. Use active / passive
b.5. Omission of the verb
b.6. Confusion between gerund, participle and infinitive
c. Adverbial phrase
c.1. Wrong location
c.2. Incorrect internal order
c.3. Using the wrong preposition
c.4. Omission of elements
c.5. Confusion between the adverbs
c.6. Excess elements
2. Internal structure of subordinate clauses
110
a. For use superfluous
b. By default
c. Wrong location in the sentence
3. Connecting sentence
a. Coordination
b. Subordination
Lexical
1. Formal (confusion between two similar words for the ENN)
2. Training erroneous words
a. Invention of the word
b. Loanword (literal word of L1)
c. Adaptation of words in the L1 to L2
d. Calco language
3. Lexical distortions by
a. Omission
b. Overload lyrics
c. Disorder in the word
d. Choosing a word similar to another
4. Use of a word with a meaning base instead of a more specific
5. Misplacement with another word (collocations)
6. Use of a word rather than another by confusion of meaning
111
Cohesion in prayer
a. Conjunctions
b. Duplication
c. Improper start of the sentence
d. Lack of structure in the sentence
e. Incorrect structure for L1 influence
f. Misunderstanding sentence structural deficiency
g. Excessive use of passive voice
h. Too rhetorical expressions
i. Lack of elements in the sentence
j. Stylistic variations of linguistic correction
k. Informal expressions
Once the errors identified and classified in groups 1 and 2 of the corpus, spent
to identify variations between group 3 and 4 of corpus, ie, between the productions in
scientific and technical English produced by the AT and NNS. The percentage model
and statistical analysis was the most suited to results and hypotheses that would be
achieved in this category, so the initial approach was to decide if they wanted to keep
the computer processing documents or globally address the information provided.
Given the objectives sought, the procedure chosen was to deal with a program
appropriate computer data extracted from the corpus.
Although he had chosen this type of treatment for the texts, the analysis Man
was unavoidable in some respects, as in the processing programs automatic now,
there are still some restrictions that prevent having all variables that are desired.
Human analysis was the most comfortable, not by the task implied, that was great in
this case, but because you could start at any analysis time, without preparing the
112
corpus. But on the other hand, this research delay greatly, and the possibility of
errors would be higher, given the great work he represented. The automatic analysis,
in turn, divided into two groups depending on the results who wanted to remove,
statistical analysis and linguistic analysis. Analysis statistics gave us the frequency of
occurrence of a word or group of words, ie, phrases, a fact that would be useful to
compare the uses certain structures in the technical literature by labeling, thus could
observe the changes that occurred between group 3 and group 4 our corpus.
However, it needed to do a linguistic analysis of certain aspects we could not refine
the software, such as the use of certain expressions, the importance of conjunctions
and expressions of modality, and as the features denoting the structural interference
of the mother tongue.
Develop a template for the classification and identification of variations, was
more complex than in the case of errors, since it could not be found referrals or
divisions proposed to classify the distinguishing features between written productions
of the EN and ENN. Given this lack of ratings on the variations of a language
productions made by writers with different native languages, were considered as
benchmark studies that dealt on L2 learning and the contrast between two
languages, as well as intrinsic characteristics that were of significance to scientifictechnical language to English (Cook, 1989, Ellis, 1985, 1994, 1997; Fisiak, 1990;
Davies, 1995; Connor, 1996, 2001; Cmejrkova and Danes, 1997; Cohen, 1998;
Alcaraz, 2000). The template was developed presented below, but have joined the
parties identified in the corpus separately:
GRAMMATICAL CHANGES
Noun phrase
a. N3
b. A + N2
c. A2 + N
113
d. N4
e. A + N3
f. A2 + N2
g. A3 + N
h. N5
i. A + N4
j. A2 + N3
k. A3 + N2
l. A4 + N
m. N6
n. N + 'OF'
or. Articles (A / AN / THE)
Verb phrase
a. Tenses
a.1. Simple Present
a.2. Present Continuous
a.3. Simple Past
a.4. Past Continuous
a.5. Present Perfect
a.6. Past Perfect
a.7. Future
114
b. Modals
c. V +-ing
d. Passive
e. V + preposition
18 We used the 'WordSmith' for this purpose.
19 We used the 'TextWorks', developed by the research group of the ACIA Project
Language Department of the UPV. (Http://www.upv.es/idiomas)
Other structural variations
a. Abbreviations used
b. Phrases on
c. Conditional sentences
d. Prepositions
TEXTUAL VARIATIONS IN STATISTICS
a. Number of total words in the corpus
b. Number of words repeated in the corpus
c. Number of sentences in the corpus
d. Average number of words per sentence
e. Number of paragraphs
f. Average words per paragraph
115
Using this template, were classified all occurrences of each of the features
which are considered relevant for the identification of variations, by Textworks the
software.
Once the identification, classification, and observed frequency material we had
collected for our study, we proceeded to the description detailed in the chapter of
results of this analysis, both in the category of errors and in the variations. We
estimated the frequency and to describe the cases from the morphosyntactic level,
and then from the lexical level, to end cohesion cases sentence. He commented on
the incidents that had observed to extract data from the corpus, grouped in different
phrases to reach conclusions more in line with our objectives. Within the level
grammar, it encompassed the morphological and syntactic errors found in noun
phrases, the verbal and adverbials, as in the gap in the sentence connection. At the
lexical level, the results were grouped according cause or reason for being, as the
errors were caused by the interference of the L1, the misspelling and incorrect choice
of a word. At the level of the sentence cohesion, we pooled the different categories
set in the template, distinguishing conjunctions, the disorder of sentence structure
and the influence of the L1. Although the classification of the results focused with a
view microlingüística contrastive, ie grammatical levels, interpretation of errors are
made from a macrolingüística, or by a pragmatic interpretation.
Regarding the category of variation, the results obtained and classified
through the template were grouped in different phrases, to thereby define the part of
the sentence that needs more attention in the writing, and in the variations of
cohesion and modality. The causes of these variations interpreted from the
pragmatic, taking into account the influence of the L1 or excessive use of L2, ie, the
rules of a typical learning acquired language that leaves the writer to act freely, but
feels mediated by every standard taught in their stage of learning, self as guided.
In each of the groups by analysis of results were performed inferential
statistics to determine if significant results were extracted (Hatch and Farhady, 1982:
p,108; Biber, Conrad and Reppen, 1998: p, 275). Analysis was applied bivariate
statistical descriptive and explanatory purposes of the sample, χ2 (chi square), to
116
determine possible relationships between variables influence of L1 or L2, as well as
showing the significance of their percentages. Same treatment was applied to all
variables, since results were prepared by way of percentages. Were obtained from
tables contingency showing the joint distribution of two variables in frequencies, ie,
the double variate analysis. These tables crossed the types of errors with the
situation the error in the sentence, and the types of changes to the site and the
variables cohesion and modality. A level of confidence of 95%, so for χ2 a given
probability level less than 0.05 (P> 0.05) indicates that statistically significant
differences between the proportions compared.
The study was completed with the calculation of relative risk or ratio of
probability of cases of a particular type of error and the likelihood of cases of other
error type taken as reference. The calculation of relative risk (test used usually in
epidemiological studies) to quantify the importance on each type of error. Also shows
the confidence intervals for each measure, indicating the difference between the
minimum and maximum magnitude of the expected results for a confidence level of
95%. For comparison of the frequency observed in the cases found, was used Epi
Info statistical program 620, in order to know the relevance of percentages removed
and their meaning, extrapolating these results to others. Following the exposure of
the third step of the study went to the explanation in chapter of conclusions, errors
and varieties were detected in the analysis, contrasting or statements reaffirming the
findings outlined by other authors. The explanation of the results of errors and
changes served to determine a specific type within the scientific-technical English
and to determine its causes.
Likewise, also justified or denied by data, statements about the characteristics
of scientific and technical writing made by several authors. Likewise, also contributed
features on errors or variations in the language they had not considered before, since
the perspective of the contrast between two productions of the same language as the
use of conjunctions or expressions of modality.
Epi Info 6 (1994) is a computer program designed by the Center for Disease
Control and Prevention. Atlanta: Georgia.
117
V. RESULTS
In order to present consistent results, with respect to approach analysis was
performed firstly detailing the frequency and statistical errors that were detected in
the scientific and technical writing made by non-native writers. This exposure results
are divided into the frequencies found in the grammatical, vocabulary and sentence
cohesion, because the mastery of these three areas covered by the vast majority of
errors made by ENN. Secondly, the cases are presented that were present and the
frequency and thus the statistical analysis of changes that had found in the
productions of ENN and EN in the scientific-technical language. ItThese results
differed in the grammatical variations caused by reasons, for the lack of cohesion or
defects in the embodiment, thereby combining a macrolingüística microlingüística
perspective and to provide more data to the interpretation of results.
Furthermore, we compared the results at different levels of phrases to get an
overview of all cases found. With this, the Results are arranged in a more easily
interpretable and established a link between the findings and results.
1. CLASSIFICATION AND FREQUENCY OF THE MOST COMMON ERRORS
IN THE SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL WRITING MADE BY NO NATIVE WRITERS
(ENN)
The results of the analysis and categorization always grammatical errors have
been an area of interest from the perspective of the IPA, and that provide insight
certain strategies for improving the production of an L2. Provide some knowledge
helpful to approach the teaching of English scientific-technical, for example, the
development of materials according to the most complex structures or problematic.
However, the types of error analysis have been followed up far have been generally
quite different, so it really has not been traced a path that followed in the identification
118
of errors in the writing, but contributions to this field of research have been in some
cases focused on a theoretical as well as their overall ranking (Ellis, 1994; 1997,
James, 1998). In other research, the corpus was contributed little or dispersed
(Webber, 1993), so it lost its rigor or credibility and its effectiveness in area of
research. This analysis gave special importance to the body that used, as well as to
data extracted from it.
Table 1 shows the data of the corpus used, with which differences were
observed between the two versions of the same production. It was the same texts,
original articles written by the NNS and the already corrected by specialists, but
however, the following data were noted respect to sentences, vocabulary and
paragraphs:
AWARDS
FREQUENCY
FREQUENCY
SENTENCE
ORIGINAL (%)
CORRECTED
(%)
DATA
110 154 (50.37%)
Words are in the corpus
108
535
(49.63%)
Word List
8110 (51.68%)
7,583 (48.32%)
Number of phrases
5468 (50.24%)
5416 (49.76%)
Average words per sentence
20.1 (50.01%)
20.0 (49.99%)
1755 (50.78%)
1701 (49.22%)
STATISTICAL Number of paragraphs
Number
of
phrases
in
the 3.1 (49.63%)
3.2 (49.37%)
paragraph
Table 1. Statistical data items included in the corpus of texts and corrected ENN
original.
119
There were differences in the frequencies found in the word lists corpus when
compared the original and the corrected version of the same articles. The number of
words was higher in the original texts, contrary to what might be expected, as is
traditionally attributed poor command of vocabulary to ENN, although it is true that
writers Latinos have a tendency to load lexical productions and the profile of the
producers of the corpus is an advanced level of English. The number of sentences
was similar in both groups, although the text original was a slightly higher number,
made more predictable by fellow number of words in that group. The number of
paragraphs also varied between the two categories, although the variation was
minimal, a fact expected, since the texts analyzed were the same and the differences
that were detected were due to the corrections and therefore modifying the original
text. From a global perspective, comparing the two categories, we observed that the
correction group of the original texts eliminated a series of words and reduced the
number of phrases. Therefore, after correction, there had been fewer paragraphs in
the total corpus of texts corrected.
After the manual recount of the errors in the original written productions
observed a total of 2,940 cases were classified taking into account the distinctions
drawn by James (1998). Certain changes were made because the classification was
adapted gradually to the errors found, typical of scientific-technical language. Was
added and the lexical category on the choice of a specific word or cohesion regarding
stylistic variations make more appropriate to scientific publications. The errors found
are presented from three views, firstly, detailing the errors identified from the level
grammar, dividing the slope morphological and syntactic.
The slope localized morphological distortions suffered by a bug in the way of
the lexicon, the use or omission of a word in the phrase or inadequate matching
various elements of the sentence. On the syntactic side, we counted the anomalies
detected in noun phrases, verbal and adverbial, and the use incorrect subordinate
clauses or error in the union of the phrases from the point of view of coordination or
subordination, ie the sentence connection. Secondly, detailing the errors identified
starting from a lexicon, considering that originated from the interference of the tongue
120
mother, by a misspelling or incorrect choice of a word. Third and finally, exposed the
frequencies of errors identified due to lack of cohesion in prayer, prompted by a use
incorrect sentence links, disorder in sentence structure, poverty or Excess elements
as well as by the influence of L1 in the production of L2.
1.1. LEVEL GRAMMATICAL (morphological / syntactic)
Classification was performed taking into account errors the salient relevant to
the written production in English scientific-technical, as although basically used the
distinction of the results made by James (1998), is incorporated other features
identified as relevant in this type of genre.
Distinctions were added to the classifications that were present in the corpus
specific team which was working, since the proposal was James referring to a
specific genre, but a general field. Detailing the results identified a total of 1,743
errors, but instead follow the detailed staffing structure had been made for the count
of cases, the results obtained were grouped according to the levels, but distributing
more adequately to the findings. The level grammatical divided into the various
phrases in which errors were found in the Production of L2. Also considered the
errors inherent in the structure sentence, but which occur in different parts of speech,
without being framed a type of phrase, could not be included in any phrase and its
results treated separately.
1.1.1. Noun phrase (NP)
Noun phrases (NP) loom large in the production of scientific and technical
English language by the way they lie about nouns or adjectives with others, no
specific binding ties. This feature is even more remarkable when you consider that it
is lacking in other languages, for example, Castilian. Noun phrases have been the
subject of speculation and studied by several authors due to the characteristic shape
121
of structuring (Bartolic, 1978; Salager, 1983, 1985, Trimble, 1985, Williams, 1985;
Quirk et al., 1985; Horsella and Perez, 1991, Halliday and Martin, 1993; Newmark,
1995; Carrio Pastor and Algilaga Ila, 1999).
The results that were included in the template for the identification of cases
errors appeared more detailed noun phrases, following the criteria
tiring
morphological or syntactic. This classification was followed in the summary of the
results presented in the tables, while maintaining the criterion for grouping phrases,
in order to locate the type of errors frequently, provide an overview and identify parts
of the sentence needed more attention from the producer or author:
LEVEL
FREQUENCY
(%)
1. Error in the shape 62 (37.81%)
RISK
ON
of the words
3.32)
MORPHOLO-
2. Use of a category 34 (20.73%)
1.17
GICAL
formal
1.92)
ERROR
TYPES OF ERRORS
rather
than
(Χ2)
JICUADRADO
2.14 (1.38 - P = 0.00
(0.72- P = 0.52
another
IN SN
3. Omission or excess 39 (23.78%)
1.34
(0.83- P = 0.22
letters in a word
2.17)
4. Concordance in the 29 (17.68%)
1-
-
-
-
SN
Total
164
(100.00%)
Table 2. Morphological level of errors found in the noun phrases of English Technical
and Scientific produced by ENN.
Was observed in Table 2 that no errors were abundant in the SN
morphological and where they are produced was due to error or confusion in the form
of words, and which as shown in the statistical data is significant and occurs twice the
122
standard value. In order to calculate the relative risk and analysis of the data χ2 it
had, was awarded the lesser of all the tables the reference value, with the that is the
basis for calculating the probability (P) that does not appear in other contexts like.
The relative risk indicates the occurrences of the value we have respect to which we
have chosen as reference, in this case, the lowest number of errors and is given the
value of 1.
Within this type of error, a distinction that has not been included in the table,
considering not entirely reliable, since the type of distinction by excess or regards
default letters to a lack of such construction (24 cases) or to an oversight the author
(15 cases). However, when the results were evaluated obtained, it was considered
that such a result should consult with the author of article, made impossible because
if the anonymity with which they preferred to leave these authors from the Area of
Coordination of Foreign Languages, the center provided the Articles for this study. It
brought the number of frequencies that have that kind error, but was not considered
in discussing the division was not considered entirely accurate, since the ultimate
cause could not provide or clarify.
Below are detailed the morphological type of error that appeared in the form of
words, and that the lexicon was a factor to consider, as it causes problems Spanish
speakers. Depending on the type of speech, implied a difficulty in production of
language:
WORDS
FREQUENCY(%)
RISK ON
ERROR
Article
9 (14.52%)
1.29 (0.48-3.45)
(Χ2)
JICUADRADO
P = 0.61
IN THE
name
31 (50.00%)
4.43 (1.95-10.05)
P = 0.00
FORM OF
Adjective
15 (24.19%)
2.14 (0.87-5.25)
P = 0.08
WORDS
Pronoun
7 (11.29%)
1-
-
Total
62 (100.00%)
-
-
Table 3. Detailed errors forms of words.
Depending on the word and its place within the production, carried a
complexity that the author must assume, and therefore control. In the results
123
extracted, the name is the type of word that meant more difficulty in producing of its
form, and data were statistically significant, followed by the adjective. The use of
pronouns and articles brought to incur fewer errors, but this fact was also facilitated
by the small variation that had within the production. Were then exposed the errors of
noun phrases, but starting from the syntactic level:
TYPES
ERRORS
ERROR
1. Articles
OF LEVEL
FREQUENCY
(%)
324 (53.73%)
RISK
ON
10.13
(Χ2)
JICUADRADO
(7.05- P = 0.00
14.54)
SYNTACTIC
2.
Excess 32 (5.31%)
1-
-
elements
IN SN
3. Poverty of 54 (8.95%)
1.69
items
2.61)
4.
Wrong 82 (13.60%)
2.56
Order
3.85)
5.
2.09
Excessive 67 (11.11%)
use of
(1.09- P = 0.17
(1.71- P = 0.00
(1.38- P = 0.00
3.19)
preposition of
6. Lack of use 44 (7.30%)
1.38
of
2.17)
(0.87- P = 0.16
Saxon genitive
Total
603 (100.00%)
-
-
Table 4. Errors found in noun phrases in scientific-technical English ENN from a
syntactic level.
It was clear that the most frequent type of error was due to misuse articles,
followed by the wrong order of words in the phrase nominal critical factor in such
124
structures. Also served to highlight the use bad was made in the use of the structure
instead of the preposition using a complex nominal structure.
