Q# 1: Language awareness (LA) theory of pedagogy

In the 1950s, L1 was seen by behaviorists as the main cause of negative interference and
learner errors. Robert Lado's comparative analysis (CA) claims that L1 interference is a major
obstacle to L2 learning. It emphasizes that similar aspects of L1 contribute to L2 learning, while
different aspects lead to difficulties. Therefore, parallel studies of the two languages can predict
learner errors in L2. Marton (1981) pointed out that learners tend to restore their strong and
lasting habits expressed in L1, leading to retrospective inhibition. He denied any peaceful
coexistence between the two language systems in the learner.

Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) is a widely practiced teaching method in the

field of language teaching in developed countries. In contrast, Sakui (2004) argues that it is
rarely used in developing countries. CLT represents the values and principles of Western
learning; therefore, it always conflicts with the local learning environment in developing
countries. In addition, CLT is an area of empirical research that lacks, more or less based on the
concepts and activities mentioned by its pioneers and founders. Research so far what is done on
the CLT is based on teachers and learners' perceptions and perceptions of CLT and observation.
However, few studies have attempted to test CLT through experience. However, some studies
have tested some CLT methods and found valid results (Bughio, 2013; Shamim 2007). Although
these studies claim that group work enhances student communication and language learning,
these studies face management issues.

Importance of CLT:

The purpose of CLT is to develop students' communicative competence. Communicative

competencies or proficiency include the ability of students to use all four skills (ie speaking,
writing, reading and listening). Therefore, Hymes believes that communicative competence is
“the overall potential knowledge and ability of the speaker-audience language.” Communicative
competence requires learners to understand the target language and requires that this
understanding be applied in context. To support this argument, Littlewood (1984) argued that
CLT "systemically focuses on the functional and structural aspects of language, combining these
into a more complete communicative perspective." Communicative activities help students
communicate and communicate with others proficiently when using any foreign language. On
the other hand, traditional activities authorize teachers to teach, while communicative activities
put students at the center and marginalize the role of teachers. English has become a necessary
condition for the indispensable and growing social and economic development. Therefore, it has
become a compulsory subject for higher education institutions such as primary schools and
higher education institutions in Pakistan. However, English has been used as a lingua franca
since Pakistan’s independence; Pakistan’s English teaching conditions are unfavorable. Although
English is a compulsory subject in the classroom, students, especially those in rural areas, cannot
easily communicate in English. They feel the lack of skills in all four languages. The main
reason behind this Pakistani teaching method is that the technology used to teach English does
not meet the standards. Some people speak Urdu (National Language) as their mother tongue;
English becomes their second language, but other languages such as Sindhi, Pashto, Punjabi, etc.
as their mother tongue, English becomes their foreign language, because Irdo is their second
language.

Although it is known as the second language of Pakistan, the English syllabus in Pakistan
does not meet the specific curriculum objectives. Teachers have not received training and there is
no modern teaching equipment; most teachers use outdated teaching methods and context-free
textbooks to teach English as a foreign language or a second language. Examinations that assess
English language proficiency are completely flawed and do not include modern and effective
assessment and assessment methods.

Role of CLT in Pakistan and Developing Countries:

Unfortunately, large ESL curriculum phenomena in developing countries like Pakistan
make it almost impossible for learners to improve their language skills by engaging in
interactions. Due to the large size of the class, teachers often use traditional methods of teaching,
and students rarely have the opportunity to participate in interactive activities. Therefore,
students cannot strengthen friendly and constructive cooperation. Through this cooperation, they
can not only learn, cooperate and enhance each other's knowledge, but also develop their
communicative language and social interpersonal skills. Through the traditional lectures in the
classroom, students mainly teach language rules rather than how to use or practice language.
Therefore, they only learn the language rules of the target language, rather than expressing their
written and verbal thoughts through communication. In the traditional teaching style, students are
mainly passive knowledge recipients. In order to learn the language better, students need to
“learn the language as an exchange, not just as a list of facts to remember or a set of symbols to
manipulate”. Language learning should begin with the active practice of the target language and
involve interactive learning strategies.

The interaction between students and the learning process and procedures through
interactive activities are the main requirements for language learning. Unless through interactive
practice, students are unable to achieve the desired level of language and skill. CLT should not
be considered a ready-made set of classroom skills. Teachers in developing countries like
Pakistan “need to work harder to develop and produce classroom skills that suit their situation”

Conclusion:
Considering the importance of CLT in language teaching, it attempts to expose CLT to
higher education institutions in Pakistan. It describes and discusses the current state of English
teaching in Pakistan and other developing countries. It aims to explore the reasons for the failure
of the CLT approach, such as group work or collaborative learning in Pakistan, and to determine
that CLT is not a universally applicable method for countries around the world. However, CLT
was found to be a way for CLT to adjust based on the constraints that implement its context.
Pakistani teachers need to consider cultural and contextual aspects and adjust CLT accordingly.
Due to the limitations of large classes and lack of training, the tendency to teach English through
traditional teaching methods suggests that language teachers at the University of Pakistan
investigate their situation and environment and adjust CLT techniques rather than using them
directly. far. This attitude of teachers can improve the current situation of college English
teaching, and can help students participate in the learning process by using different CLT
methods such as cooperative learning.

