The Role of the L1 in SLA

It is a popular belief that second language acquisition

(SLA) is strongly influenced by the learner’s first
language (L1) and the role of the L1 in SLA is a
negative one. That is the L1 gets in the way or
interferes with the learning of the L2, such that
feature of the L1 are transferred into the L2.
The role of native language / mother tongue / L1 in
second language acquisition has come to be known as
“language transfer”.

It has been assumed that in a second language learning

situation learners rely extensively on their native
language.
According to Lado (1957), Individuals tend to transfer
forms and meanings of their native language and
culture to the foreign language and culture.
 This transfer is productive when the learner attempts
to speak the language.
 This transfer is receptive when the learner attempts
to grasp and understand the language and culture as
practiced by native speakers.
Lado’s work and much of the work of that time (1950’s)
was based on the need to produce pedagogically
relevant materials.
A contrastive analysis of the native language and the
target language was conducted in order to determine
similarities and differences in the languages.
Explaining L1 Transfer
 The L1 system is used for both comprehension and
production.
 The L1 system is used in hypothesis construction
responsible for interlanguage development.
 Comprehensible input serves as a major source of
information for hypothesis construction.
Theory of L1 Transfer
An important distinction not always made in discussions of
transfer is between transfer in L2 communication and
transfer in L2 learning.
 Transfer in communication involves the use of the L1
either to receive incoming messages (reception) or to
process output (production).
 Transfer in learning occurs when the learner uses the L1
in an attempt to develop hypotheses about L2 rules.
There are several possibilities for transfer:
1) it is primarily a characteristic of communication
2) it is primarily a feature of learning
3) both communication and learning transfer are significant
and interrelated aspects of L2 acquisition.

There are two different kinds of transfer:

 Where the two languages were identical, learning could
take place through positive transfer to the native-
language pattern.
 Where the two languages were different, learning
difficulty arose and errors occurred resulting from
negative transfer.
Marton (1981) said ‘Taking a psychological point of
view, we can say that there is never peaceful co-
existence between two language systems in the
learner, but rather constant warfare continues during
the period of storing newly learnt ideas in memory’.
Felix (1980) rejected this belief and according to him the
role of L1 got almost denied or minimized.
Now to find the disparity regarding the role of L1, we
need to examine Behaviorist theory of learning.
Behaviorist Theory
Behaviorist Theory dominated both psychology and
linguistics in the 1950’s. This theory suggests that
external stimuli (extrinsic) can elicit an internal
response which in turn can elicit an internal stimuli
(intrinsic) that lead to external responses.
 The learning process has been described by the
theorists as a process forming Stimulus-Response-
Reward (S-R-R) chains. These chains come about
because of the nature of the environment and the
nature of the learner.
 The environment provides the stimuli and the learner
provides the responses and finally the environment
provide the reward.
 When the learner learns a language, this learning
includes a set of Stimulus-Response-Reward (S-R-R)
chains.
HABITS
This association of a particular response with a
particular stimulus constituted a habit, and it was this
type of regular behavior that psychologist such as
Watson (1924) or Skinner (1957) set out to
investigate. They wanted to know how habits were
established.
They attributed two important characteristics to habit
1. Observable
2. Automatic
The learning of a habit than could occur through:
Imitation (i.e. the learner copies the stimulus behavior
sufficiently often for it to become automatic)
Reinforcement (i.e. the response of the learner is
rewarded or punished depending on whether it is
appropriate or otherwise, until only appropriate
responses are given)
ERRORS
Behaviors theory predicts that transfer will take place
from the first to the second language.
Transfer will be negative when there is proactive
inhibition. In this case errors will result.
Transfer will be positive when the first and the second
language habits are the same. In this case no errors
will occur.
In behaviorist accounts of SLA, errors were considered
undesirable.
They were evidence of non learning, of the failure to
overcome proactive inhibition.
If they were tolerated, then there was a danger of error
becoming habit in their own right.
Contrastive analysis hypothesis
Contrastive analysis is a way of comparing languages in
order to determine potential errors for the ultimate
purpose of isolating
 what needs to be learned in L2 learning
 what does not need to be learned in L2 learning
The ultimate goal of contrastive analysis is to predict
areas that will be either easy or difficult for learners.
There are 6 basic features of CA. Those are:
1) Takes language to be a set of habits and learning to
be the establishment of new habits.
2) Locates the major source of errors in the first
language (habits).
3) We should be able to account for errors by
considering differences between L1 and TL.
4) Predicts greater differences lead to more errors.
5) Differences must be taught, similarities will be
implicitly transferred from the L1.
6) Difficulty/ease of learning a particular TL is
determined by the differences between L1 and TL.
Psychological aspect
There are two positions those are developed with
regard to CA: (1) strong (2) weak.
The strong version (predictive) maintained that one
could make predictions about learning and hence
about the success of language teaching materials
based on a comparison between two languages.
The weak version (explanatory) starts with an analysis
of learners’ recurring errors (error analysis). It begins
with what learners do and then attempts to account
for those errors on the basis of native language-
target language differences.
Linguistic aspect
Most of the contrastive analysis studies carried out,
have been based on surface structure characteristics,
such as those described by the structuralists, the
procedure followed was:
Description ( a formal description of the two languages
is made)
Selection (certain items, which)
Comparison (the identification of areas of difference and
similarity)
Prediction (i.e. identifying which areas are likely to
cause errors).
Criticism of The Constrastive Analysis Hypothesis
Since 1970s were of three major types of criticisms:
1. There were the doubts concerning the ability of
contrastive analysis to predict error
2. There were a number of theoretical regarding the
feasibility of comparing languages and the
methodology of contrastive analysis.
3. There were reservation about whether contrastive
analysis had anything relevant to offer to language
teaching.
Criticism of the Behaviorist Theory
 The problem was, as famously observed by Chomsky
in his review of Skinner’s ‘Verbal Behavior’, language
isn’t a collection of reinforced habits.
 Children learning an L1 do not simply reproduce what
they’ve heard; they very often use language
creatively, producing things they’ve never heard
before, understanding things they’ve never heard
before. They show evidence of internalized rules by
producing forms like *He goed.
The Predictability of Errors
Brooks (1960) for instance, gives four cases for
learner error:
1. The learner does not follow the structural pattern
and makes a random response
2. The correct model has been insufficiently
practiced
3. Distortion may be induced by the first language.
4. The students may follow the general rule which is
not applicable in a particular instance.
The Types of Errors
Dulay and Burt (1973, 1974a) they identified four types
of errors according to their psycholinguistic origins:
1. Interference like error
2. First language developmental errors
3. Ambiguous errors
4. Unique error
Language Transfer Re-examined
The nature of language transfer was re-examined in order
to state more precisely the conditions under interference
took place and the findings were:
1. it was recognized that the difficulty predicted by
contrastive analysis might be realized as avoidance
instead of error
2. Empirical evidence was forthcoming to show that
interference was more likely to take place where there
was similarity between L1 and L2 items and when there
was total difference.
3. Perhaps most important, it was recognized that error
was a multi factor phenomenon and that interference, as
one of the factors interacted in complex ways with other
factors.