With all this, the total errors in the SN due to grammatical reasons, was 764
cases. It was clear that here were a much larger number of cases due to incorrect NS
structure to the inappropriate words. In order to appreciate more clearly the
percentage of each of the errors committed in the SN in total, all exposed as a graph:
Lack of use of the
Saxon genitive
6%
Excessive use "of"
9%
Percentage of errors
Error in the form
7%
5%
Agreement
4%
Wrong order
11%
Poverty of
elements
7%
Formal category
rather than
another
4%
Omission
or excess
Articles
43%
Excess elements
4%
Figure 6. Percentages of errors made by ENN in SN from a grammatical level
Most errors were due to misuse of the items, followed by the wrong order of
words in the SN. In the legend of the graph, the four causes of error were at first were
those with morphological origin, the remainder being due to those causes mistakes
syntactic. As mentioned above, causes syntactical errors were the most common and
frequent in the noun phrase, since there are certain elements, such as article, not
deepen the learning of the ENN L2, a fact that affects a large number of errors in
their production. Another of the phrases that carries an important part of the meaning
of written production is the verb phrase, so it can be complicated by various causes.
He explained the different results found and the most outstanding in a separate
paragraph to highlight the most notable.
125
1.1.2. Verb phrase (SV)
The verb phrase (SV) is a vital part of the sentence, as it provides a temporary
concrete meaning and the rest of the words that appear, so a error in this part of the
sentence, can lead to total confusion of action or concept time to be transmitted. As
in the previous section, were counted and rated frequencies from the perspective of
scientific-technical language, whereas those more complex features such genus and
therefore ENN hauled errors more common. Also exhibited by separate the
frequencies found from a morphological and syntactic level, as This is contrasted with
the global results of the frequencies within found, when comparing the same charges
in clusters of SN and SV:
LEVEL
ERROR
TYPES
ERRORS
OF FRCUENCIAS RISK ON
(%)
1. Error in the form 25 (28.40%)
6.25
of
17.95)
(Χ2)
JICUADRADO
(2.18- P = 0.00
verbs
MORPHOLOGI
2. Concordance of
CAL
verb phrase
IN SV
3. Influence of L1
59 (67.05%)
14.75
(5.36- P = 0.00
40.59)
4 (4.55%)
1
Total
88 (100.00%)
-
-
Table 5. Morphological errors made by ENN in verb phrases.
Appreciated in Table 5 that there was a majority of errors produced by a lack
of consistency within the SV, due in large part to the lack of accordance with the
subject of the sentence, verbs which makes a difference between the various people
verbally. Another type of errors made with frequency, and therefore, were also
126
significant in the error category, were those of the verb, largely due to ignorance of
the ways irregular verbs. Annex 6 located at the end of this study are listed Several
examples of the types of errors found, to determine the differences between the
various classifications. After
Morphological classification errors, the errors were
detailed syntactic were made in the verb phrases of the sentences of the corpus, and
greatly affecting the understanding of the structure and verbal phrase general.
LEVEL
TYPES OF ERRORS
LEVEL
RISK
(Χ2)
FREQUENCY
ON
JICUADRADO
(%)
ERROR
1. Use of tense incorrect
78 (25.32%)
4.33 (2.60- P = 0.00
7.23)
SYNTAX 2.
IN SV
Using
modal
verb 34 (11.05%)
1.89 (1.07- P = 0.026
wrong
3.34)
3. Use verbal preposition 24 (7.79%)
1.33 (0.72- P = 0.35
incorrect
2.45)
4. Use active / passive
81 (26.30%)
4.50 (2.70- P = 0.00
7.49)
5.
Confusion
gerund 73 (23.70%)
/participle / Infinitive
4.06 (2.42- P = 0.00
6.79)
6. Omission of the verb
18 (5.84%)
1
Total
308 (100.00%)
-
-
Table 6. Syntactic errors committed by ENN in verb phrases.
The forms that more errors caused by the lack of distinction between the various
characteristics were the active and passive verbs in sentences, as could be seen in
Table 6, a fact that was statistically significant. The ENN, in some cases, did not
distinguish between the two forms, in others, used the passive form Too many times
when the easiest way was active, and also followed the versa. A 25.32% of the errors
in the SV was caused by the confusion of the times verbal, which was a significant
127
figure and led to a serious confusion of temporality of the sentence. They also
stressed in these cases produced results by confusion between the verbal forms of
the participle, the gerund and the infinitive when you follow certain verbs. The
grammar rules that refer to this part are one of the most difficult for the developer of
L2, since they have to remember all verbs are followed by each of these verb forms
and do not coincide with the use made in the L1, which increases its complexity.
Mistakes made by ENN in the verb phrase rose to take his total to 396 cases,
and were more numerous than were due to causes syntactic to morphological, as
happened in the SN. Were collected various errors of SV as a graph so you could
see the percentage of each type of error with respect to all errors so we can define
more precisely the importance of self-possessed in the phrase:
Figure 2. Percentages of errors made by ENN in verb phrases.
As shown, the most frequent errors in the SV were produced by syntactic
reasons, among them emphasized the use of a wrong verb tense and improper use
of active or passive, followed by another common mistake, as was the failure to
distinguish between forms of the infinitive, gerund and participle. Also was quite
common in the SV total errors, lack of agreement within the same phrase, which
showed that there were gaps in knowledge grammar of the ENN that led to the
misunderstanding of the action and seasonality of production.
Another of the phrases that are affected by the errors committed in the
scientific and technical writing is the adverb, which although it has been relegated
traditionally, considering that errors incurred milder and which has no complex is also
important within the structure and meaning of the phrase, indeed observed in the
results.
128
Errors Percentage
Form of verbs
8%
Active / Passive
26%
Error in verbal
preposition
8%
Agreement
19%
Wrong tense
26%
L1 Influence
1%
Modal verb
wrong
12%
Figure 7. Percentage of errors made by ENN in phrases verbal.
1.1.3. Adverbial phrase (SA)
The adverbial phrases (SA) within the scientific-technical language the place
facts and actions that are being described in the sentence, and establish and define
the frequency and importance of research. In detailing the errors found to affect the
production of phrases adverbial in genre science and technology. We proceeded as
in paragraphs above, are presented in tables the frequencies found, along with the
percentages and statistical analysis. They were divided into two blocks to determine
clearly the two causes of error, first from the viewpoint of morphological errors, for
then focus on syntax errors and end up exposing the total percentage of errors in
graph form:
TYPES
ERRORS
OF LEVEL
RISK
(Χ2)
FREQUENCY ON
JICUADRADO
(%)
ERROR
1. Error in the 7 (31.82%)
1
form the adverb
MORPHOLO 2.. By default or 15 (68.18%)
2.14 (0.87-5.25) P = 0.087
GICA
excess of an
adverb
Total
22 (100.00%)
Table 7. Morphological errors committed by ENN in adverbial phrases.
129
As noted in Table 7, this type of phrase has few uses incorrect in shape, being
composed of elements that have less changes in the scientific-technical language,
being defined specifically by their meaning. The most frequent errors committed by
the omission or excess of a adverbial adverb in the phrase, but to have so little value
compared to total words, their relevance in the overall production was relative.
Regarding the results extracted due to syntax errors in SA, appreciated the
following:
LEVEL
TYPES OF ERRORS
LEVEL
RISK
FREQUENCY ON
(%)
1. Site incorrect
98 (29.97%)
19.60 (7.9848.12)
ERROR
2. Incorrect internal 7 (2.14%)
1.40 (0.44order
4.41)
SYNTACTIC 3.
Use
of
the 202 (61.77%) 40.40 (16.64preposition
98.06),
incorrect
4. Omission of the 15 (4.59%)
3.00 (1.09phrase
8.25)
adverbial
5. Confusion adverbs 5 (1.53%)
1
Total
327
(100.00%)
Table 8. Syntactic errors committed by the adverbial phrases in NNS
(Χ2)
JICUADRADO
P = 0.00
P = 0.56
P = 0.00
P = 0.02
-
The total errors in the adverbial phrases amounted to 349 cases.
Of these, the majority corresponded to the location of syntax errors incorrect in
the sentence or use of an inappropriate preposition. Were exposed, as in the
preceding paragraphs, all frequencies in a graph to be could clearly see the amount
and type of errors made in this phrase:
130
Percentage of mistakes in adverbial phrases
Failure SA
4%
Omission or excess
4%
Confusion ofForm of the adverb
adverbs
2%
2%
Site incorrect
28%
Use prep. incorrect
58%
Wrong order
2%
Figure 8. Mistakes made by the adverbial phrases in NNS.
As can be seen in the figure, most of the errors in the SA were due to
improper use of the preposition that was used, followed by the wrong location in the
sentence, a fact related to the influence of L1 to L2 production.
For an overview of the frequencies, contrasted the total number, and the
percentage of errors that appeared in each of the phrases in graphically, in order to
assess the importance of each in understanding and grammatical expression of
sentence structures:
Was seen in the graph there was a noticeably higher number of cases, ie,
errors in noun phrases in the other phrases. One of the causes that are alleged in
this incident was the influence of L1 in the writing, although it is also contemplated
that noun phrases are more common in prayers, but the possible reasons and
reasons were discussed more deeply in the next chapter.
The results presented below are related to a number of features that
influenced largely written in the scientific and technical production, but not included in
the various phrases discussed above as being the result of errors affecting the
131
internal cohesion of the sentence. However, they are not contemplated as part of
cohesion, since the nature of these errors were grammar. They are called deficiency
errors in grammatical connection.
900
800
767
700
600
500
396
400
349
300
200
100
0
Singtama nominal
singtagma verbal
singtama adverbial
Serie 1
Figure 9. NNS errors caused by various phrases in Scientific and Technical articles.
1.1.4. Connecting sentence
This type of errors made by the Scientific and Technical Articles ENN, was the
last to be looked at within the grammatical level. It encompassed as errors committed
by those disconnect character sentence syntactic which referred to coordinate and
subordinate sentences, both to its internal structure and their links. It was measured
in this section the errors affecting the syntactic structure of the sentence and the
internal cohesion of the latter through the connection sentence. The morphological
agreement was not included in these results, since the center of this section was set
at the syntactic aspect and internal cohesion of the prayer and parts thereof:
132
LEVEL
TYPES OF ERRORS
SYNTAC-
1.
TIC
sentences subordinate.
Internal
LEVEL
FREQUENCY
(%)
of 26 (11.25%)
structure
8 (3.46%)
12 (0.60-6.64)
(Χ2)
JICUADRADO
-
1
P = 0.24
RISK
ON
Total By use of redundant 4 (1.73%)
3.50
ERRORS
elements
10.63)
IN
By default elements
Wrong
14 (6.06%)
location
in
(1.15- P = 0.18
the
sentence
THE
2. Error in the joining of the 205 (88.75%)
7.88
CONNECT
parts of the sentence. Total
20 (8.66%)
11.84)
-
ION
Coordination
185 (80.09%)
1
P = 0.00
Subordination
9.25
(5.25- P = 0.00
(5.84-
14.65)
Total
231 (100.00%)
-
Table 9. Syntax errors due to lack of connection in the sentence.
The identification of such mistakes was crucial to determine the factors
improper influencing the production of L2, since not only with the knowledge
grammatical rules of production is done properly. Knowing the type of sentence
subordinate and the type of use involved is also essential for production correct. As
was noted in Table 9, the most frequent types of errors, and statistically significant,
found in this group was that of subordination, because wrong choice of the link of
subordination or the composition of a subordination in the sentence where it was not
necessary. The cases were highlighted more That those, both as a relative pronoun
as a link of subordination, with 114 cases Which followed with 36 cases and when to,
with 11 cases. The remaining errors were mostly caused by the confusion of
133
pronouns or links within the subordinate clauses, examples of which can be seen in
Annex 5.
To end the presentation of the results of the frequencies of the level grammar,
have been compared the results found in all groups referred to thus see clearly the
most frequent errors in written production of scientific and technical English:
noun phrase
767
verb phrase
396
adverbial phrase
349
oral Connections
231
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Figure 10. Comparison of different errors at the grammatical level.
There were more errors in the noun phrase in the other groups of sentence, a
fact largely caused by misuse of the article. Without but the sentence connection was
the cause that gave rise to fewer errors in the sentence, since there is usually a
subordinate sentence by sentence, which limited their frequency. Then, continuing
with the scheme laid out in the workforce of the results, we exposed the errors found
within the lexical level, ingredient also crucial to achieve correct production in
scientific and technical writing.
1.2. Lexical
The vocabulary used in the corpus of this study was scientific-technical and
therefore, very concise and focused, by referring also to an academic context. Not is
known by the common speaker, but is addressing a very specific, of scientific
134
research. Its purpose is to communicate to other groups researchers, so that its
choice of words is very accurate and time, words chosen should make clear its
meaning, as some results of some research requires an explanation for better
understanding. Therefore, the characteristics or differences were found which differ
may be found in corpus other more general factor taken into account in developing
the various divisions of a total of 577 lexical errors found, which were exposed as
causes that originated the error.
1.2.1. Interference of mother tongue (L1)
One of the most common causes of error lexicon is the interference of the L1,
and that the mental structure and word formation, has an established pattern from the
first language spoken, so the common trend is to copy the pattern in all other
linguistic expressions that you make. Were pooled frequencies, as was done at the
grammatical level, to make a brief and concise exposition of the results in the
production of scientific and technical texts, as shown in Table 10:
LEVEL
ERRORS
LEXICONS
BY
TYPES OF ERRORS
(Χ2)
JICUADRADO
LEVEL
FREQUENCY
(%)
1.
Formal
error 102 (55.74%)
confusion in words
similar to the ENN
2. Training erroneous 81 (44.26)
words
RISK
ON
1
-
Total
-
-
1.26
(0.94- P = 0.11
1.68)
INFLUENCE
THE L1
183
(100.00%)
Table 10. Lexical errors committed by the ENN due to the influence of L1.
There was a higher incidence of errors caused by confusion Formal of words,
ie words that are confused because the NNS in their L1 does not exist or not
differentiated. Also significant is the way they were written words improperly, and
therefore inferred in a misunderstanding of message that the writer wanted to
135
transmit. Therefore, detailed the result obtained the formation of words, to determine
more precisely the cause of this incorrect production:
TRAINING CAUSES
FREQUENCY
(%)
13 (7.10%)
RISK
ON
1
(Χ2)
JICUADRADO
-
WRONG
Loan linguistic
OF
Adaptation of words in 15 (8.20%)
1.17 (0.55- P = 0.70
WORDS
the L1a words that do
2.42)
not exist in L2
Calco linguistic
53 (28.96%)
4.08 (2.22- P = 0.00
7.47)
Total
81 (44.26%)
-
-
Table 11. Causes of the formations of the wrong words.
The percentages of these results were calculated considering the total results
in Table 10, since these were the results of a part of the total encountered. It was to
highlight the data that is used almost 29% of templating language, ie L1 greatly
influenced in the choice of words of the texts. However, loan words or adaptation of
the L1 words that there are errors in the L2 slightly appeared and were not, therefore,
statistically significant in the overall error under the influence of L1. The
classifications are provided in each of the clusters can be seen in Annex 5 of this
study, which shows examples of different types of the errors.
1.2.2. Misspelling
Another source of lexical error was the misspelling of certain words or lexical
distortions, as he calls James (1998), which were due to various causes and that
were classified as explained below:
136
LEVEL
TYPES OF ERRORS
LEVEL
FREQUENCY
(%)
1. Omission of any part 11 (6.21%)
5.50 (1.22-24.81)
(Χ2)
JICUADRADO
P = 0.01
1.50 (0.25-8.97)
P = 0.65
1
-
RISK
ON
of word
LEXICAL
2. Overload of letters in 3 (1.69%)
the word
DISTORTI
3. Disorder in the word
2 (1.14%)
ONS
4. Choosing a word with 161 (90.96%)
80.50
a similar meaning to
324.55)
(19.97- P = 0.00
other
Total 177
(100.00%)
-
-
Table 12. Errors caused by distortions in the production of lexical ENN.
Table 12 shows that most of the frequencies were due to choice of a word
when in fact they wanted to choose another, whose group is followed with far fewer
cases, and therefore is not statistically significant, the omission of any part of the
word. Two other sources of errors obtained very little significant frequencies, as
shown in the statistics. It included the wrong choice of a word that can confuse the
meaning, but not under the influence of L1, as we noted in the previous section, but
because the ENN the meaning associated by using a sense to each other by being
quite similar, and he wrote one instead of writing another. Annex 5 located at the end
This study exemplified the types of errors.
1.2.3. The wrong choice of a word
If and lexical errors were noted earlier could lead to infer confusion in the
reader, the type of errors that are detailed below, contributed great way that you
could not understand the meaning of the assertions made by researchers. If the
meaning of a word is confused or used a word when it wanted to use another,
137
triggered a series of errors that confused the receptor. The division was proposed for
this type of error and thus the extracted results are detailed in Table 13:
RISK
ON
(Χ2)
JICUADRADO
1
-
2. Using a base word 120 (55.30%)
10
(5.53- P = 0.00
instead of a specific
10.09)
3. Misplacement along 32 (14.75%)
2.67
to another (collocations)
5.17)
4.
4.42
LEVEL
TYPES OF ERRORS
ERROR
1. Invention of the word
BY
CHOICE
Using
a
LEVEL
FREQUENCY
%
12 (5.53%)
word 53 (24.42%)
confusion of meaning
Total
(1.37- P = 0.00
(2.36- P = 0.00
8.26)
217 (100.00%)
-
-
Table 13. Errors by wrong choice of a word by the NNS.
There were more errors in the type of error that occurred by choosing a
general word, instead of a more specific and appropriate to the context of the article,
followed by the error due to using a word by confusion of meaning, though all
frequencies were statistically significant. The latter type of error differed from the two
types classified in the above groups, in Tables 11 and 12 which, in Table 13, the
NNS used a word because he believed that had the same value but did not appear in
form or from the point of view of the meaning, but the confusion came from a wrong
choice of word. Also observed errors due to a misplacement of a word next to each
other when which is another naturally accompanies it, if English is known as
collocations. Were presented on a graph the three results to total errors compare and
see which was the main cause of lexical errors in the Scientific - Technical
production:
138
Lexical errors
300
250
200
150
100
lexical errors
50
0
L1 influence
lexical errors
sentence
disorder
conjunctions
Graphic 11.Comparación between the different causes of lexical errors in the ENN.