Q#2: Definition

Interlanguage (IL) is the language system used by second language learners. The learner creates
the language when trying to communicate using the target language. Interlanguage is influenced
by the learner's mother tongue because they use native language knowledge to understand and
organize a second language or to compensate for existing capacity gaps.
Despite this, the language is completely different from the learner's first language (L1) and target
second language (L2). Interlingual has its own rules system, but it contains sentences and
elements that are not grammatical. Since IL consists of the elements of L1 and L2 and the
perception of the speaker, it is always unique from the speaker to the speaker. Learners create
rules and change the rules through the input of teachers, peers, etc. and learners.

Characteristics

Inter-language is dynamic and permeable. When learners lack knowledge and master the
rules, it can serve as a bridge between L1 and L2, but as time goes by, it will become a learner's
progress. They improve certain rules and get new rules. Their abilities have changed and their
language has begun to reflect these changes. First, they might say: ''I no swimming' and later
become: ''I don't swimming' until it reaches perfection: ''I don't swim. ''The process of continuous
extension and modification reflects the changing trend of IL. The rules of IL are not fixed: they
are changed, deleted or added.

Inter-language is systematic. Although different learners have different inter-language, they all
have their own rules within their variations. They may not align with the actual rules but they are
systematic: ''I received money, I buyed a new car, and I selled it.'' Rules are set in predictable
ways.

Inter-language is variable. The performance of learners is changeable. They can apply the same
rules differently in different contexts or domains. Because learners have other rules for the same
function, accuracy and fluency will vary from case to case. In a classroom environment, learners
focus on producing grammatically correct sentences, they may say: ''I don't drink coffee.'' In a
spontaneous conversation, the same meaning can be expressed as: ''I no drink coffee.''

In short, characteristics are written as;

 Systematic (governed by rules and by students’ L1)

 Dynamic (changes frequently)
 Variable (based on context and situation)
 Reduced system (form)- the inter-language is less complex grammatically in form
 Reduced system (function)- used for a smaller range of communicative needs.
 Claiming that cross-language is a language in itself. Learner language changes far more
than native speakers. Selinker points out that in certain situations, the discourse produced by the
learner is different from the discourse produced by the native speaker trying to convey the same
meaning. This comparison reveals a separate language system.

It can be observed that cross-language is variable in different contexts. For example, in

one discourse domain it may be more accurate, complex, and fluid than in another discourse
domain. Variability is observed when comparing the learner's discourse in a conversation with a
form-focused task, such as a memory-based speaking practice in a classroom. Spontaneous
conversations are more likely to involve using cross-language. A learner can produce a target-
like variant in one context (for example, "I don't have") and a non-target variant in another
context (for example, "I don't"). Scholars from different traditions object to the importance of
this phenomenon. Those who introduce Chomsky's perspective into second language acquisition
often think that variation is merely a misrepresentation and not worthy of systematic inquiry. On
the other hand, those who approach it from the direction of "social linguistics" or "psycho-
linguistics" consider variability to be an intrinsic feature between learners' languages. In these
methods, the learner's preference for one language variant over another language variant may
depend on social (context) variables, such as the status or role of the person with whom the
learner is talking. Preferences can also be based on linguistic variables, such as a voice
environment or adjacent features that are marked as formal or informal.

Variability in learner language distinguishes between "free variation", which has not been
shown to be systematically related to accompanying linguistic or social features, and "systematic
variation", which has.

Free variation:

Free variation in the use of a language feature is usually taken as a sign that it has not
been fully acquired. The learner is still trying to figure out what rules govern the use of alternate
forms. This type of variability seems to be most common among beginning learners, and may be
entirely absent among the more advanced.
Systematic variation:

Systematic variation is brought about by changes in the linguistic, psychological, and

social context. Linguistic factors are usually extremely local. For example, in earlier stages of
acquisition, a learner will often display systematic constraints on their ability to use the correct
tense. They may say "Last year we travel to the ocean" rather than "Last year we travelled to the
ocean." They also tend to make more mistakes when the word following a “tensed” word begins
with a consonant (e.g., burned bacon). But they will show higher accuracy when the word
following the tensed word begins with a non consonant (e.g., burned eggs).

Other factors:

Social factors may include changes in registration or familiarity with the interlocutor.
According to the theory of communication regulation, learners can adjust their speech to make
them convergent or separate from the use of interlocutors. For example, they may deliberately
choose to present non-targeted forms like “I don’t” to English teachers in order to assert with
non-mainstream groups.

The most important psychological factor is usually seen as a form of concern, which is
related to the planning time. The more time learners have to plan, the more their production goals
will be. Therefore, literate learners can produce more similar goals in their 30-minute planning
writing tasks, rather than in conversations where they must produce a completely unplanned
language. The impact of the level of literacy on the ability of L2 learners to pay attention to
forms is unclear.

Affective factors also plays an important role in system variation. For example, a learner in a
state of tension (such as a formal exam) may produce fewer forms of goals than in a comfortable
environment. This obviously interacts with social factors and plays an important role in the
attitudes of interlocutors and topics.