Chapter 3
Interlanguage
Interlanguage is often referred to a systematic development of learner
language reflects a mental system of L2 knowledge. The concept of
interlanguage constitutes one of the first attempts to explain L2 acqusition by
answering questions such as ‘What is the nature of the linguistic representations
of the L2 that learners form?’ To understand what is meant by interlanguage we
need to briefly consider behaviourist learning theory and mentalist views of
language learning.
Behaviourist learning theory
The dominant psychological theory of the 1950s and 1960s was
behaviourist learning theory. According to this theory, language learning is like
any other kind of learning in that it involves habit formation. Habits are formed
when learners respond to stimuli in the environment and subsequently have
their responses reinforced so that they are remembered. Thus, a habit is
stimulus-response connection.
Learning took place when learners had the opportunity to practice making
the correct response to a given stimulus. Learners imitated models of correct
language and received positive reinforcement if they were correct and negative
reinforcement if they were incorrect.
Behaviourism cannot adequately account for L2 acquisition. This is
readily apparent from the descriptive work on learner language discussed in the
previous chapter. Learners frequently do not produce output that simply
reproduces the input. Furthermore, the systematic nature of their errors
demonstrates that they are actively involved in constructing their own rules,
rules that sometimes bear little resemblance to the patterns of language modeled
in the input. In short, learning is not just a response to external stimuli.
A mentalist theory of language learning
In the 1960s and 1970s a mentalist theory of first language (L1) acquisition
emerged. According to this theory:
1. Only human being are capable of learning language
2. The human mind is equipped with a faculty for learning language,
referred to as Language Acquisition Device.
3. This faculty is the primary determinant of language acquisition.
4. Input is needed, but only to ‘trigger’ the operation of the language
acquisition device.
What is ‘interlanguage’?
The term ‘interlanguage’ was coined by the American linguist, Larry
Selinker, in recognition of the fact that L2 learners construct a linguistic system
that draws, in part, on the learner’s L1 but is also different from it and also from
the target language.
The concept of interlanguage involves the following premises about L2
acquisition:
1. The system of rules is viewed as a ‘mental grammar’ and is referred to as
an ‘interlanguage’.
2. The learner’s grammar is permeable. That is, the grammar is open to
influence from the outside.
3. The learner’s grammar is transitional. Learners change their grammar
from one time to another by adding rules, deleting rules, and restructuring
the whole system.
4. The systems learners construct contain variable rules. That is, the learners
are likely to have competing rules at any one stage of development.
5. Learners
employ
various
learning
strategies
to
develop
their
interlanguages. The different kinds of errors learners produce reflect
different learning strategies.
6. The learner’s grammar is likely to fossilize.
This concept of interlanguage offers a general account of how L2
acquisition takes place.
A computational model of L2 acquisition
The concept of interlanguage can be viewed as a metaphor of how L2
acquisition takes place. It implies that the human mind functions like a
computer. The learner is exposed to input, which is processed in two stages.
First, parts of it are attended to and taken into short-term memory. Second,
some of the intake is stored in long-term memory as L2 knowledge.
Input
intake
FIGURE 3.1
L2 knowledge
output
A computational model of L2 acquisition
Figure 3.1 represents the basic computational metaphor that has grown
out of ‘interlanguage’ and that informs much of SLA. As we shall shortly see,
this basic model of L2 acquisition can be elaborated in a number of ways. For
example, a component labeled ‘social context’ might be added to explain how
the nature of the input varies from one setting to another.