The most common cause of mistakes was the wrong choice of a word in text,
followed by interference lexical similar words or translations of the L1. Here are
presented the errors caused by lack of cohesion sentence, the results were grouped
in the same manner as was done in two previous sections, to determine their causes
more accurately.
1.3. COHESION SENTENCE
In contemplating the sentence cohesion, we must surely refer to Halliday and
Hasan (1976), already established at that time clearly and precisely the points
needed to infer cohesion to a sentence or a text.
This study did not focus to study only the cohesion, and that was a part
provided all the errors committed by the NNS, but was considered a relevant aspect
in the analysis of discourse. For this reason is referred to errors caused by a lack of
cohesion, but influences on the scientific and technical production. This kind of
language is argumentative, basing its reason for being in the exhibition and
139
reasoning of certain theories that the author argues, therefore, the use of
conjunctions, or and lack of structure, of course, the influence of L1 in the writing
scientific and technical aspects were important in the specific field that is analyzed,
and for the same reason, do not we go into cohesion by reference, substitution or
ellipsis, which were considered relevant in other productions, as literary or narrative.
The English language is characterized by short sentences and a structure
relatively simple when compared with the Spanish language, which has phrases long
and dependent structures from each other. This feature of English becomes
inconvenient for speaking, since it tends to produce longer sentences and more
subordinate clauses under the influence of L1. If consider the subordinate clauses in
English scientific and technical (Radford, Atkinson, Britain, Clahsen and Spencer,
1999: p, 285) note used in a restrained and intended as held by the speaker when
the joints. They are vital in cohesion of prayer, because they create a framework in
which the author expresses his thoughts, which, in many cases act as a conductor of
discourse.
This section is considered error factors that influenced the cohesion of the
chosen production rate, and which appear in different parts of the sentence could not
be included in the previous sections. Although this section does not included all
factors that influence cohesion, which were reflected other aspects of concern for the
conclusions drawn, for a total of 620 errors found in our corpus.
1.3.1. Conjunctions
Links sentence or conjunctions, as called in this study, characterized by
complex phrases generally required, since in itself, the phrase simply does not need
this kind of words to express. But at time that a phrase that depends on another or
that links to another in a text, require the links that help make more understandable
the data being contributing, since that link the thoughts of the writer and the reader
through the path that would lead him. As well Hoey (1991: p,5), referring to the
consistency text and elements that bring coherence to it, says: "Conjunction Stands
140
on Its Own as a category, and covers the use of adjunct-like elements by writers or
speakers to mark the semantic They Perceive as holding Relationships Between the
They produce sentences." Thus, the criterion for establishing the appropriate link for
a sentence is to decide the meaning and nuance infer wish we require for certain
structures, thereby supporting the general idea of the text and the internal cohesion
of thereof.
Once past the initial level of language learning, the use of infer it conjunctions
is essential to a higher level, more fluently, the speech language. According to Gili
and Gaya (1972: p,326) or conjunctions conjunctive links are "The most visible sign
of the link extra statement “ but in this study will not consideration of cohesion, but
the sentence, we will continue with it the conception of Quirk et al. (1972: p, 521) of
conjunctions, with which the author states "[...] the connection Between Two linguistic
units", or the Swan (1995: p,142) "Conjunctions join clauses are Words That Into
sentences", ie to assess its morphosyntactic function of linguistic units link together.
In this section we pooled the errors due to incorrect use of the conjunctions by
following the documentation of Halliday and Hasan (1976: p, 242-3) as comprised the
use of conjunctions with the intention that has the producer. Not conjunctions detailed
in the sub-classifications that they establish, as the number of errors found in the
corpus was not large enough detailing all frequencies. We found a total of 85 errors
in this corpus, generally due to the use of a conjunction over another, which were
distributed so then we will detail in Table 14:
CONJUNCTIONS
FREQUENCY (%)
RISK ON
(Χ2) JI-SQUARE
1. Additive
13 (15.29%)
4.33 (1.24-15.20)
P = 0.01
2. Adversative
23 (27.06%)
7.67 (2.30-25.52)
P = 0.00
3. Causal
34 (40.00%)
11.33 (3.48-36.89)
P = 0.00
4. Temporary
12 (14.12%)
4 (1.13-1417)
P = 0.02
Inclusion of the
Conjunction
3 (3.53%)
1
-
Total
85 (100.00%)
Table 14. Conjunctions mistakes by ENN.
141
As was seen in the results in Table 14, conjunctions with more errors were the
grounds, especially by the use of so indiscriminately in scientific and technical
articles. Also, the links also accounted adversative difficulty for ENN, especially with
the use however, and as was seen in statistical results, both types of conjunctions
were significant. In Annex 5 of this study illustrate the results obtained in our corpus,
which no examples in this chapter, since the objective was to define the classification
and importance of errors in production scientific-technical ENN also included in the
classification that was not used conjunctions in the text as it was indicative of the
ignorance of some links by the NNS, however, this was the category had fewer cases
and that used as a benchmark in statistical results. The following detailed errors
affecting the cohesion also, clearly affecting the lack of understanding of the
sentence and were often Typical errors of L2 learning, not to match the structures
between the different languages.
1.3.2. Disorder in sentence structure
Textual cohesion in any language, the key factor to achieve complete
understanding on the part of listeners and readers is really communicating idea that
the reader or writer wants, becoming difficult task at times due to the incorrect
structure of the phrases in any text. This fact is accentuated in the scientific and
technical articles, since the complexity of the formulations or explanations of any
process requires that the writer respects the intrinsic order of the target language or
otherwise, the receiver does not understand the message or be obscured by
structural inadequacy.
In the results of Table 15, contemplated various aspects inciting error
sentence structure, detected when comparing group 1 and group 2 of the selected
corpus. Was considered The following features emptied into a disorder of language
production English, which caused a lack of cohesion in the phrase:
142
COHESION FAILURE
(Χ2)
JI
SQUARE
-
RISK ON
1. Duplication of elements
FREQUENCY
(%)
58 (22.05%)
2. Lack of elements in the sentence
85 (32.32%)
1.47 (1.05-2.04) P = 0.02
3. Improper start of the sentence
46 (17.49%)
1.35 (0.87-2.10) P = 0.17
4. Lack of structure in sentence
34 (12.93%)
1
5. Misunderstanding of the phrase 40 (15.21%)
1
-
1.18 (0.75-1.86) P = 0.48
lack of structure
Total
263 (100.00%) -
-
Table 15. Errors due to lack of structural cohesion in prayer committed by ENN.
As shown in Table 15, the most frequent errors committed by the NNS in
regard to cohesion within the sentence structure resulted from included or excluded a
number of elements in the sentence. With regard to the lack of elements, this was
due mostly to not properly explained the referent of a pronoun or avoided him when
they should mention it, bringing darkness to the consistency sentence. With regard to
excess elements, especially has been able to observe that the pronouns were not
used mostly properly, so the repetition of elements led to a prayer full of items that
confused the reader. Were also significant errors caused by an improper start of the
sentence, as in some cases, due to a lack of sentence structure or to the influence of
L1, but since in most cases, when contrasted that expression with that of the L1 was
not clear enough the source of the error, we chose classified in the group of structural
disorder. Was observed, however, that none of the data provided was significant
because it was greater than the maximum probability of 0.05, so these data were
extrapolated to other types of corpus, as found by chance. We calculated the
statistical data were provided taking as reference the total number of words, if the
error was related to absence or defect in the words, while it was taken as a reference
the total number sentences if the error appeared only once in every sentence. It was
noted that the table 15 showed two reference values, as in types 1 and 2 errors total
words contemplated as the total number, while the errors 3, 4 and 5 is contemplated
as the total number of corpus sentences. Below is presented the last group that was
143
misleading to the NNS in scientific and technical articles and was undoubtedly
crucial, as explained in chapter of the theoretical foundations of this study.
1.3.3. Influence of L1
In previous sections of this study emphasized the importance of the mother
tongue when a writer runs a text, so it was an unavoidable part in this paragraph of
sentence cohesion. Also included in the various ratings results where there were
certain traits that did not fit the types that had been established, so it is included as
an influence of the L1. If the writer produces any text literally translating their L1,
which is the most end and own productions with a basic level, is clearly complex
understand, because each language has its own form and structure the particular
discourse. However, in the corpus that was chosen in this study there were no such
cases so obvious, but the writer to possess a level of production through the English,
where it has looked at the interference of L1 were specific and concrete. In the table
given below, results are presented found by errors produced due to interference from
the L1. Were detected denoted as characteristics of the Spanish language and thus
differed English language, for example, disorder in the structure due to a calque
structural language, or excessive use of the impersonal way to start sentences with
the pronoun it:
TYPES OF ERRORS ON THE FREQUENCY
L1
(%)
RISK ON
(Χ2) JI
SQUARE
1. Influence of the structure L1
51.33 (16.39-160.82),
P = 0.00
2. Excess use of the form 48 (17.64%)
impersonal
3. Rhetorical expressions
39 (14.34%)
16 (4.99-51.34)
P = 0.00
13 (4.02-42.04)
P = 0.00
4.
Stylistic
variations 22 (8.09%)
proofreader
5. Informal expressions
3 (1.10%)
7.33 (2.20-24.49)
P = 0.00
1
-
6. Sentences too long
6 (2.21%)
2 (0.50-7.99)
P = 0.31
7. Total
272 (100.00%)
-
-
154 (56.62%)
Table 16. Errors caused by the interference of L1 in the NNS.
144
As shown in the results shown in Table 16, were made one high error rates
due to the influence of L1 in the sentence structure, and often the literal translation
was evident, altering the order and thus cohesion of the sentence, for any reader who
does not share the same language mother. However, the formation of long phrases,
characteristic of the tongue Spanish, did not elaborate on the NNS corpus of this
study, and is therefore not statistically significant. The cause of this error was due to
the enhanced level of L2 learning, because in practice the reading of other articles,
as its profile was not the beginners in the English language. One unique feature and
statistically significant was the use of the impersonal form with the pronoun it, which
is mostly used in situations where use a passive structure would be most appropriate,
and thus would be made more simple a phrase. Included in this group characteristics
of the errors were corrected in the text, but not really were errors in itself, but the
correction suggested a different phrase as a variation style to that provided by the
NNS. It was not lexical or grammatical errors, but affecting the cohesion and
therefore on the way of processing the text.
Here then presented a comparison between different overall results of the
three causes of errors due to lack of cohesion in a graph, with In order to determine
the total number of cases obtained:
conjunctions
sentence disorder
lexical errors
L1 influence
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Figure 12. Causes of errors in sentence cohesion of the NNS.
145
As shown in the graph, the errors caused by the disorder and sentence the
influence of L1 had a similar number of cases, although the latter cause was slightly
higher in the errors, while conjunctions possessed a distinct minority. Yet here was
taken into account that the two causes of numerous mistakes had more types of
errors that the conjunctions because there is a greater number of cases in prayer to
incur this error, because the Conjunctions are also scarce because their probability of
occurrence is also less.
To end with the results obtained by classifying errors scientific and technical
writing of NNS, showed a chart of results total obtained in the three levels studied, ie,
the grammar, vocabulary and the cohesion, so that by comparison, the discussion of
the results in the conclusions them more clear, since the difference between the
three
levels
could
be
contrasted
with
more
precision.
Grammatical
or
morphosyntactic level was the largest, and therefore, since the profile of the writers of
our corpus, indicated some gaps in learning L2. Furthermore, both the errors brought
about by the lexicon as cohesion (41%) also formed an important part of the total
frequencies, so that no cohesion sentence be disregarded, even though together to
reach the total of grammatical errors almost 60%.
Sentence
cohesion
21%
Lexical level
20%
Errors
Grammatical
level
59%
Figure 13. Percentages of errors occurring at different levels by ENN on items
scientific and technical.
146
Then, once the differences observed in the results of errors, the results were
presented which were originated by the variations.
They were seen once and there were no errors in the texts of the NNS, but still
and still continue to be subject to correction due to certain distinguishing features
respect to the native production.
2. CLASSIFICATION AND FREQUENCY OF CONTRASTIVE CHANGES IN
PRODUCTION WRITTEN SCIENTIFIC-TECHNICAL NOT MADE BY NATIVE
WRITERS (ENN) AND NATIVE WRITERS (EN)
While the previous section James (1998) provided a standard for classifying
errors were found, and from their associations, extended and adapted the features
found in our corpus, but they found references criminalize or define the variations that
exist between two types of productions the same language. These variations,
therefore, would not be classified as errors as the causes that produce them are
different. This analysis discerned if the initial errors gave way to an interlanguage in
ENN led him to commit the same types of variations that the above errors, so that the
classification performed was very similar, although their interpretation is very
different.
Therefore, this study proposed a number of features ratings or variations that
were linked to grammar, vocabulary, cohesion or mode and were the result of
different ways of expressing a language increasingly converted into a universal
heritage. Through the analysis of 100 scientific-technical articles from different areas,
cases were marked variations Hispanic farmers make about the natives. Through
these results achieved a classification of these traits that have enabled an overview
of the different variations that exist.
147
2.1. STATISTICAL DATA FOR CHANGES
The statistical variations that were extracted were first preamble of the results
obtained in the rest of the sentence structures, such as are shown in Table 17, since
it was considered appropriate to display a table comparative differences noted
between different parts of the text of the two types of productions, and then discuss
them in the next chapter. As statistical variations are contemplated data concerning a
number of general characteristics of the texts, which provided an overview of the
corpus with the that was counted in this study, as was done with errors, and that
extracted results presented in tables.
DATA STATISTICAL
SENTENCE
FREQUENCY
ENN (%)
FREQUENCY
AS A%
184,357 (47.11%)
206,907 (52.89%)
List of words
10,590 (45.43%)
12,716 (54.57%)
Number of phrases
9017 (50.00%)
9017 (50.00%)
per 20.44 (46.11%)
22.94 (53.89%)
VARIATIONS Words in the
corpus
STATISTICS
Average
words
sentence
Number of paragraphs
Number
of
words
1145 (55.51%)
in 161.29 (41.58%)
916 (44.49%)
225.88 (58.12%)
paragraph
Table 17. Statistical data items included in the corpus of the EN and ENN.
As shown in Table 17, there was a greater number of words in the articles of
the AT despite having an equal number of sentences, which marked all the results
could be seen in the corpus. It was noted that the NNS write articles with a greater
number of paragraphs that the EN, which is why there were fewer cases of words in
each paragraph NNS that IN, as the greater the number of paragraphs, the total
words in the corpus are distributed more.
148
The number of phrases which are counted in the corpus was the same in both
groups, as the outlook for the counting of the frequencies was made according to the
number of phrases, so that an imbalance in the number of words would lead to a
inadequacy of the chosen corpus. An event highlight was the length of sentences the
NNS, that despite the trend observed in the writers who possess a writing lower level
and therefore run longer phrases, sentences of Articles prepared for publication were
shorter than those of even EN, by so the trend given to traditional Hispanic writers to
write in sentences longer in production in other languages, was not evident in this
corpus.
Were then exposed variations related to the level grammar, the consistency
and the modality to delineate the differences in use that existed between the two
groups of writers of scientific and technical texts.
2.2. GRAMMATICAL CHANGES
Grammatical variations are contemplated as the results found in the structure
and form of the noun phrase and verb phrase, and in this way, to know the changes
on the twin pillars of prayer, which were the two main sources of errors. We studied
two types of variations to understand that traditionally have more weight and
importance of prayer, and in this form, link to the type of errors detected, and thereby
ascertain whether the same groups in which errors were committed are those who
possessed more variations. A then will be detailed on the findings of these two
phrases sentence.
2.2.1. Variations in the noun phrase
The importance of the noun phrase has been observed in other of this
research, so do not expose this issue again, but it is would like to emphasize the
149
structural difference of this phrase in regard to the Spanish language and English. As
a result, as our aim was to discern the variations in the use of SN between EN and
ENN, we analyzed the data found in the construction of compound noun phrases
rather than the simple, because these former that supposed to provoke a greater
variation between products of the two groups of authors. It also took into account that
these structures existed in the L1, so our initial hypothesis was that changes would
be expected Initial to produce these structures as foreign to their way of native
production. Below are detailed the results found among the 50 items written by native
authors and 50 articles written by non-native writers the use of the noun phrase,
which carries a burden of considerable significance within the text. With these results,
showed the most common patterns positioning of the SN and the differences
produced by producers different native languages.
VARIATI
ONS
IN THE
SYNTAG
MA
RATED
COMBIN
ATI-ONS
THE SN
N3
FREQUENC
Y
ENN (%)
679 (53.61%)
FREQUENC
Y
AT (%)
590 (46.49%)
A + N2
906 (49.81%)
913 (50.19%)
A2 + N
359 (53.42%)
N4
313
(46.58%)
52 (63.41%)
A + N3
126 (60.29%)
83 (39.71%)
A2 + N2
53 (45.69%)
63 (54.31%)
A3 + N
8 (44.44%)
10 (55.56%)
N5
3 (60.00%)
2 (40.00%)
A + N4
12 (80.00%)
3 (20.00%)
A2 + N3
7 (50.00%)
7 (50.00%)
A3 + N2
1 (33.33%)
2 (66.67%)
30 (36.59%)
(Χ2) JISQUA
RE
1.08 (0.98-1.18)
P
=
0.14
0.93 (0.86 to 1)
P
=
0.04
0.81 (from 0.71 to P
=
0.94)
0.00
1.62 (1.04-2.53)
P
=
0.03
1.42 (1.08-1.86)
P
=
0.01
0.79 (0.55-1.13)
P
=
0.19
0.75 (0.30-1.89)
P
=
0.53
1.40 (0.23-8.38)
P
=
0.70
3.74 (1.06-13.23)
P
=
0.02
0.93 (0.33-2.66)
P
=
0.89
0.47 (0.04-5.15)
P
=
0.52
RISK
ON
150
A4 + N
COMBIN
ATI-ONS
THE SN
N6
Total SN
0(0.00%)
1(100.00%)
FREQUENC
FREQUENC
Y
Y
ENN (%)
AT (%)
0
0
2839
2653
(51.69%)
(48.31%)
N + 'OF'
4341
5013
(46.41%)
(53.59%)
Total
21,626
23,113
Items
(48.33%)
(51.67%)
A
3965
4611
AN
(46.23%)
(53.77%)
THE
841 (48.50%) 893 (51.50%)
16,820
17,609
(48.85%)
(51.15%)
Table 18. Variations of the use of SN EN and ENN.
