Variability in Interlanguage

Interlanguage Variability

• Interlanguage co-varies with linguistic context.

• Interlanguage variation is an indication of learners’ stage of acquisition.

• Learners style shift in the L2 in the same way their style shift in the L1.

• Interlanguage co-varies with the task that learners are performing.

• There are multiple factors that influence interlanguage variation.

Interlanguage Variability

SystematicVariability

Non-Systematic Variability

Individual Variability

Contextual Variability

Linguistic Context

Situational Context

Free Variability

Performance Variability

Systematic Variability

• Derived from heterogeneous competence model.

• In general it is relatively easy to handle since it can be predicted and accounted for.

• Show the direction of learner language development.

Status of Language Use• Viewed differently by linguists.• Approached in two categories:

1) Heterogeneous Competence Model~ variability is classified as systematic.~ emphasize on communication.~ sees stylistic variability as the integral part of competence.~ seeks to characterize the user’s underlying knowledge.

2) Homogenous Competence Model~ variability is considered as non-systematic.~ emphasize on performance.~ ignores stylistic variability.

Individual variability

• User’s knowledge of how to use the language appropriately

• Makes up of integral part of the user’s communicative competence

The Study of Language Use

Labov (1970) lists five axioms:1) Style shifting: All speakers possess several styles that then adapted to fit the social context.

2) Attention: “Styles can be ranged along a single dimension, measured by the amount of attention paid to speech”.

3) The Vernacular: The style which minimum attention is paid to monitoring speech.

4) Formality: It is not possible to tap vernacular style of the user by systematic observation of how he performs in a formal context.

5) Good Data: The only way to obtain good data on the speech of a language user is through systematic observation.

Observer’s Paradox

VS.

Formality: It is not possible to tap vernacular style

of the user by systematic observation of

how he performs in a formal context.

Good Data: The only way to obtain good data on the

speech of a language

user is through systematic observation.

Labov (1970)

“Good data require systematic observation, but this prevents access to user’s vernacular style, which, because it is the most systematic style, is the principal goal of linguistic enquiry”

Contextual Variability

SituationalContext

Linguistic Context

Situational Context

• similar to the stylistic variability observed in native-speaker usage.

• emphasized that language behaviour is predictable and style-shifting occurred systematically.

Example 1

Labov (1970)

~ conducted a study of speech pattern of New Yorkers.

~ the data was collected and classified in 5 categories:

1) casual speech

2) careful speech

3) reading

4) word lists

5) minimal pairs

~ These styles were spread along a continuum according to the amount of attention paid by the speakers to their own speech

~ He studied the frequency of socially marked sound as they occurred in each speech style.

~ The study found out that, / Θ / a prestige sound in New York English occurred more compared to the non-prestige sound such as /t/.

~ From this study, it proved that language behaviour was predictable and style-shifting took place systematically.

Example 2

• Occurrence of /z/ in the speech of ten Japanese students.

• The study was carried out in 9 months time in 3 different occasions.

• Activities:

1) Free speaking

2) Reading dialogues aloud

3) Reading word lists aloud

• Result revealed that the correct target language variant was most frequently occurred in (3), least frequently in (1) and (2) in between.

Why the correct target language variant occurred in (3) reading the word lists aloud???

• The students were able to audio-monitor their speech and due to that, they were able to use the target language variants closest to it.

• As agreed by Schmidt & Beebe:

“ When a learner is able to attend closely to his speech, he may produce a higher incidence of target language forms”

Tarone (1983)

• Represents the effects of situational context as a continuum of interlanguage styles.

• Consists of six or more styles.

• Level of styles:1) Vernacular style – unattended speech data

2) Style 2 – attended speech data

3) Style 3

4) Style 4 various elicitation tasks

5) Style n

6) Careful Style – grammatical judgement

•

The Interlanguage Continuum

CarefulStyle

Style 2

Style3

Style4

Stylen

Vernacular Style

Linguistic Context

• Occurs when two different linguistic context cause different forms.

• Even though in TL require the same form.

• Example:

1) Mr. Smith lives in Gloucester.

(correct example of the third person singular -s)

BUT….

fail to do so when the linguistic context consist of a subordinate clause such as:

2) Mr. Smith who live in Gloucester married my sister.

• The variability may not involve a correct target language form at all. It may consists of the use of two (or more) deviant forms.