P{11- 20}

Transfer in Learning Psychology is a hybrid drawing on the sciences of linguistics  & psychology

One of the concerns of learning psychologists is the effects of  one learning task on a subsequent learning. The observation that prior learning effects subsequent learning leads to the hypothesis of transfer.

CA concerned with L2 learning So it needs psychological component.

Transfer in Learning Psychology Transfer as assumed by Ellis 1965 is that “ “perhaps the single most important concept in the theory and practice of edu.” Transfer as assumed by educationalists is: “transfer of training will be pervasive (wide), so that : what is learnt at schools will be relevant (has relation) in later life,”” that successive( that follow) steps in the course linked with transfer from earlier steps to the latter steps or

Gains made in one skill (say speaking)will effect gains in other skill ( as writing). Ellis definition of transfer: The learning of task A will affect the subsequent learning of task B. or we can say L1(A) and L2(B) Therefore,

THE PSYCHOLOGICAL BASIS OF CA IS A TRANSFER THEORY

“So, the hypothesis that: “ the learning of task A will affect the subsequent learning of task B.” transfer (Ellis)

What are the two “entities” associated in a learning task? are: Stimulus ( S ) Response ( R ) *

The psychological basis of CA resides (be- or found) in the two psychological enterprises(schemes): S-R Theory Skinner’s Behaviorist explanation of how lg (linguistics and Language Teaching) learning is consummated ( completed). Associations Theory(unite) Red light or need to decelerate or stop the vehicle.

Then, beside transfer the other corner of Psychological CA are: R response+ S stimulus Or say the psychological basis of CA are: Association S+R theory

Some problems of Definition 1-In “conditioning” the R when associate with some S then the responses are assumed to be available to the learner. In L2 learning the Rs themselves have to be learnt as well as with which S they are to be associated.

2) CA is concerned with teaching rather than learning. - Teaching involves the predetermination of what Ss & Rs are to be associated. Learning is the set of decisions that can be quite arbitrary. كيفي

 What constitute a S or a R in L2 learning?  Jakobovits sees S as a constituted of :  “ …… the environment conditions that are antecedent to linguistic utterances”.  Richterich (1974) called S as a:  “communicative need”.  --But lg. behavior is a two-way process:  not only do we produce utterances,  we also receive them.  So Jakobovit’s definition of S will not serve perception  Solution : “analysis by synthesis”

Corder (1973): Linguistic descriptions which aim at accounting for lg (linguistics and Language Teaching), as a system deal with sentences, not utterances.”

Transfer Theory & CA The foundation of CA is that L2 learners tend to transfer to their L2 utterances the formal feature of L1” Or as Lado (1957) put i: “ individuals tend to transfer the forms & meanings and the distribution of their native lg. & culture to the foreign lg. & culture

CA & Behaviorists Learning Theory The psychological basis of CA, is Transfer Theory, elaborated & formulated within a S – R (Behaviourist) theory of psychology. Corder: “ one explanation of L2 errors is that: the learner is carrying over the habits of his mother tongue into L2 (a sort of habit – structure ).”

Let us check what CA analysts who examined L1 transfer say: Two of them will be reviewed: 1. Cross Association Mechanism of H.V. George 1972: who makes generalization that L1 German learner of English is its subject: First: he learns that “women” means “female human adult” so he makes this as basis that and then woman is “Frau”, but now “Frau” has another meaning “female spouse” and women attract the second meaning. “Frau” Look at this “the man met his woman and kids in the park”

Direct interference from the mother tongue is not A good assumption the frau never replace the word wife and woman He prefers to invoke (pointed out) redundancy (fillers) having 2 words for one of L2 as the main cause for such errors. in English

2. Ignorance Hypothesis of Newmark & Reibel It is alternative toL1 transfer It proposed to explain L2 learners’ errors. Adult may try to say what he does, but not know how to say in L2. He uses what ever means comes to his disposal.( نظمه ) You see, at this time the interference happens. What ignorance hypothesis?

Is not alternative to interference, but Is a best precondition for it. If L1 and L2 formal device for special function for ordinary learning. The learners L1 items toL2 use. So, errors occurs. Therefore, Ignorance and interference don’t refer to, or explain the same phenomena although each one can work without the other.

Duskova 1969 See ignorrance – without- interference was possible He discussed learners’ errors in L2 English. Saying there special English construction …it doesnr present problem on production level, why?, Because simply the learners can avoid it{ it called avoidence strategy) And the learner who have experience of failure or difficulty over some L2 structure, will never committ it again.

- It is possible for diff. learners to be ignorant of L2 structure. When 2 learner have different L1s. Spanish L1, L1 German of L2 Russian, both enquire about identity in ways different from Russian. What is transfer? Is the psychological cornerstone of CA -It originates in behaviorist psychology. Although some object to add psychology to CA

How learners of L2 can gain control Of some L2 items easily? As CA hypothesis observed that with equal degrees and intensions (powerfull) of teaching

Then avoid using this structure in question Interference theory is: If the learner is called to produce some L2 form that he hasn’t learnt, he tend to produce erroneous forms the standpoint of the ignorance hypothesis.

Learners assesses his knowledge to Some particular TL features and find it lacking. So start his{ignorant by a self evaluation}\

diachronic / synchronic.. A diachronic study or analysis concerns itself with the evolution and change over time of that which is studied; it is roughly equivalent to historical. Thus diachronic linguistics is also known as historical linguistics. A synchronic study or analysis, in contrast, limits its concern to a particular moment of time. Thus synchronic linguistics takes a language as a working system at a particular point in time without concern for how it has developed to its present state..

The extent to which synchronic study really does as it were take a frozen slice of history for study is itself not absolute: to talk of a system necessarily implies movement and interaction, and movement and interaction take place in timesystem