RISK
ON
-
(Χ2) JISQUA
RE
-
-
-
0.92 (0.88-0.95)
1.01 (0.92-1.10)
1.02 (1.01-1.03)
P
=
0.00
P
=
0.89
P
=
0.00
Respect to the values of Table 18, when expressed in percentage groups of
the EN and ENN, we calculated the percentage of total use of that structure by the
two groups, individually, at each combination of SN. Not calculated combinations in
total, ie the total composite structures a name, but the total for that scheme, as seen
when looking at the percentages. We calculated this way to compare the
percentages of use individual had been made by the two groups at each nominal
composition and included total noun phrases to distinguish if a group had used a SN
number higher than the other. In this account of the SN, were not included articles
and structures of, as was classified using these separate forms to check whether use
differed between the various producers, since they had been cause
significant
errors.
Article was included in all its forms in the recount on the grounds that, as said
before, we make many decisions regarding the article and wanted to compare their
use to discern more explicitly the variations between the two groups.
Table 18 showed that there is a different use of phrases nominal, though not in
overwhelming numbers, since few were the ratings in that their use is statistically
significant (ie, P less than 0.05). Yes There were some that were significant
variations between the two productions, as If the adjective was followed by two
151
names, two name adjectives, four name and an adjective followed by three names.
The two groups shared a trait, with increasing the number of names on the sign,
down the number of cases. In regard to the nominal composition pure (only names)
of SN the NNS used more this type of structure as EN. This case is quite curious,
given that these structures Castilian does not exist, so the authors have been overly
influenced by their L2 learning and their structural conditions, a fact also confirmed
that the NNS used more compounds that SN IN. However, the IN used more
structures with preposition of and not bowed both by the use of compounds SN. This
impacted in a simplified and less darkening of the structures by IN, while the NNS
were inclined to the opposite process, using structures more semantic load in
production.
Regarding the use of adjectives within the SN, there was a greater use of a
initial adjective within the structure (A + B. ..) by ENN, but when increased the
number of adjectives within the NP preceding the name, the AT used these phrases
more often. This feature is regarded as L1 influence, since in Castilian not perform
these types of structures several adjectives together, without any connection or
typographical sign.
Here are presented the results found in what concerned the verb phrase, part
also important and that was the cause of several errors in the NNS, as noted above.
2.2.2. Variations in the verb phrase
Regarding the verb phrase, the trait that most worries the ENN are the times
verbal to be of use when writing a scientific-technical and other structures that induce
errors and grammatical reasoning serving complex or not always regular, so that
were included in order to observe the variations that could be obtained.
He then outlined the case of the verb phrase, which first divided the results in
different English tenses and then exposed other structures related to the verb phrase
152
that highlighted by the oscillation in use. Thereby observed variations arising when
using a type of verbal form or another.
FORMS
THE SV
Simple Present
Present
(Χ2) JISQUA
RE
0.95 (from 0.91 P
=
FREQUENC
Y
ENN (%)
3034
FREQUENC
Y
AS A%
3324
RISK
ON
(47.71%)
(52.29%)
to 0.99)
0.01
34 (58.62%)
24 (41.38%)
1.48 (0.88-2.49)
P
continuous
VARIATIO
=
0.14
Simple Past
NS
Past continuous
5145
5359
(48.98%)
(51.02%)
5 (35.71%)
9 (64.29%)
1 (0.98-1.03)
P
=
0.93
0.58 (0.19-1.73)
P
=
0.32
IN THE
Present perfect
40 (42.55%)
54 (57.45%)
0.77 (0.51-1.16)
P
=0.21
Past perfect
1 (11.11%)
8 (88.89%)
0.13 (0.02-1.04)
P
=
0.02
VERBAL
Future
Total
424
275
(60.65%)
(39.35%)
time 8683
9,053
1.61 (1.39-1.87)
P
0.00
-
-
-
-
-
-
verbal
(48.95%)
(52.83%)
Modal Verb
1769
1497
(54.16%)
(45.84%)
248
323
(43.43%)
(56.57%)
V +-ing -
30 (66.67%)
15 (33.33%)
-
-
V + preposition
306 (31.9%)
372
-
-
V. Passive -
=
(37.81%)
Table 19. Variations of the use of SV EN and ENN. Phrase
153
It was obvious, looking at Table 19, the most used tenses the EN and ENN
were present and simple past, with the use made by the two very similar groups,
since differences were not statistically significant, although AT tenses used more
than the NNS, if consider the total number of tenses. However, note that it was used
more than twice times the future by the IN ENN, fact that was statistically significant,
as were the data obtained in this simple and the present perfect, so clearly observed
differences in use between the two. The relative risk showed us the more times you
used a tense relation to which reference was made, and if the difference was greater
than 1, was considered a case that was repeated in other corpus, or it had exceeded
and became an example.
Modal verbs used them over the NNS that IN, although only 10% more. By
contrast, the most frequently used IN the passive form, 13% more than ENN. We
included the verbs followed by-ing form because the category of errors was observed
to have certain problems with regard to distinguish that kind of orally followed a verb.
Using this type of verbal form was just the double in ENN than in the EN, rather
curious case, since we observed no dominated this type of structure.
Since it was found that modal verbs, apart from the meaning and influence
nuances that the author wants to infer the text, also influence the consistency and
sentence modality are presented in a separate table of frequencies observed in our
corpus, since it helped establish the type of changes found in our corpus and what
shades you wanted to inflict on the sentences in conclusions of this study.
FREQUENCY
ENN (%)
FREQUENCY
CAN
/ 877 (59.82%)
BE ABLE 78 (76.47%
COULD
166 (48.82%)
589 (40.18%)
24 (23.53%)
174 (51.18%)
MAY
181 (39.69%)
275 (60.31%)
MIGHT
13 (24.07%)
41 (75.93%)
MUST
213 (62.64%)
127 (37.36%)
MODAL
VERBS
CHANGES
IN
MODAL
AT (%)
(Χ2)
JICUADRADO
1.26 (1.16-1.36)
P = 0.00
2.75 (1.75-4.32)
P = 0.00
0.81 (0.66 to P = 0.03
0.99)
0.56 (0.47 to P = 0.00
0.66)
0.27 (0.14 to P = 0.00
0.50)
1.42 (1.15-1.75)
P = 0.00
RISK ON
154
VERBS
NEED
90 (38.96%)
141 (61.04%)
0.54 (0.42 to P = 0.00
0.70)
SHOULD 151 (54.51%)
126 (45.49%)
1.01 (0.81-1.27)
P = 0.90
TOTAL
1769 (54.16%) 1497 (45.84%) Table 20. Variations in the use of modal verbs and EN made by ENN.
Modal verbs can most frequently used were followed may in the EN, whereas
in the NNS modal verbs can and most often used were must, followed by May, as
shown in Table 20. It was noted with the
results obtained after this counting
frequencies, which uses different manners were changed according to ENN
producers or AT, a fact that suggested certain nuances of manners or influences the
L1.
The information about the manners that were extracted from the corpus were
Should statistically significant except for, since differences between two groups were
not sufficiently representative to be due to chance because were lower than 0.05.
2.2.3. Variations in other sentence structures
Were also noted in the results a number of structural variations affecting the
meaning of sentences and therefore the text. Were detected changes in the use of
subordinate clauses, as well as affecting prepositions the adverbial phrases, which
were the cause of error, as noted in paragraph Previous results. We refer to this type
as structural variations, in which include results that could affect both sentence
structure and the ultimate meaning of the text as last communication entity in the
discourse writing.
VARIATIONS
STRUCTURES
Phrases of
relative
Which
Who
Whom
Whose
FREQUENC
Y ENN (%)
FREQUENC
Y AT (%)
RISK
ON
(Χ2)
572 (39.97%)
24 (22.01%)
2 (40.00%)
41 (64.06%)
235 (42.03%)
859 (60.03%)
85 (77.99%)
3 (60.00%)
23 (35.94%)
324 (57.97%)
1.06 (0.98-1.15)
0.45 (0.29-0.70)
1.06 (0.18-6.34)
2.84 (1.71-4.71)
1.15 (0.99-1.35)
P = 0.14
P = 0.00
P = 0.94
P = 0.00
P = 0.06
JISQUARE
155
SUBORDINATED
PHRAS
ES
Where
That
Why
381 (34.82%)
18 (47.36%)
713 (65.18%)
20 (52.64%)
0.85 (0.77-0.94)
1.43 (0.76-2.70)
P = 0.00
P = 0.26
Total
sentences
of relative
Phrases
conditional
If
Whether
1273
(38.57%)
2027
(61.43%)
-
-
300 (56.07%)
23 (29.87%)
235 (43.93%)
54 (70.13%)
1.14 (1.07-1.22)
0.38 (0.24-0.60)
P = 0.00
P = 0.00
Total
conditional
323 (52.77%)
289 (47.23%)
-
-
Table 21. Changes due to the relative subordinate clauses and conditional.
As noted in Table 21, while the frequency phrases relative AT (61.30%) were
almost double those of the NNS (37.70%) in conditional sentences, the use made by
the two groups was very similarly, there was only a difference of 5%. Highlighted with
respect to the frequencies phrases found in the relative, the frequencies were scarce
found with the pronoun Whom (0.15%), while the most used pronoun was which
(43.36%) in both groups of NNS and EN, feature quite logical given the profile of the
items making up the corpus. Relative to the phrases conditional, the link within the
subordination was largely if, regards trait that the way you learn the L2.
We established a list of commonly used prepositions rather than providing the
total of them, for detailed the most common and thus discern whether variations were
influenced by the L1 or the way of learning the L2. It also took into account the
possibility to check if the prepositions caused more variations were the same that
influenced the cause of errors confusion between the prepositions. Were not included
who had less than 100 cases, considering that the difference between the EN group
and the NNS was scarce and in some cases, minimum, and therefore it was decided
to consider only frequencies of the most common prepositions, as shown in Table 22.
PREPOSITIONS FREQUENCY
ENN (%)
FREQUENCY
AT (%)
156
VARIATIONs
IN THE
After
170 (65.63%)
89 (34.37%)
At
671 (40.25%)
996 (59.75%)
Between
456 (50.83%)
441 (49.17%)
By
1288 (47.17%)
1443 (52.83%)
For
1943 (43.87%)
2485 (56.13%)
In
4655 (49.45%)
4758 (50.55%)
Into
306 (53.13%)
270 (46.87%)
Of
6958 (44.60%)
8642 (55.40%)
On
1158 (51.69%)
1082 (48.31%)
189 (45.77%)
224 (54.23%)
Through
105 (33.65%)
207 (66.35%)
To
4459 (45.70%)
5296 (54.30%)
With
1597 (50.36%)
1574 (49.64%)
Within
116 (32.31%)
243 (67.69%)
Without
109 (49.10%)
113 (50.90%)
PREPOSITIONS Out
Table 22. Variations caused by the use of prepositions
No statistical data were provided prepositions, since they are not calculated
prepositions total corpus, since that was not our goal. Was preferred show the
percentages of prepositions common to have a list of the most frequently observed in
which the percentage of variation between the two groups.
Then exposed the variations between the two groups due to cohesion, more
specifically, conjunctions, as had previously been made errors.
2.3. CHANGES IN THE COHESION
He distinguished a factor in the cohesion of the sentence and therefore the
text, ie conjunctions, not including other because they do not believe so relevant in
the production of scientific and technical English by NNS. Another reason was to
observe their behavior changes after checking the percentage of errors due to
157
incorrect use of conjunctions, in order to determine if certain errors in the
interlanguage fossilize Product when it contains no errors.
Table 23 are presented the frequencies detected in conjunctions and its
different variations, following, as was done in error, the classification of Halliday and
Hasan (1976: p, 242 - 3):
CLASSIFICATION FREQUENCY
FREQUENCY
RISK
(Χ2)
CONJUNCTIONS
ENN (%)
AT (%)
ON
SQUARE
1. Additive
594 (37.57%)
987 (68.43%)
0.89 (0.81 to P = 0.00
JI-
0.96)
2. Adversative
611 (46.14%)
713 (53.86%)
1.26
(1.15- P = 0.00
1.38)
3. Causal
408 (43.45%)
531 (56.55%)
1.13
(1.01- P = 0.03
1.27)
4. Temporary
273 (34.95%)
544 (65.05%)
0.74 (0.65 to P = 0.00
0.84
Total
1886
2775
(40.52%)
(59.48%)
-
-
Table 23. Variation in the use of conjunctions by EN and ENN.
Varying the frequencies of use of the conjunctions of the NNS respect to IN.
The most common conjunctions of ENN were adversarial, followed by the additive,
while the AT, conjunctions were the most frequent additive, but were followed by
adversative, ie, were presented frequencies of the two groups in reverse order. The
total number of conjunctions in the NNS was lower than in the ON due to the L1
domain of the production process, and for the EN, is their native language and
therefore more aware of the uses and types connectors.
As in other sections, the percentage provided for each type of was conjunction
relative to each type, as shown by the sum of the percentages.
This was done because the overall proportions was not relevant in this study,
but the percentage compared between the two groups of printed, it was more.
158
2.4. VARIATIONS OF THE METHOD
Mode is a feature of the production can not be written obviate a specific study,
as is the scientific-technical language. Although objectivity attributed to this genus,
the authors fail to convey their opinion based on a series of words that are included in
the form epistemic, expressing their opinions and judgments through his productions
(Duke, 2000: p, 215). Results were reflected in those parts of speech that indicated
trial or wished to influence the reader's opinion, since the variations produced by
using those words were important to interpret the intent of the author and if they were
the result of insecurity or security as a cultural heritage or as a learning defect modal
features of the L2.
TYPES
OF FREQUENCY FREQUENCY RISK
VARIATIONS
ENN (%)
AT (%)
ON
0.96
Abbreviations
32 (44.44%)
40 (55.56%)
(Χ2) JISQUARE
P = 0.86
(0.601.53)
VARIATIONS Abbreviations
of improper
academic
language
THE
Expressions
uncertainty
0 (0.00%)
2 (100.00%)
-
957 (48.87%)
MODE
Expressions
certainty
546 (64.38%)
SENTENCE
impersonal
Form
959 (49.86%)
Words
probability or
possibility
504 (47.19%)
1001(51.13%) 1.15
(1.051.25)
302 (35.62%) 2.17
(1.892.49)
964 (50.14%) 1.19
(1.101.30)
564 (52.81%) 1.07
(0.951.21
P = 0.19
P = 0.00
P = 0.00
P = 0.00
P = 0.23
Table 24. Variations between EN and ENN on the mode of prayer.
The distinctions made in these results were the result of a selection of traits
that were related to the scientific-technical language, and therefore, it was considered
159
that their frequencies were worthy of discussion, since they were words that gave him
a turn or other text. Also, the results of Table 24 also wanted to raise as a
continuation of the distinctions made in the category of error, because our ultimate
goal was, to some extent, link errors committed in scientific and technological
production in a state of Proficiency in the L2, with the interlanguage created later
when these errors were gone. The purpose of this connection was to conclude
whether the variations and errors were values that somehow agreed in their results,
since the matches the results would result in fossilization or persistence of the error.
Examples of some variations of form and cohesion were attached to this study
in Annex 6.
Both the IN and the NNS used a similar number of frequencies in regard to the
expressions of uncertainty, and impersonal probability, while there were variations in
the words denoting certainty.
Were added to these results the abbreviations that are detected as shown in
features of informality by the producer of the sequences, and even neglect in
academic by the EN. There were significant differences in the results of almost all the
features of mode detected in the corpus, without however, the results of the
abbreviations and words denoting probability or possibility, differences in use were
not significant, since a narrow margin of cases between the two results.
We included those traits or characteristics that are more typical understood or
in some cases, improper, formal production is attributed to the type of production
chosen in this corpus. With these there was the language academic is produced by
different types of producers, which also inculcate or show their distinct cultural traits
through their expressions. In these results be added concerning the variations found
modals, which also are indicative of the mode in the text, but not included in Table 24
because they appear in Table 20, with the frequencies and variations discussed
below in the concluding section. With these latest results are presented the total
frequencies and ratingsthe corpus analyzed, both mistakes and variations were
analyzed in this study. Then it came to drawing conclusions in the last chapter, which
160
were compiled and presented the answers to the objectives raised earlier, which by
linking these approaches with results and with the theoretical foundations that were
exposed, is refuted or denied the initial thesis entitled to make cultural changes in a
lingua franca.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
The approach followed in the study was pragmatic, for the application of the
writing improved scientific and technical, since it detected a latent need of such
studies, or to help a group that frequently fail to understand the corrections to be
made or the variations alleged between his speech and that of a native writer. Key
point in this investigation interlanguage was the establishment of the writer of
scientific and technical articles, and through which conveys a message that, although
pristine errors of various kinds, seems that is never equated with conveying a native
writer.
This has been the driving force for this inquiry, which originated by a sense of
inferiority experienced by many writers to write in an L2. In reviewing a article for
international publication, the fact of belonging to a group of NNS means in many
instances, it is considered that impurities have linguistic that in certain cases, are
simply the author's own stylistic variations. Without But once he was performing the
analysis itself, there were other fields intertwined and that at any given time, they
came to become an issue until even more exciting than the first order that broke in
the initial thesis. Due to this circumstance, the analysis identified two types of
conclusions related to those errors and those related to the variations detected,
which were separated at certain times of the study, but are subsequently interlocked
with the aim of determining whether the parts of the production had more errors were
the same in which the variations detected in the interlanguage.
161
The conclusions drawn from the research were not only the result of reflection
on the results that had been removed, but were the endpoints of a research joined to
provide a practical implementation, with the theory around the current linguistic
background on the issue. Initially broke the Applied Linguistics, contemplating a
pragmatic approach to discourse analysis science and technology, as these types of
analysis are the pillars of research current language, which are located the basis of
applied research that was done in this study. Since the practical approach was also
taken into account for the study factors such as scientific and technical writing or the
importance that had the English in a technical way, since they are directly involved in
the conclusions are provided. We preferred this development of the theoretical for the
reader, along with the writer, could come naturally to the conclusions stated in this
study, as the steps followed were marked by a specialized focus on the subject, yet
comprehensive border. Then, according to the scheme used in the goals, the first
detailing the various general conclusions reached in this study, to then present the
findings and specific conclusions errors and variations.
1. GENERAL COMMENTS
In the development of general remarks followed a process rooted in discourse
analysis from a pragmatic point of view, namely the study of experience and
language as a reflection of reality, focusing on the production of language as a
dynamic process and subject to errors and variations to be detected and qualify for a
correct spelling. From this experience, identifies a series of assessments to help
understand the processes of formation, evolution and contrast the different
languages that communicate with men. Some Linguists believe that L1 is an
important factor for extracting rules to help communicate with other speakers of the
L2, as is the case Coulthard (1988: p, 178) when we said: In other words, who are
Competent speakers in one language conversationalists Appear to return to an
Earlier Stage of conversational structure are faced with When They Situations in
Which They Are grammatically and lexically incompetent. The implication of These
162
observations as we learn That is more about children's Acquisition of Their
conversational competence in first language we will gain insight Into the Further
learning and teaching of second and foreign languages. Hatch has no Doubts, "only
Discourse analysis-through can we answer the many questions That We Have About
second language acquisition. "
But others are saying (Eubank, Selinker and Sharwood Smith, 1995: p, 8;
Mauranen, 1996: p, 225) that are not fully identical L1 and L2, as that interference
from one another by influencing them in a more learning slower and more
problematic in the formation of the structures of the sentence. In contrast, the L1 itself
is useful in the acquisition of habits to produce L2, the pedagogical function of
contrastive analysis, as it often fails hand use in daily practice such as the classroom
(James, 1980: p, 141), being useful to establish some common patterns. Even
though the L1 is not used as standard in the teaching of L2, it sure helps in the
production processes and improvement of the tongue through the contrasts are
between the structure, lexical or cohesion of both. Therefore, to determine the parts
of the prayer that interfere with the production of the message to be communicated
and the causes that induce this interference, are vital to achieve proper
understanding.
Likewise, culture or society of a writer changes the production written makes
since, although production is free from errors, there are certain variations or
differences that can reject or defend as traits of the language. This statement is a fact
that has not gone unnoticed by linguists as van Dijk (2000: p, 47) when he states "[...]
as soon as members of a ethnic group or culture communicate with members of
other groups or cultures, differences in the speech can be accepted in a cooperative
and tolerant or provoke misunderstandings and conflicts, and may even lead to
domination, exclusion or oppression of the powerless. " This is particularly the case
has happened with the use of English as a medium of international communication
scientific research, as it dictates the fees imposed by the original producers of the
tongue or native, relegating to the background to Native producers. This has marked
the growing importance that possess studies being conducted to identify gaps that
163
have to produce NNS any text in an increasingly Anglophone world (Swales, 1996: p,
56). Although sometimes claim that the NNS not have a competition language
equivalent to the EN (Selinker, 1992), this study proved itself to be equals the
competition when production is reviewed sufficiently. Even in some settings to get to
beat the competition of the EN, as no relaxation occurs's own mastery of the
language, which sometimes leads in the neglect or even the use of genderinappropriate ways for not exercising so careful review.
Regarding the general conclusions based on their respective objectives,
justified, first, classification errors, and, secondly, the variations. Mistakes made by
NNS have been and are a source of several studies (Corder, 1967, 1971, 1981, Burt,
Dulay and Krashen, 1982; Ellis, 1994; van Lier, 1995, James, 1998; Carter, 1998)
and that through their detection, delimiting strategies to the optimization of
production, as well as allow improvement in written and spoken production. However,
the studies and classifications of errors made in a technical context, more
specifically, the production in scientific-technical English, are rather scarce, but still
vital to research and international scientific communication. This study counted and
classified according to the detected errors possessing location within the sentence,
typifies depending on level, ie, grammar, vocabulary and cohesion. It made such a
distinction because It was determined more precisely the production that were
committed in the errors, thus, the strategy was adopted to avoid would be more
focused on the cause of the error. Within each level, were exposed separately the
classifications made to justify and clarify the different types that had been identified,
allowing for more specific findings of the internal distinction errors found in the
various phrases and the results obtained.
Mistakes made at the grammatical level split, following the classification of
textual errors by James (1998: p,154), in its aspects traditional, the morphological
and syntactic. Respect to the morphological aspect is determined the errors caused
by confusion formal equivalency for omission or excess words in the sentence, and
so on. that have been classified according to the frequencies have been found. It was
decided to include this aspect of the grammatical level because, although the
164
morphological errors were a few, helped to discern the causes that originated and
thus more closely determine their origin. As concerning the syntactic side, we
included the errors caused by an incorrect distribution of the parties, or poverty
excess of elements, the confusion of forms, etc.. The aim pursued was define what
field were committed more errors and also, what parts of the sentence were to take
better account for possessing more complexity to the NNS.
Regarding the errors at the lexical level, were defined and classified also
following the distinctions made James (1998: p, 142), but instead what this author
suggests that distinguishes between formal and semantic errors in this study called
lexical errors, and included the most important aspects in written production. Were
grouped on one level, as was done if the classification of formal and semantic errors
given by James, was needed in some cases the collaboration of the NNS, which was
not possible in this study. So same, thus the data were simplified in the results and
errors contributed Tailor-made productions lexical incorrect.
The findings of the lexical level of errors was divided to define more precisely
the specific causes that led to the choice of a wrong word. Therefore, instead be
effected in the same division as the level grammar, we took into account a pragmatic
point of view and classified according to which causes errors due, that is, the L1, an
incorrect write and selection a word wrong. Included other types of errors other than
those proposed James, for being a specific corpus, to thereby be able to determine
precisely the type of errors that were detected.
Finally, it is contemplated cohesion errors sentence, since they are essential
for understanding and coherence of the sentence and thus the text. Although not
there were errors in the two previous levels, an error in cohesion could lead to the
misunderstanding of production, so its inclusion is justified. His domain is essential
for the production written (Halliday and Hasan, 1976) therefore considered several
factors conducive to error in a specific genre like our analysis. Included in this level
the use of conjunctions, the disorder in sentence structure and the influence of L1.
165
James (1998: p, 161), in this regard, identifies errors which are produced by a
lack of coherence, but does not classify those produced by cohesion. Without
however, included this type of misclassification has been made because often cause
misinterpretation of the text sequence. It understood that the coherence of a text is
determined by the level of perfection cohesion, which is why it has been preferred to
point in this type of errors eventually result in the consistent production.
As we examined the corpus under study were added new classifications to
different levels or aspects of textual sequences, with what specialization of the types
of errors found in the corpus was increasingly more evident. From a general
perspective, we observed that the errors made were based primarily on learning
defects in L2 and application of the rules of the L1. The specific findings of errors
presented in the following section, which explicitly limited the scope and magnitude,
and the specific causes that led to the ENN to commit.
Although one of the objectives of this study was the description and
classification of the most common errors committed by Hispanics technical writers,
and are likely to cause misunderstanding by other writers use English as medium of
communication, another goal that was raised was the matter of the variations that
occur in the English language due to the cultural interference. These variations,
however, do not interfere in any with the production from a level grammatical, lexical
or cohesion, are characteristics of the English language understood as universal and
international vehicle communication, which would have to respect internationally. The
concept of Standard English is increasingly obsolete (Freeborn, French and
Langford, 1993; Mauranen, 1996: p, 196), because today we live in a revolution
ongoing communication, a fact which no doubt is causing some changes language
that we must assume, as in the time it was assumed that there other varieties of
British English.
This study claimed that the differences or variations were observed, after
correction of errors at an early stage of the production language, are actually
remnants of the errors detected by the influence of the L1 and culture, as well as by
excessive zeal or laxity in applying the rules of the L2. Although the production
166
written is correct, there are some variations or textual sequence differences due to
different social and cultural conception of L2. The challenge of this study is, first, to
offer a taxonomy for errors or changes in the scientific-technical language, and
secondly, to demonstrate that variations are due largely to the interference created
interlanguage L1, but should be respected as such since it does not interfere with
understanding the written production. The total number of errors of the NNS analyzed
totaled 2,940 cases found in the thirty articles contrasted with an average of 98
mistakes article. It was noted that, although the simplest level of English was with the
unaided sight of the grammar, because if a writer can write a text in the language
English is understood to have grammatical and lexical knowledge to do so, This
usually involves most of the errors of the NNS. The author, ignoring disregard of the
grammar rules, is changing the shape and distribution of the sentence and damaging
its cohesion, so although the lexicon occur properly, hardly the message is
interpreted by the issuer.
Also, the influence on the L2 L1 causes text entity loses its and resembles
more a literal translation of the source language (Quirk and Stein, 1993: 184), fact
that also is a source of errors and causes disturbances in sentence comprehension.
The writer's skill is demonstrated by adjusting all the words and knowledge intends to
transmit, depending on how it wishes to transmit, and in an appropriate form to be
understood by the reader, you will need all of these ingredients understand any
logical reasoning. Moreover, there are sometimes cases where writers produce
properly in L1, L2, while in the fail convey their thoughts, or have difficulties in
successful communication since according Mauranen (1996: p, 225 - 6): "The use of
a foreign language imposes an additional processing load on the writers ". However,
this does not diminish competition to the producer, although not native, as the effort
made is usually higher than for native producer.
With respect to variations are analyzed and the results are classified based on
the same basis as it occurred in the errors, ie, considering the grammatical level and
thus, in contrast to a perspective microlingüística parties that carry the most weight in
the sentence. That is, they have seen the phrases nominal and verbal and other
167
types of structures, such as subordinate clauses, that have been deemed susceptible
to variations in production scientific -technical, and in its cohesiveness and form, from
a contrast macro-linguistic. They are grouped in this way in order to determine the
variations in the use of such productions, which are also sources of error, on the one
hand, and on the other, are vital parts and thus greatly influence in the sequences
textual scientific-technical language. I want to identify whether the use of these
structures is similar in the NNS and the EN, in order to specify different variations and
the causes to which they should and in this regard have been grouped as so that it
will exhibit at specific conclusions.
This analysis of changes in scientific and technical discourse demonstrates
language production that is not composed of exact or rigid notions that can define,
but is a form of expression that depend on many factors which make versatile and
flexible, so it must be accepted as legitimate the variations that made the NNS and
explained in the specific findings. The Most of these variations are the result of a
tendency to use a structure or another so they are perfectly understood by any
reader, and actually provide wealth in a language known and internationally. The
severity in not accepting these variation is even more shocking considering the
corpus of this type study, since the production of error-free technical-scientific
language of the NNS (Group 3 of Annex 1), is in itself clear and does not lend itself to
misinterpretation. By This is further evidence of the need to claim the acceptance of
some features beneficial for both the writer and the reader.
The writer benefits because not change their cultural roots, a fact that greatly
simplifies written production and multiple corrections to which it is subjected, while
the reader has more diversity in the writing, a fact that enriches their perceptions of
language, and therefore are more easily understood from other productions ENN.
Then passed to specify the findings of this study, commenting, first,
classifications errors made in the form detailed and the different results obtained in
this group that redesigned the initial hypothesis in order to accurately determine the
most susceptible and thus, the likely cause.
168
169
2. ANALYSIS OF ERRORS
Following the path that has been made in the initial approach of this study, we
first will discuss and justify the detailed classifications of errors found in the corpus,
together with comments on the results, which have provided a complete overview of
the most common mistakes, and they need more attention from the NNS. The end of
the study of errors has been to offer a which identify the classification errors of the
NNS with respect to the writing science and technology, and thereby detect the
sentence phrases that have more difficulty for them. Likewise, provide probable
cause of these errors to facilitate its removal from the production of the NNS or
become accuracies it is due to remember when processing a scientific-technical text.
It will divide this section, as has been done in the chapters on objectives and
results, the findings of grammatical errors, lexical errors and mistakes cohesion, to
finally end this section with a final conclusion as a summary of the most common
types of errors to be useful to the group of scientific and technical writers. This last
part is intended to encompass the conclusions that the results have led to discern the
magnitude and significance of such errors and the measures taken to avoid them.
2.1 ERRORS MORPHOSYNTACTIC
For the disquisition on the types of errors found in the corpus that aspect
related to morphological and syntactic, or grammatical, will follow the same process
as in the results, while the causes discussed errors in the various phrases and
grammatical forms in certain affect production of misunderstanding by the recipient.
Errors in the noun phrase (NP)
Nominal groups are part of the sentence at once more complex and simple,
and on the one hand, can have a simple arrangement, but transmit a vital information
for the meaning of the text, which is why some authors warn of the danger of causing
170
unnecessary language density scientific and technical (Ventola, 1996: p, 155),
although others state that the best strategy to follow is to distinguish the scientific
written discourse genres (Gilbert and Mulkay, 1984: p, 55, 59, Halliday, 1993: p, 70).
Possessing the ability to synthesize its entirety has always aroused the curiosity of
students of the language, though often it has been argued that this offered no
condensation lexical complexity and Therefore, their interest was
somewhat
reduced.
The combinations and pre-modifiers relations between core and postmodifiers in the SN have traditionally presented some complexity to the Native
producers, the proof structure is common in scientific genre pre- modifiers of four or
five elements, which no doubt confused decide upon its disposition or interpretation.
With regard to the post- modifiers, identifying the relationship between the elements
is more clear as there are usually prepositions that indicate the relationship between
different elements, but nevertheless this is not the case the textual, and it is source of
errors of various kinds.
In order to more specifically identify and classify errors Nature morphological
and adapt to the characteristics of the present study, distributed the results according
to the frequencies that were in the corpus. Although initially followed distinctions
James (1998: p,154) was added a posterior to classification error in the form of
words, since a delimitation of the grammatical category was thought appropriate and
necessary. To the define whether the formation of words is wrong most common
names in adjectives, pronouns and articles, we add value to the results without this
definition would be impossible to discern. The formation of the words wrong in the
scientific-technical English is due mostly to the complexity of the words specific
genre. This fact of course is relative with respect to other frequencies provided, since
at this level, there is a greater error in the form of names, but is actually 18.90% of
morphological errors. Therefore, no Disprove Halliday (1993: p, 71) when he says
"The problems with technical Usually terminology Arise not from the technical terms
from the complex But Themselves Relationships They Have With One another ",
because in reality, the errors caused by morphological causes are a minor part of
171
total errors, so we support his claim data "Nevertheless technical terms are not, in
Themselves, Difficult to master, and students are not particularly dismayed by them ",
since in realize the complexity is given by the syntactic level.
For this reason, the body, causes errors in syntax SN (603 cases) are greatly
superior to those committed by causes morphological (164 cases), as seen in Tables
2 and 3 of the resultados20. As far as regarding the classification of errors made in
the syntactic level, have been account of the frequencies found in the corpus in
different parts of noun phrase, but considering relevant parties have traditionally
presented difficulties for NNS or those for which no structures parallel in the L1 of the
producer. The most prevalent error is the misuse of Article (53.73%), a fact which has
also been observed by other authors in studies similar (Tarantino, 1984, Webber
1993: 38). This type of error is widely facilitated by the influence of L1, and uses that
do not match the different articles, blending especially the use of the definite article
(Swan: 1997: p, 160).
Furthermore, a common error in the corpus is the use of an incorrect order of
elements of the complex noun phrase. This feature is understandable given that no
parallel structures in Castilian and sometimes 20 It can locate the tables in the index
tables. taxonomies that arise are complex, as you said Halliday (1993: p, 74), and
that the density of certain SN is sometimes very high. It is also a remarkable fact, but
to some extent expected, a relatively large source of error is the excessive use of the
preposition of, whose cause is in the structure of the Castilian, favors this type of
construction. Therefore, the English language is considered international language,
since the capacity of expression concentrated in a few words is useful in certain
contexts, such as scientific-technical language.
Because excessive or poverty of elements is one of the types of errors less
has been recorded in the corpus, it is understood that use SN ENN so Similar to EN,
and sometimes even exceed the number of elements necessary, with a desire, not
influenced by the L1, but by an excessive diligence in the use of rules L2 with respect
to the grouping of elements within the phrase. Therefore, as directed by Ventola
(1996: p, 155) should explain the danger runs, both by poverty, such as excessive
172
use of elements in the SN, as greater density in the structure does not imply a
greater mastery of the language.
Are included in the classification errors of the SN as is otherwise not use of the
Saxon genitive, which is considered committed under the influence of L1 when
literally translates to L2, which is common in various structures, as discussed
Stockwell, Bowen and Martin (1965: p, 64).
As shown in Figure 1 of the chapter of results (see index tables), comparing
the overall grammatical errors committed in the SN, the use Incorrect items is the
most frequent cause, followed by the wrong order and the excessive use of the
preposition of. Undoubtedly, there is an imbalance in the extracted results since there
is a predominance of apparent errors items, but must be considered that they appear
several times in the same sentence of Hence, the greater frequency of this type of
error.
Is considered undoubtedly important, apart from the frequencies with which
errors are committed, and their causes, the classification is given in the Chapter VI
various errors in the scientific-technical English, and that identifies the parts of the
structure and morphology of the sentence to be emphasized to avoid them.
One of the most common causes of error is the influence of L1 occurs when
L2, as with the use of preposition or consistency of the SN, but not other cause be
forgotten, as is the ignorance of certain aspects of L2, such as not using the Saxon
genitive or an excess of elements in the SN.
However, one of the causes of error that was detected was the use of
excessive structures of the L2 and L1 do not exist in, as it is to include too many premodifiers elements in the SN, error is attributed to excessive diligence the application
of knowledge about the L2.
The following will discuss the different classifications of errors were made of
verb phrase, distinguishing also the errors due to form and syntax.
Errors in the verb phrase (SV)
173
In the verb phrase, morphological errors were classified as regards the shape,
consistency and the influence of L1, ie, when the forms of tenses are altered by the
influence of the mother tongue, hanging its form and thus away from the intended
meaning. This classification has been caused by the cases found in the corpus, since
as they were certain errors, creating a different type of error and typical of Technical
and Scientific language.
As in the SN, errors occur morphological lesser degree than the syntax, since
the variables that can arise are more restricted by the formal characteristics, and
likewise, the shape is generally better absorbed by the NNS and is simpler than the
structure, and there are many factors and features be coordinated at the time of
production. The most common mistake is the one committed by a lack of consistency
in SV, especially in tense which change shape depending on the subject of the
sentence, a fact that shows a lack of agreement by the writer, influenced by a defect
in learning L2 change of verb forms in English. This error has been the most frequent
in the morphological level (67.05%) of the corpus and is statistically significant, but
this feature also exists in other productions of writers other than L1 Castilian, due to a
"[...] Inability to examine the syntactic context in Which the controller and the target
OCCUR [...] and Inability to Recognize the Differences Between the agreement
systems of English and the SL "(Al-JARF, 2000: 13). Therefore can not be argue that
this error is due to an influence of L1, since the NNS is accustomed to such changes
as changes in Castilian as the verb form the entity with the sentence.
With regard to syntax errors, we must remember that the verbal system
Spanish and English is different (Stockwell, Bowen and Martin, 1965: p, 122) mainly
in two respects, the structure of the times and verbal aspect and in the model
inflection, so that errors are generated due to confusion in the active form and
passive, the verb tense of modal verbs, use of the gerund, participle or infinitive and
so on., as seen in Table 5 (see rate table). The group verbal Quirk and Stein (1993:
p,191): "The verb phrase is to express concern concerned Various things about a
verb - Such As things Modality and tense and voice ", so it is not to belittle its
importance in the whole production. Although the total of errors is less than the SN,
174
be borne in mind that it is a fairly logical for the lower occurrence in the sentence,
since the SN may appear several times in prayer, even though it is simple. It also has
importance in the scientific-technical language, as according to the tense used, the
writer determines the timing or duration of experiment or process that defines (Nash,
1987: p, 70). Traditionally tense used to describe the scientific facts is this simple, as
suggested Swales (1971: p, 89), while the last is reserved to refer to the findings or
previous experiments. The tenses of the narratives of Articles scientists do that varies
according to the author's intention to use the verb tense, and does not have the same
intention a text written in the past than the present or any other tense. Polanyi (1989:
p, 17) observes that "[...] reports on last time are specific, affirmative narratives of the
past that we speak of a series of events that took place at specific times and only one
world in the past, "so that you use in parts of methodology and results of research
articles (Biber, Conrad and Reppen, 1998: p, 124). Scientific narratives also tend to
prefer the use of This, as a tense in English reflects a sense of timelessness and
permanence, frequency, and therefore reliable and firmness, so that used more in the
introduction and conclusions of the research paper (Biber, Conrad and Reppen,
1998: p, 124). In the corpus processing, have been important and statistically
significant frequencies (25.32%) due to improper use of time verbal, especially with
the use of present perfect instead of simple past, confusion ENN quite common in
Spanish-speaking, as noted by Stockwell, Bowen and Martin (1965: p, 127). Marking
the decisive influence the use of a number of times verbal rather than others is the L1
in the corpus of this study, as are the times who lack verbal correlation with Castilian
cause the most errors in the NNS.
Moreover, it is clear the importance of the passive voice in English Technical
and Scientific as it is considered an important pillar within the functions of the English
grammar (Swales, 1971, and Stein, 1979). Moreover, Quirk et al. (1972: p, 808),
comparing the frequency of use of active and passive sentences, deduce that the
texts that appear passive, it is ten times more common than active, for synthetic put
it, when a text appears the passive, often dominate the text, so they add: "The
passive is more Generally Commonly Used in informative than in imaginative writing,
Notably in the Objective, non-personal style of scientific articles and news items. "
175
Most of the mistakes made in the passive (26.30%) are confusion in the use of
passive or active, so that although its importance is well proven and affects its use,
the writers do not see the correlation between active and passive, confusing. This
type of error is determined by the low importance it has in Castilian (L1), relegated to
very specific uses and not extending its use by having the shape of the impersonal.
However, the errors detected are not due only to a lack in the use of the passive
voice, which would determined by the influence of L1, but also been detected in that
the use has been indiscriminate, (this phenomenon is called Kyong Ju (2000: p, 105)
overpassivization) so that in this case relates to an excess of readiness in the use of
L2. Another common source of error in the NNS is confusion in the forms of gerund,
participle and infinitive (23.70%) after another verb or an isolated in the phrase,
figures that are also statistically significant. There are rules certainly clear about their
use, but are generally large and difficult to remember for the NNS, so it uses the
translation of the L1 to decide the way correct. If the frequency is considered and
compared with the total of frequencies in that concrete level, the number is significant
enough to consider one of weak points in the production of the tongue. This error is
caused by a learning enough of the language, so that in the absence of knowledge,
we use the L1. Regarding the overall errors in verb phrases can be seen in Figure 2
(see rate table) that have the most common mistakes syntactic reasons, such as the
misuse of tenses and the passive or active these values followed closely by the
incorrect use of the infinitive, the gerund and participle (38% of total). As mentioned
above, errors morphological clearly have little importance in the total errors of the SV,
so we can say that the influence of the L1 is the mark decisively level of errors
committed in this phrase. The initial hypothesis was to find Where more categories as
the use of the correct verbal preposition or the use of modal verbs, since it had
shown a different conception of modality and formality on the part of the NNS, but
have not met these expectations.
The following will explain the errors found in the corpus adverbial phrase
belongs to, the use and position is confusing to ENN, since that is different from the
L2.
176
Errors in the adverbial phrase (SA)
Although traditionally not been given the importance that the adverbial phrase,
also affects the correct interpretation of a production written, so that the errors found
that relate to this sequence have been included in the categorization and explanation
of their causes. Although this phrase arouses less interest overall, the use of
prepositions or location in the phrase itself have been a source of analysis, since they
involve difficulty in the process of production (French, 1949: p, 17; Webber, 1993: p,
40; Swan, 1995: p, 444; Martinez Osés and Aertselaer van, 2001: p, 145).
The classifications have been able to discern were lower than those of
phrases discussed so far, but justifies the lower combinations allows this phrase.
Regarding the morphological level, is divided into errors caused by an error in the
manner and for excess or omission of adverbs, totaling 6% of total errors found in
that phrase. The number obtained errors has been low, so the results obtained in
these ratings are not statistically significant and may be due to circumstances not
decisive.
Structural or syntactic errors were more numerous in this phrase, being due
largely to incorrect use of the preposition (59% of total errors of that phrase),
coinciding with similar findings made by Webber (1993: p, 40) in contrastive analysis.
Another cause of errors is also notable location was the phrase incorrectly in the
textual sequence, while that classifications of errors due to incorrect internal order,
omitting phrase or confusion between the adverbs that should have been using
source few errors. Clearly, the influence of L1 is what justifies the mistakes
Frequently, since the use of prepositions mismatch between the two languages,
maternal and goal, and the location of the SA also varies, as the Castilian has less
strict rules to put it into production. The imbalance that exists in the frequency of
errors seen in SA Figure 3 (see graphs index) as a source of error, around the
prepositions, dominates all other frequencies. It must be clarified that if the errors of
prepositions are due to an influence of L1 on the production, has also been to assess
the difficulty of learning the prepositions to the NNS is also a factor to consider. The
177
original intention of the ENN is the translation in doubt, but this also indicates a gap in
learning.
By comparing the errors of the three phrases sentence, you can check The
number of cases is directly related to the frequency with which the phrase appear in
different phrases, since the most commonly occurring SN and therefore the number
of errors is greater, followed by the SV and finally the SA. This fact is relatively
logical, since the greater use of a structure, increased risk of suffering has errors.
Errors in sentence connection this classification has been added to those discussed
above for having found Where the body could not be classified into other categories,
since no fall into any of the above or phrases can be included in the error committed
produced by a lack of cohesion, as were rooted in internal structure of subordinate
clauses in the union or in parts of the sentence.
James (1998: p, 157) refers to it as clause errors, but has not followed the
classification proposed by him in this section, but have distributed the various errors
found in several types according to their nature.
Considering the overall classification on the grammatical level, the sentence
connection has not been a source of excessive errors, but the most common mistake
has been prompted by an error in the choice of the link of subordination (80.09%),
more specifically, that. The ENN confuse their use in relative clauses, playing every
time they want to write the conjunction, the translation more is this direct link. This
error is caused by improper assimilation of the meaning subordinating this link in the
L2, that is wrong by a learning process, since in this case, the L1 uses multiple
connections so it might confuse the NNS, but not case.
Conversely also could pertain to the influence of excessive use L1 This
subordinator, since the structure is very explanatory rooted in the Castilian
expressions, but is also used quite frequently in the language
English when writing official documents or when the writer expresses his
opinion, as give evidence Biber, Conrad and Reppen (1998: p, 141), so another
possible cause of this disproportion in the errors could be the mimicry of expressions
178
of the L2. In the corpus is used indiscriminately this connection, thus being a source
of errors obstruct the interpretation of meaning sentence, so that it is understood that
this fact is caused by an incorrect interpretation of the L2, the standards of the ENN
has interpreted as those used in the L1. Considering the two types of errors are listed
later in subclassifications that can be seen in Table 8 (see rate table), errors
committed by the incorrect connection of the various parts of the sentence, or of the
phrases subordinate are more frequent (88.7%) and therefore, statistically significant
than those caused by a mistake in the internal structure of sentences subordinate.
This has been detected in other studies (Stockwell, Bowen and Martin, 1965; Swales,
1971), as it has devoted special attention, but not included in the section on cohesion
to distinguish between the internal connection prayer and elements to read a text we
refer to previous sentences or structures, ligand completely text.
The remaining low frequencies have established categories, such as omission
of items (1.73%) or use superfluous (3.46%). Comparing the total errors in the
grammatical level in Figure 5, the sentence is the connection causes fewer errors,
but it must be borne in mind that the influencing variables for make the mistake that
are also smaller. With the description of the various grammatical level proposed
classifications and the number of cases found in each type, we end this section to
discuss the rankings and frequencies Notable lexical level.
2.2. Lexical errors
The vocabulary used in the scientific-technical genre is obviously specific and
requires specific expertise and clear itself of the subject matter or interpret. In this
section the analysis of lexical errors in the corpus, were considered as a starting
point active faults, ie those that produced the writer and not the liability or errors that
occurred due to a misunderstanding of the text (James, 1998). Vocabulary is a very
different level of study the grammatical level, so until recently, and as a legacy of
Chomsky, the lexical level had been a source of few studies. However, the
179
specialization of language and the variability of genres has generated several
publications (Webber, 1993; Swan, 1997; Candlin, Bhatia and Jensen, 2002) have
analyzed the different types of vocabulary and expressions England.
Lexical errors committed are very specific due to circumstances specific act for
which the classification is proposed at this level is not phrases, but the underlying
causes. Thereby, a part of the analysis already presented by the classification, but in
this section will discuss the criteria continued to be classified lexical errors of that
particular way. We According to Ellis (1997: 18) when he states: "The identification
and description of errors are preliminaries to the much more interesting task of Trying
to Explain Why They occur. Errors are, to a large Extent, Systematic and, to a
Certain Extent, predictable " although we disagree with the last part, since the
inclusion of the various errors found in the various categories has been a fairly
complex process, to join his classification with his explanation. Discussed in the
previous section the importance of the errors have grammatical, but not be
underestimated lexicons, because as Edge (1989: p, 2) explains: "The Most
Important sort of mistake is a mistake That leads to a
misunderstanding ". The
tendency when analyzing a text is to observe its structure right, without considering
that many errors may be due to the lexicon used by the writer, which sometimes is
not adequate. The writer uses scientific-technical Formal and specific words that are
not used in everyday language, so that the ENN's task becomes more difficult,
although some studies (Swan, 1997: p, 180;Varó Alcaraz, 2000: p, 70) have reported
that the mother tongue, in this case the Castilian, helps in the writing of L2, since
there is a correspondence with the language Latin which the scientific-technical
English has inherited many words.
Although the distinctions or classifications of frequencies have been made
taking into account its causes and thus proposing a different classification to
Traditional, yes you have considered the distinctions of James (1998: p,143) in the
detailed classifications of frequencies. The causes of the errors found have been
mixed, as some errors are typical or universal (Ellis, 1997: p,19) that are found in
many productions ENN; others are due to the interference of L1 in the production of a
180
L2, others are default, omitting ways not known, others by suprageneralización,
taking to the written production only ways considered easier to learn and process, or
transfer, applying their knowledge of the L1. As we can say by looking at different
types of errors and their origin, the ENN model of language standards to measure,
creating their own rules.
In the process of practice is quite logical L2 include specialized or invent
words like those you have as a reference in the mother tongue (L1), as this simplifies
the process due to interference from the vocabulary of native language. Usually used
when certain structures or vocabulary determined to express, for some speakers is
difficult to separate the influence of expression in the L1 when producing other
languages. Therefore, when expressed in L2, the tendency is to use the most familiar
or similar to those association known default snapshot of the object with the word.
Carter (1998: p,73) explains the concept of lexical errors and their causes, among
which mention interference of the second language: Related OCCUR errors in firstlanguage as well as second-language learning But They Are likely to be more acute
in the second language. Martin (1984) Argues That in the case of advanced secondlanguage learners [...] the errors are Most Likely to be interlingual. [...] Regularly
students advanced set-up items and false equivalencies Between That the Glossing
practice of new words in terms of synonyms can be a primary factor in Establishing
errors in second language production.
Has distinguished within the errors due to the influence of L1, by a part, which
is formally due to a confusion between words, ie, that form is similar in the two
languages and therefore the writer has used the same way, and secondly, the
incorrect formation of words due to various causes that have been defined more
specifically. This type of error is also common in writers with an L1 other than
Castilian, as Webber shows (1993: p,41), using translations literals of the native
language, etc. adjectives as nouns., which has sometimes found that this type of
problem is difficult to solve.
The total number of cases obtained in this study, the two main categories
established, have been similar, with only a difference of 5.74%, which we find that
181
there are similar problems in the confusion of words and their formation, ie the slope
morphological and semantics. In the group of errors committed by morphological
causes, include the frequency shifts caused by language casts of certain words
(28.96%) that the writer has assumed that there in L2 and therefore the use as
correct. These errors generally has reasons of lack of familiarity with English words
or the low specific L2 reading done in the field, so the author assumes that the written
same way in both languages. With respect to loanwords, which in our corpus are
which have resulted in fewer cases, Radford, Atkinson, Britain, Clahsen and Spencer
(1999: p, 254) argue this phenomenon as follows: "People need to Develop words for
new and unfamiliar concepts, new technology, new plants and animals [...] Another
reason is prestige. If Uncertain cultures are particularly prestigious Associated with
Activities, it is common for the words associated With That activity to come from the
language of That culture ". However, the scientific and technical ENN have no
problems in this sense, since most of the words coming from the Anglo-Saxon, so
can not use words of their language by first knowing the English.
Another ratings or causes of errors that has been established of the
misspelling, ie those words which for various reasons that have distinguished
themselves, have been written incorrectly. The most frequent error in this category
has been to choose a word when wanted another, ie, confusing meanings (90.96%).
Martin (1992) calls it syntax error, which happens when the use the synonym of a
word that can be found in a dictionary, not warns of structural change or agencies to
do when inserted into the the text. This error is largely due to confusion of specific
terms and little reading in the target language, so that certain words are confused
because it seemed similar meaning to the writer. This error is semantic in nature
Confusion meaning, while morphological cause errors as the omission of part of the
word, letters or overload disorder of the word are those who have had less because
of errors by the NNS. Finally, another cause of error that are distinguished in the
lexical level is caused by incorrect choice of a word, distinguishing the cases in which
using a base word or general rather than a specific case is the largest (55.30%), the
use of a word by confusion of meaning, ie, not but the writer seems to connect them
for certain reasons (14.75%), the misplacement of a word next to each other
182
(14.75%) and finally, when the writer uses a word of creation itself, since there is
neither in L1 nor in L2 (5.53%). This will NNS observed that they have problems in
the choice of a specific word and is unknown, use a more generic. As in previous
cases we blame these frequencies of the low specific text reading L2, so that
mistakes specific lexicons.
Comparatively, the wrong choice of a word is the event that causes more NNS
errors, so it must be especially careful when choosing a word determined. Biber,
Conrad and Reppen (1998: 85) share this view, since the compare certain words like
start and begin or little and small, for the speaker are similar in meaning, we see that
there is a marked degree of confusion. Martin (1992) considers the semantic
confusion error for the most complex, because when the ENN confusing one word
with another by similarity of fields, it is difficult to reflect and being aware of the error.
We must not forget the kind of vocabulary used in this study because mark it
greatly the most common type of error and its cause, since the vocabulary ENN
specialized causes the store to use a wider vocabulary or that he is accustomed. The
cause of such errors is the profile of production NNS runs, since the more specific the
production, more difficulty shall accurately and clearly express the idea to be
conveyed in textual sequences. Another key to adequate production in L2 is to know
and be able to use the elements that give cohesion to the production, so then go to
class and justify the errors have been detected in that field.
2.3. ERRORS OF COHESION
They have been classified certain errors found in the corpus in a third level,
the of cohesion, since these are cases that can not be classified at the lexical level or
grammatical because its nature is very different, but are considered as error.
These cases undoubtedly interfere with the proper interpretation of the text, so
it is vital identification, frequency and classification. The general ascribes Halliday
and Hasan (1976), Hoey (1991), Sinclair (1991) and Bublitz (1999) cohesion is an
183
essential factor to consider in writing and therefore must emphasized and reviewed
your application in any type of written production, and as Alcaraz (2000: p, 92) tells
us "The resources of cohesion are essential, so penalty of falling into the
ungrammaticality and distortion of conceptual stability. " Looking at the type of
frequencies found, we have followed a charge of classification similar to the lexical
level, depending on the type of errors and their causes, so that have been
distinguished on the one hand, errors in conjunctions, linking essential part
sentences in both its internal and external structure, on the other, disorder in the
sentence structure errors caused by non-literal translation of the L1, and Finally, the
influence of the L1, very decisive sentence cohesion. As discussed in the results, we
focus on the elements impede cohesion in the scientific-technical, not entering in the
aspects of textual coherence since this aspect would need a separate study which is
being performed. However, we acknowledge the importance of consistency and
adequacy in future studies to consider other variables the study and analysis of the
issue. Detected errors in regard to conjunctions or links sentence distributed by type
considerations following Halliday and Hasan (1976: p, 226). It was found that given
the total number of errors, it was not a number excessive, some of the ratings had
only one occurrence, a fact that question its validity, but we must consider that the
use of a wide range of conjunctions between ENN is difficult to find. Therefore, we
will dedicate our attention to the conjunctions in that it has detected a larger number
of cases, since the results are shown in Table 14 (see rate table).
Conjunctions that have caused more error have been the causes (40%) and
also, are statistically significant, by the indiscriminate use of social or confuse these
with equivalent expressions that produce poverty in the expression or, occasionally,
baroque and unnecessary expressions in scientific-technical English, which is
characterized by direct and precise. Another group of conjunctions source of errors
have been the adversative (27%), which are the result attributable causes a lack of
such conjunctions, particularly however, so that no used, causing a connection
poverty sentence and therefore textual. The It our analyzes show a poverty sentence
connection ignorance of the L2 greatly, as well as a lack in the global perspective and
cohesive devices. The structures bound NNS intra staments and extra –staments or
184
improperly, proving to be of pay special attention to these words sometimes be
complex and not their reflect its use and importance, are neglected in the writing. A
study here would be interesting to compare the use of conjunctions in different
genres to observe rather than their position, as does Posteguillo (1999: p, 591), but
itsfrequency and the importance they have in the sentence or textual coherence.
Cohesion errors relating to the disorder in the sentence structure is been
divided into the various causes and found that they were not related to the influence
of L1. There have been different approaches to the study of the order of the
sentence, taking into account different perspectives (Enkvist, 1981: p, 50). Traditional
grammar we establishing the positions of the components of the sentence, ie in front
of the subject is verb, the switch is placed in front or behind the nucleus and so on,
but Furthermore, we structuralist grammar defines the positions of words as a series
of holes and fill them with items and give us rules for what type of elements we put
into these holes, and finally, generative grammar has provided a series of patterns for
the order of the sentences as a result of the rules that exist in the order of the
phrases. Can follow any of these approaches to analyze the variations in the
structure of the sentence, but we must also take into account the exceptions that
exist in the order, depending on the style or context of the text. The text type at issue
in this study is static and simple, not varying its structure, thereby following traditional
grammar or generative.
The order of words can perform other functions beyond mere error, as to
indicate contrasts, emphasis or a choice among alternatives. Many sometimes, we
emphasize that we want to convey information by changing the usual order of the
phrase, as you tell us Quirk and Stein (1993: p, 201): "We THEREFORE Tend to
construct our sentences so as to move in linear order from The Most Known to the
MOST unknown, from the 'Given' to the 'new' ". The normal word order of a Prayer
can change depending on the writing of the sentences above or information they
provide. (Van Dijk, 2000: p,30).
The concept of lexical cohesion between elements of the sentence has been
studied extensively by authors such as Halliday and Hasan (1976) and Nunan (1993:
185
p, 28). The lexical cohesion means when there are two words in text that are related
semantically and thus bind the meaning of the phrase. Have distinguished two
categories within lexical cohesion, reiteration and collocation term, which is
Reference has been made in the classifications of lexical errors, and is present in the
lexical and structural cohesion. Reiteration includes repetition, synonyms and
generalization, while the term includes all collocation forms that are semantically
related. Of the two categories, the term collocation is most problematic for linguists,
since often the reason to be the location of certain grammatical structures together
with other is the tendency of language to the pool and there is no clear reason, as
expressed mainly from open structures rather than the closed, so there is no limit.
Carter (1998: p, 60), along with others like Greenbaum (1970), Mitchell (1971), Martin
(1981), Benson (1985) and Hoey (1991) have been concerned about this term and
the implications that behaves in the production of the tongue. Avadditional difficulty to
the frequency of grammatical collocations, he says this linguist, is that some
structures would be very clear, and grammatically always occur in that mode, while
other structures do not have a link as clear to others, and it would be difficult to
establish a grade placement, giving rise the error in sentence structure.
Of course in the mistakes made by lack of cohesion can not be avoid the
influence of L1, which likewise is the most common of the three ratings entered but is
separated by a narrow margin of disorder in the sentence structure. Between the
ratings were made according to the corpus and the frequencies found, the most
common has been caused by the translation of L1 (56.62%), so that has caused a
noticeable change in the structure, adapting to the already known and therefore
undermining the coherence sentence. So thereof, has also identified an excessive
use of the impersonal form, together of course the use of the passive form, as a
substitute to the Spanish way. Also have been remarkable rhetorical expressions and
phrases that certain structures have been frequent repetitive phrases. Another
category, although it presents less frequencies than previous ones is also of note, is
that which has been called stylistic variations of the spelling, driven by errors that are
actually variations in style that the correction should be considered to vary, although
grammatically correct.
186
It can be seen when comparing the three causes of lack of cohesion in a text,
that conjunctions are those with less frequency, quite logical case well considering
that it has a smaller presence in prayer that the errors by structure or influence of the
L1, which can occur several times in the same sentence.
However, once exposed the three levels within the sentence and frequencies
found for each of them, if we compare the errors made by the three different cases
we can see that most errors (59%) are committed at the grammatical level, followed
by the sentence cohesion and lexical level, with very similar frequencies. This will
want to show that the most notable differences of L1 (Castilian) and L2 (English) are
both lexical or cohesion as structural, since differences or cultural clashes are
concentrated in the difference between the structures and rules that have a fairly long
period for assimilation, but it is a kind of language that uses the precision of
expression, the search for objectivity and approximate exposure (Alcaraz, 2000: 62).
For these characteristics should be a kind of language possessed few errors in the
writing, since in many cases, linguistic expressions are minimal and based more on
formulas and numerical expressions. However, errors in the grammar are traditionally
seen as obstacles between students first and second cycle, ie, article, verb tenses,
verbs in-ing and participles, etc.. This is to show that sometimes you should not fail to
affect issues traditionally considered as problems in learning, a seven if the producer
of L2 can be expressed in that language by having a sufficient linguistic background
and cohesion, continue letting down the trivial aspects that are overcome with
practice and daily correction. It is not intended to discourage NNS overcoming their
obstacles of scientific papers written expression in English, but on the contrary,
aware of his hard work, you want to iron out all differences that can be detected and
that in this study have been discussed in all classifications of errors, to thereby help
improve the production and writing to focus their detailed reviews on specific points.
Looking at the data provided in this study, the types of errors production of
scientific and technical English related to rote learning certain parts of the text
sequences are those that produce more errors in the NNS, while those aspects that
may be associated or identified by logic or cohesion are those who have suffered
187
fewer errors in the corpus. This denotes a gap in learning approaches that may be
being neglected in L2, as they are certain aspects like articles and the use of verbs in
the form of gerund, participle and infinitive those with more errors.
Not content to provide a classification of the various errors by ENN, you want
to bind this detection with the delimitation of the interlanguage that author has
created to make amends and thereby assess the importance of linguistic variations
despite being grammatically correct, remain a source of doubts and revisions in an
effort to approach or mimic a standard English is becoming a more isolated and
theoretical.
2. ANALYSIS OF CHANGES
Before beginning the review of each of the different types of variations were
detected in different parts of the sentence and thereby linking them, by this
classification, with the errors in these same parties and watch the interlanguage has
been formed to overcome these errors, to assess if become part of them as errors in
itself but as interlanguage that the NNS has created. This is the reason for having
split the results achieved, not by the results exposed, but by the causes to which they
attributed these variations. In establishing these distinctions are, while justifying the
variations detected, evaluating its importance in the increasingly standard English in
which the power of Communication is the most notable and we can not close our
perspectives, as indicated by Fairclough (1992: p, 54): Critical language awareness,
in other words, Should not push learners Into oppositional Which practices and
disadvantage to Condemn Them marginalization; It Should equip them With The
Capacities and Understanding Which are
reconditions for meaningful effective
choice and citizenship in the domain of language.
With this, we understand the importance of English as the language and
internationally, and which in turn influencing other languages and cultures, is also left
influenced by other languages and cultures, thus becoming the lingua franca as well
188
Graddol authors as saying, McArthur, Flacky Amey (1999: p, 18) and Lorenz (1999:
p, 72).
Likewise, we would like to emphasize again on the concept of variation that
has been introduced in this study because he had been named as differences when
considering the various productions of the written or spoken language, but This term
seems discriminatory, since part of the concept of different, not equal to what is
accepted by all. Therefore, we propose the name of Variant those nuances that vary
from the known to date, being due to cultural causes of variety in style. Of course we
do not mean this term as Meurman-Solin does (2001: p, 5) from a perspective of
change temporary text, but our concept linked more with your use of this Duszak
name (1997: p,11) when it affirms the existence of cultural variations within the same
genus, linking it with the concept of English language used internationally, a fact
attributed to its use in academia.
Such differences are made in the writing are known most researchers who
writes scientific and technical articles, but have not been discussed above to
determine and define exactly the type of variations carried out and their actual
causes. The Duke study by Garcia (2000), on differences in the style of scientific
English, determines certain variations in the use of L2, but not a structural approach
to prayer, but stylistically. On the other side, called differences, although sometimes
also referred to this phenomenon as variation, but non-specifically and concisely
without delimiting.
However, in the present study, based on the classification errors committed,
leading to the creation of the interlanguage once overcome, it is intended
demonstrate that variations between ENN and EN are minimal and therefore must
respected as such, removing them from the written production of the NNS, but
respecting them as factors that enhance any language deemed internationally.
189
2.1. GRAMMATICAL CHANGES
Variations in the noun phrase (NP)
Have been considered relevant changes in the noun phrase because they are
structures which themselves play a crucial role in the sentence, since it involves most
of the meaning. Moreover, be considered which are structures which are sometimes
focus of several linguists (Halliday, 1989; Alcaraz, 2000: p, 63) because their
premodificación formed by several elements causes problems in interpretation,
although one advantage it has is the conciseness and brevity in the expression. This
last characteristic is
hat has given great importance in the scientific language,
because it is produced by an economy in language that is impossible for other
languages. This feature has led to several studies, such as van Dijk (2000: p, 30)
which affirms: "[...] is common in English [...] the first noun phrase of a sentence
expressing information already known by the receiver, while the latter parts of speech
often express new information. "
It was observed that NNS do not use complex noun phrases equal in number
to the AT, because as has been seen in the results, although this structure has a
complexity quite important for writers with Spanish language, its use outweigh the
EN, actually quite curious and surprising. We blame this high frequency of use of
excessive influence on the L2 learning, since the complex noun phrases has always
been a point that has greatly influenced. Therefore, although it has been observed
errors committed by an excessive use of the preposition of, in the interlanguage
created later are not even creating an abuse of this structure by inherently complex
for a NNS. Can be seen, in the same way, that made ENN more frequent use of noun
phrases composed entirely of names, whereas the composite structures of several
adjectives, its use is less. This feature may be due to the use of many adjectives is
not frequent in Castilian, so that would be attributed to the interference of the L1.
Although globally the be noted that although these differences exist that have been
mentioned, in fact SN using complex is similar in both groups of writers, so conclude
this section with the domain of this structure characteristic of scientific-technical
190
English is comparable between the two types of texts analyzed. A notable aspect and
has been included in this section is the use of the article, since as seen above, was a
major cause of error in the NNS. The indefinite article is used similarly in both groups,
while Article defined varies in use, using more English writers, so that is ascribed the
cultural tendency for Hispanics to generalize ENN their claims and be less concrete
in their submissions that the EN. Germanic cultures tend to be more assertive and
concise in its arguments, while the Latin, instead, to use longer sentences and more
rhetorical turns, and a sample of the rhetoric linguistic imprecision traits are
exemplified in our corpus through use of the article.
Variations in the verb phrase (SV)
Regarding the verb phrase, has been considered as variations taken into
account in the formation of the tenses interlanguage as caused significant errors in
the production of ENN. Variances important are those detected at times less common
in English scientific-technical, or progressive or perfect time. However, the use of
present or the past is similar in both groups, so there are no significant variations in
these frequencies. The total number of tenses is likewise similar in both groups and
which is made of modal verbs liabilities or verbs followed by prepositions, categories
included as a source of error in the NNS.
In general, we see that using the verb phrase is similar, but has made a count
of the separate modal verbs considered important in stylistic issues of the scientific
paper, as it inferred certainty, uncertainty the results presented. The NNS used a
larger number of verbs possibility, while they do IN the verbs of uncertainty, if enough
funny, because as the NNS use another language, one might think that they were
more insecure in their expressions, while the results confirm what Conversely, as
shown in Table 18 (see table index). Likewise, ENN used in greater numbers than
the verb must-EN, thereby being more assertive in their claims.
Variations in other sentence structures
The most significant changes in other important structures, given their level of
error in the NNS, are the relative subordinate clauses, used to a greater extent by the
191
AT, so we conclude that explanations or definitions are a feature the AT commands
more. The complexity of the sentence is more pronounced in the AT to use phrases
relative to prayer give a more precise and definite.
Other structures relevant to the production of L2, as are the phrases
conditional or prepositions are used similarly by the NNS and IN. These data
demonstrate that ENN interlanguage is held by the same or very similar to the native
language used by the EN, therefore, having corrected those aspects of the L2 which
had previously failed. We attribute this characteristic of a correct learning of L2, while
the transfer characteristics L1 structural disappears at this stage of the written
production. It highlights respect to variations of prepositions, as reflected in Table 19
(See rate table), the increased use made of the EN preposition of, at, and for.
Prepositions have been one of the parts of speech that have ENN dominated to a
lesser extent in the count of errors, so in the interlanguage, This small domain is
reflected in less use of certain prepositions that create conflict have not defined
exactly their field and place in the sentence.
2.2. VARIATIONS OF COHESION AND MODALS
As such have been classified those variations due to the connection between
different language structures that influence the time of communication written, and
although the writing is correct and there is no mistake, there are still force. Other
changes to note are the manners, which may be due to be rooted in the writer's
native language, which conveys certain L1 structures, or to which has been reflected
a settlement of those structures caused more mistakes and are marked in the
interlanguage of writer, or conversely, an excessive application of the rule learned, so
that structure and style are as closeted, losing the naturalness of native writer, you
can make changes without being regarded as incorrect.
Thus the interlanguage that is created transmits the right knowledge, yet
transmitted the cultural and linguistic backgrounds that leave the writer, transmitting
192
regular expressions used in the L1, and therefore, many sometimes different from
the L2. With these results we propose to show that the interlanguage created is
entirely valid to communicate scientific and technical articles, since the variations that
appear in the language are in part to the legacy of the L1 and the writer's own culture
and therefore enrich the language rather than impoverish, as understood English as
a lingua franca as the language no longer exists tied to rules defined by the standard
English, but exists as heritage of all cultures and languages.
The type of lexical features that are considered to define the dimensions
interlanguage in the NNS were certain words that give the production characteristic
features written yet differentiated into production written, showing the writer's
intention in the text or what is the same, their modality. Although this chapter has not
been awarded a lexical level, as we preferred the contrast between structures which
are often problematic for scientific and technical writer, this section does is focused
around the cohesion and words that indicate certain features of style. Therefore,
were added as Annexes, vocabulary lists provided by the program Wordsmith, where
you can see by comparing Annexes 4 and 5, the words in the two sets of printed, by
alphabetical sorting and frequency. The lists have been obtained in our study
illustrate that written productions of both groups have frequencies of common words
as articles, prepositions, pronouns, etc.. quite similar. Of course, given that are using
different types of texts, nouns are different and have different numbers of cases,
made sense. Therefore, we have tried to provide this list to you can compare certain
commonly used words in writing, without being specific, so that it can be seen that
the frequencies are common. The variations or differences in the use of certain words
as some modal verbs, and discussed above, will now be considered as lists of words
in your whole. Looking at the list of words by frequency, the initial list is composed of
words and general use in all items, but as the list proceeds, decreases the frequency
of words in the row of the NNS, while the row of the AT is the one with more cases,
and in other words, the opposite happens. This fact shows that the use of basic
words or used to give a structural coherence and meaning to the phrase remain in
the two groups, while nouns vary in their frequencies due to the lexical variety of
English. The words are key to infer it form of prayer, but detected by analyzing the
193
corpus, certain frequencies, such as the use of abbreviations that are worthy of
comment. They are used in much the same in both groups, but although at first it was
a significant fact for us, then found that the two groups used similarly. Traditionally it
has been provided that in formal writing, in this case, science and technology, it must
avoid certain features of informality, such as contractions, however the note the
observed data, this view changes. The language at all levels evolves, and thus,
although in our corpus frequencies are not excessive, believe that these
abbreviations used are due to a tendency to release the language scientific and
technical formalities. Another important characteristic was found two cases of
incorrect abbreviations in the body of the AT, a fact that has not happened in the
NNS, due to constant revisions to which their texts are subjected by the fact of not
being native. These results link to the concepts of standard English and the
idealization of the speaker native discussed in the theoretical part, so these
frequencies refute our thesis of the idealization of English as a native speaker's
heritage and support the detract of this concept.
Also, certain words that were collected to infer a more text certain or uncertain
claims the writer, as the style or content of the article research is conditioned in a
certain way for it. Respect to the words conferring uncertainty and the examples set
out in Annex 6, frequencies were very similar in both groups of writers, while can see
that the ENN have been more assertive and want a character infer it certainty to their
claims, since the use of this type of lexical is used 28.76% more the group of the IN.
It is to note the case of modal verb must, as in Castilian not have the same force or
verbal assertiveness in English, so that used more frequently. The highest number of
frequencies detected in the NNS is due to the influence of L1 using certain formulas
assertive than in English not used in a scientific-technical context, as they prefer
other modal verbs do not are so aggressive.
Regarding the use of the impersonal form, which was included because it held
the NNS initial thesis that would not use both as IN, can be observed in the Table 23
(see rate table) that the results are similar in both groups writers, as also happened in
the use of words to support the claim. However, in the category of the connectors,
194
which are an important point within cohesion of the sentence and which noted that
were the result of errors in texts ENN, are used much less by the ENN that the EN.
We attribute this variation at frequencies to the mark they have left these errors in the
interlanguage of ENN, that uncertainty in this type of words, yet are vital to cohesion,
not used for not interfering in writing. Is not a variation attributable to L1, as in the
Spanish language connections are used to infer various kinds cohesive sentence or
text therefore we conclude that the variations found in both groups written production
not establish that there is a kind of self-produced the NNS and other than the AT, but
rather reinforce our initial thesis that actually there is one type of written production
which possesses a variety that can due to cultural or structural interference of the L1,
the imprint they left on the interlanguage errors committed more often or excessive
application of grammatical rules by ENN. But also the IN also vary his writing from
the standard one formal setting, with the use of abbreviations or manners that
express insecurity and uncertainty in a context which argued a hypothesis or
application of an experiment. Therefore, we refer back to the thesis stated in the
beginning of this study, English as a international written communication between the
scientific community is a fact evident in any publication, so that the various
productions that come from around the world should be considered equally,
discarding the linguistic review those structures or parts that are wrong, but accepting
as valid those structures or words that are correct and therefore not require a revision
or change, but actually give it a richness and variety that is now unstoppable and
undeniable. Regard to cohesion in production, it can be seen by the data have
offered about conjunctions, there is considerable variation in the use of conjunctions,
as well as statistically significant, as they use AT more than ENN. This is due to
poverty in the expression and a Ignorance of this kind of words that are vital to the
coherence infer it production. These data are consistent with errors appreciated,
since it also deficiencies can be observed in the use of this type of cohesion.
These variations may be due to two causes: the first assimilation poor
conjunctions and their importance in the sentence, and second, a ignorance of some
conjunctions and their use in certain contexts. It has been well commented (Alcaraz,
2000; Duke, 2001) that scientific language should be concise and accurate, but is
195
observed that in the ENN is even too in the case of conjunctions. If we contrast the
table 14 with the errors of the NNS and Table 23 (see table index), with variations of
the NNS, it appears that the conjunctions that are used most are the ones that have
caused more errors, so shows that the cause of the little error in certain conjunctions
was to have a adequate knowledge of the use and form of conjunctions, but by a
ignorance of that part of the L2. Final Thoughts In this study contrastive productions
of scientific and technical articles extracted several considerations which are then
passed to list mode abstract:
1. Errors were found in the production phase of L2, where the producer is sufficiently
independent to produce in English, but not yet mastered the language focused on the
grammatical level, meaning that the process of ing is lacking. The parts of the
grammatical level that were located more errors were the articles in the noun phrase,
the use of passive and the distinction between active and infinitives, gerunds and
participles in the phrase Verbal prepositions in adverbial phrase and sentence
connection, the union of the various parts of the sentence, due to the links of
subordination.
2. Although the lexical level had fewer errors in its entirety also presented problems
in some respects, and the choice of a word to be adjusted the producer's intention.
This is typical of the corpus that was used as requires specialized knowledge of what
the author wishes.
3. Regarding the sentence cohesion, there were few cases, due in large As to the
inclusion of less variable than at other levels. They highlighted the cases under the
influence of L1, which is common in the stage production of the producers of our
corpus.
4. The variations that were extracted by contrasting the production of the IN and the
NNS were not significant globally, since the change was minimal. In the grammatical
variations emphasizes the use of articles made by the NNS and you prefer the
formation of noun phrases composed of top names that adjectives. The use of
196
articles as conflicted previously observed in the errors, so that concerns the
fossilization of incorrect productions in the ENN's interlanguage.
5. The verb phrase is used in much the same, especially the use of the future and of
passive verbs are used more for the NNS that IN. The distinction between passive
and active was the cause of frequent error in the corpus of the NNS, so that it detects
an error fossilization of interlanguage created.
6. The AT used a greater number of subordinate clauses relative, ie they are more
explicit that the NNS, and this is a feature that coincides with the errors found in the
use of relative pronouns. Also prepositions can be considered as an error in the
interlanguage fossilize, as they vary the cases found in the NNS and the EN.
7. Conjunctions were used similarly in the two groups, except additive conjunctions,
which were most used by the AT. However, this not feature concerns a fossilization,
but the influence of L1 that does not use same type of connectors.
8. Finally, regarding the modality, there were differences in the use of expressions of
certainty (the relative risk was more than 2), but the other features of modality
showed a similar number of cases, so that the mode is not was a kind of significant
change within the scientific and technical production. With these final judgments
concludes our study, although we aware that there are certain traits to be analyzed
within the typology that mentioned in the sections of the form and cohesion, but it
was thought appropriate relegated to further studies.
VII. REFERENCES
Since they have taken as benchmarks various ramifications of applied
linguistics, have been divided into two bibliographic sources for a hand, concerning
applied linguistics, pragmatics and discourse analysis with all its aspects, such as
writing and producing professional English and academic. On the other hand, will
197
expose the references refer to the contrastive linguistics and the types of analyzes
that are based on it, as the analysis of errors and interlanguage and the
consideration of English as a lingua franca.
1. APPLIED LINGUISTICS AND ANALYSIS OF SPEECH
Varó Alcaraz, E. (2002) "Foreword" in I. Fortanet Gomez [eds.] Cómo escribir un
artículo de investigación en inglés Madrid: Alianza: 12 to 15.
Varó Alcaraz, E. (2000) El inglés profesional y académico.. Madrid: Alianza.
Atkinson, D. (2000) "On Peter Elbow's Response to 'Individualism, Academic Writing,
and ESL Writers' by Vai Ramanathan and Dwight Atkinson. " Journal of
Second Language Writing, 9 to 1: 71-76. Http :/ / icdweb.cc.purdue.edu /
silvat / jslw / toc.html. (12/28/00, 12:21)
Barsky,
R.
F.
(1999)
"Discourse
analysis".
Http
:/
www.arts.uwo.ca/chomsky/mit/discourse_analysis.html. (04/06/99, 10:36)
/
Bhatia, V. K. (1993) Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings.
London: Longman.
Beaugrande, R. of and Dressler, W. (1981) Introduction to text Linguistics. London:
Longman.
Beaugrande, R. of (2000) "La saga del análisis del discurso”" in T. A. van Dijk [ed.] El
discurso como estructura y proceso. Barcelona: Random House Publishing:
67 - 106.
Benveniste, E. (1971) Problems in General Linguistics. Florida: University of Miami
Press.
Bloor, M. and Bloor, T. (1991) "Cultural expectations and socio-pragmatic failure in
academic writing "in P. Adams, B. Heaton and P. Howarth [eds.]
Developments in
ELT: Socio-Cultural Issues in EAP. Hemel Hempstead: Phoenix ELT.
Blue, G. M. (1990) "Individualising academic writing tuition" in P. C. Robinson [ed.]
Academic Writing: Process and Product. ELT Documents 129. London: British
Council.
198
Brodine, R. (1983) "Referential cohesion in learner Compositions". Papers on Work
in Progress 10: 13-20.
Brossell, G. (1986) "Current research and unanswered questions in writing
assessment" in K. L. Greenberg, H. S. Wiener and R. A. Donovan [eds.]
Writing Assessment:
Issues and Strategies. New York: Longman: 168 - 182.
Brown, G. and Yule G. (1983) Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press Bublitz, W. (1999) "Introduction: Views of Coherence" in W. Bublitz, U. Lenk
and E. Ventola [eds.] Coherence in Spoken and Written Discourse.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Candlin, C. N. (1997) "General Editor's preface" in B. L. Gunnarsson, P. Linell and B.
Nordberg [eds]. The Construction of Professional Discourse. London:
Longman
Candlin, C. N., Bhatia, V. K. and Jensen, C. H. (2002) "Must the words collide?
Professional and academic Discourses in the study and practice of law "in G.
Cortese and P. Riley [eds.] Domain-specific English. Berlin: Peter Lang: 101 - 114.
Carrio Pastor, M. L.; Algilaga Ila, M.T. (1999) "Translation of complex noun phrases
in agricultural articles Actas del I Congreso de Lingüística Contrastiva,
Lenguasy Culturas, Languages and Cultures. Santiago de Compostela
University of Santiago de Compostela: 63 to 70.
Carter, R. Macarro and Sanchez, A. (1998) Linguistic Choice across Genres:
Variation in Spoken and Written English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Carter, R. (2000) Vocabulary. Applied Linguistic Perspectives. London: Routledge.
Ceirano, V. and P. Rodriguez G. (1997) “Análisis del discurso asistido por
computadora.
Nuestra experiencia con el NUD IST" Http :/ / www.geocities.com/Athens/
Forum/5917/analista.html (06/04/99, 13:39)
Cohen, A. D. (1998) Strategies in Learning and Using a Second Language. London:
Longman.
Garcia Coll, J. F. and Palmer Silveira, J. C. (2002) “La sección de discusión y
conclusiones”in I. Fortanet Gomez [eds.] Cómo escribir un artículo de
investigación en inglés.Madrid: Alianza: 148 - 179.
199
Cook, V. (1985) "Universal Grammar and second language learning". Language
Teaching and Linguistics: 73 - 89.
Cook, G. (1989) Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cook, G. and Seidlhofer, B. (1995) Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cook, V. (2001) "Knowledge of writing". IRAL, 39: 1 to 18.
Coulthard, M. (1988) An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. London: Longman.
Coulthard, M. (1994) Advances in Written Text Analysis. London: Routledge.
Courtes, J. and Ballon Aguirre, E. (1997) Análisis semiótico del discurso: del
enunciado a la enunciación. Madrid: Gredos.
Croft, W. (1990) Typology and Universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crystal, D. (1981) Directions in Applied Linguistics. London: Academic Press.
Crystal, D. (1982) What is Linguistics? London: Edward Arnold. 3rd edition.
Cumming, S. and Ono, T. (2000) "“El discurso y la gramática”T. A. van Dijk [ed.] The
Discourse as structure and process. Barcelona: Random House Publishing:
171 - 205.
Davies, A. (1995) "Proficiency or the native speaker: what are we Trying to Achieve
in ELT? "In G. And B. Cook Seidlhofer [eds.] Principle and Language
Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dudley-Evans, A. (1994) "Genre analysis: an approach for text analysis for ESP" in
M. Coulthard [ed.] Advances in Written Text Analysis. London: Routledge:
219 - 28.
Dudley-Evans, A. and St. John, M. J. (1998) Developments in English for Specific
Purposes: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Dudley-Evans, A. (2000) "Genre analysis: a key to a theory of ESP?"
CORPORATION 2: 3 - 11.
Eggins, S, and Martin, J. R. (2000) “Géneros y registros del discurso”in T. A. Van Dijk
[Ed.] El discuros como estrucutra y proceso. Barcelona: Random Editoral:
335 - 371.
Ellis, R. (1985) Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
200
Ellis, R. (1994) The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Ellis, R. (1997) Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fries, C. (1945) Teaching and Learning English as a Second Language. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press.
Gee, J. P. (1999) Discourse Analysis. Theory and Method. London: Routledge.
Gili and Gaya, S. (1972). Curso superior de sintaxis española. Barcelona: Vox.
Greenberg, H. (1966) Universals of Language. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Grellet, F. (1996) Writing for Advanced Learners of English. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R. (1976) Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985) An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward
Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1992) Spoken and Written Language. Oxford: Oxford University
Press. 2nd edition.
Halliday, M. A. K. and Martin, J. R. (1993) Writing Science: Literacy and discursive
Power. London: The Falmer Press.
Hamp-Lyons, L. (1990) "Second language writing: assessment issues" in B. Kroll
[ed.] Second Language Writing. Research Insights for the Classroom.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 69 - 87.
Hawkins, R. (1983) Word Order Universals. New York: Academic Press.
Hawthorn, J. (1992) A Concise Glossary of Contemporary Literary Theory. London:
Edward Arnold.
Hoey, M. (1983) On the Surface of Discourse. London: Allen and Unwin.
Hoey, M. (1991) Patterns of Lexis in Text. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hutchinson, T. and Waters, A. (1987) English for Specific Purposes. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Hutchinson, T. and Waters, A. (1988) "ESP at the crossroads" in J. Swales [ed.]
Episodes in ESP. New York: Prentice Hall International: 177 - 185.
Hyland, K. and Hamp-Lyons, L. (2002) "EAP: issues and directions". Journal of
English for Academic Purposes, 1 to 1: 1 to 12.
Jaworski, A. and Coupland, N. (1999) The Discourse Reader. London: Routledge.
201
Jordan, R. R. (1997) English for Academic Purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Kaplan, R. (1980) On the Scope of Applied Linguistics. Rowley: Newbury House.
Krashen, S. (1981) Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning.
Oxford: Pergamon.
Krashen, S. (1982) Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford:
Pergamon.
Kroll,
B. (1990) Second Language Writing. Research
Classroom.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Insights
for
the
Kyong Ju, M. (2000) "Overpassivization errors by second language learners." Studies
in Second Language Acquisition, 22 to 1: 85 - 111.
Larsen-Freeman, D. and Long, M. H. (1992) An Introduction to Second Language
Acquisition Research. London: Longman.
Malmberg, B. (1981) Los nuevos caminos de la lingüística.. Madrid: Routledge
publishers.
Martin, J. R. (1989) Factual Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Martin, J. R. (1992) English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Martin, J. R. (1993) 'Genre and literacy: modeling context in Educational Linguistics. "
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13: 141 - 72.
McCarthy, M. (1991) Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge
University Press.
McCarthy, M. (2001) Issues in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Mills, S. (1997) Discourse. London: Routledge.
Nash, W. (1989) Designs in Prose. London: Longman.
Nemser, W. (1971) "Approximative system of foreign language learners."
International Review of Applied Linguistics 5: 51 to 52.
Newmark, P. (1995) A Textbook of Translation. London: Phoenix ELT.
Nunan, D. (1993) Introducing Discourse Analysis. Penguin English.
Pique, J. He kissed and Andreu, J. V. (1998) "Bridging the gap in scientific articles" in
I.
Fortanet and others [eds.] Genre Studies in English for Academic Purposes. Castelló
de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I.
202
Angordans piqué, J. Posteguillo and Gomez, S. (2002Organización de la bibliografía,
citas directas, notas, apéndices y agradecimientos” in I. Fortanet Gomez, [co.] How
to write a research paper in English. Madrid: Alianza: 180 - 209.
Posteguillo, S. (1999) "Marked as themes in academic writing Discourse Organisers"
in J. de las Cuevas and D. Fasla [eds.] Contributions to the study of linguistics
applied. Logroño: AESLA.
Posteguillo, S. (1999) "The schematic structure of computer science research
articles".
English for Specific Purposes, 18 to 2: 139 - 60.
Posteguillo Gomez, S. (2002) “El título y el resumen de un artículo de
investigación”in
I. Fortanet Gomez, [co.] Cómo escribir un artículo de investigación en inglés. Madrid:
Alianza: 32 - 55.
Quirk, R. et al. (1972) A Grammar of Contemporary English. London: Longman.
Radford, A.; Atkinson, M.; Britain, D.; Clahsen, H. y Spencer, A. (1999) Linguistics.
An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Munby, J. (1978) Communicative Syllabus Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Santos, T.; Atkinson, D.; Erickson, M.; Matsuda, P. K. y Silva, T. (2000) “On the
futureof second Language writing: a colloquium”. Journal of Second
LanguageWriting, 9- 1: 1-20. http://icdweb.cc.purdue.edu//silva/jslw/toc.html
(28-12-00,12:22)
Saussure, F. (1987) Curso de lingüística general. Madrid: Alianza.Schumann, J.
(1978) The Pidginization Process: A Model for Second Language Acquisition.
Nueva York: Newbury House.
Seliger, H. M. y Shohamy, E. (1989) Second Language Research Methods. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Sinclair, J. y Couthard, R. M. (1975) Towards an Analysis of Discourse: the English
Used by Teachers and Pupils. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sinclair, J. (1991) Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Skuja, R. (1984) “An analysis of the organisation features of argumentative
compositions written by teachers and pupils in Singapure”. M. A. Project:
University of Birmingham.
Smith, F. (1982) Writing and the Writer. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
203
Smith, N. y Wilson, D. (1983) La lingüística moderna. Barcelona: Editorial Anagrama.
Referencias bibliográficas 293
Snyder, I. (1998) Page to Screen: Taking Literacy into the Electronic Era. Londres:
Routledge.
Stein, G. (1979) Studies in the Function of the Passive. Tübingen: Gunter Narr
Verlag.
Swales, J. (1971) Writing Scientific English. Hong Kong: Nelson.
Swales, J. M. (1985) “ESP- The heart of the matter or the end of the affair?” en R.
Quirk y H. G. Widdowson [eds.] English in the World. Teaching and Learning the
Language and Literatures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 212227.
Swales, J. M. (1988) “Introduction” en J. Swales [ed.] Episodes in ESP. Nueva York:
Prentice Hall International: xii- xvii.
Swales, J. M. (1990) Genre Analysis. English in Academic and Research Settings.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. M. y Rogers, O. (1995) “Discourse and the projection of corporate culture:
the mission statement”. Discourse and Society 6- 2: 223- 42.
Swales, J. M. (1996) “Occluded genres in the academy: The case of the submission
letter” en E. Ventola y A. Mauranen [eds.] Academic Writing. Intercultural and
Textual Issues. Amsterdam: John Benjamins: 45- 58.
Swales, J. M. (2001) “Issues of genre: purposes, parodies and pedagogies” en A.
Moreno y V. Colwell [eds.] Perspectivas recientes sobre el discurso. León:
AESLA- Universidad de León: 11- 25.
Swan, M. (1995) Practical English Usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (2ª
edición).
Tannen, D. (1994) Gender and Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tomlin, R. S. et al. (2000) “Semántica del discurso” en T. A. van Dijk [ed.] El discurso
como estructura y proceso. Barcelona: Gedisa editorial: 107- 170.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1972) Some Aspects of Text Grammars: a Study in Theoretical
Linguistics and Poetics. The Hague: Mouton.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2000) El discurso como estructura y proceso. Barcelona: Gedisa
editorial.
Widdowson, H. G. (1979) Explorations in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
204
Widdowson, H. G. (1996) Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Widdowson, H. G. (2000) “On the limitations of linguistics applied”. Applied
Linguistics 21- 1: 3- 25.
205
Anexes:
Interview
1. Which are the most common errors committed by Spanish speakers in the English
Language?
( ) Speaking ( ) Written Article
( )
Noun
( ) Conjunctions
( ) Plurals/ singulars
2. Which techniques can be used to solve this problem?
( ) Reread the material
( ) Take notes
( ) Make summaries
( ) Practice
3. Is there any relation between the age of people and their incidence in these
errors?
( ) Yes
( )
No
4. Which of the next reasons, do you think are the cause of these errors?
( ) Oral practice
( ) Writing
( ) Interaction with the English language
5. Is the academic area responsible for that to happen.
( ) Yes
( ) No
6 .Are teachers engaged to solve this issue?
( ) Yes
(
) No
7Which areas are more important to cover?
(
) Grammar
( ) Speaking
8. Are people conscious of their errors ;are they conscious of the rules of the
language?
( )Yes
( )No
9. Are English instructors good role models to follow nowadays?
(
)Yes
(
) No
10. Is there something important you would like to add?
206
207