Error Analysis: Application to Libyan Learners' Errors

Error Analysis: Application to Libyan Learners’ Errors

 Rafi A. Selman

Anshan Normal University

Anshan, Liaoning, China

 

 Introduction

The last four decades have witnessed an important shift from the view of the teacher as the controller of language learning towards a more leaner-centered view which focuses on the learner’s powers of hypotheses formation as he develops his linguistic competence. One of the main results of this shift of attention has been an increasing concern in the analysis of learners’ language. Applied linguists paid a lot of attention to the field of error analysis and its implications for the whole process of second language learning. This paper, however, aims to examine and analyze a collection of erroneous structures made by a particular group of Libyan students and trace them to their sources as far as possible. The main finding of this study is that the utilization of certain strategies on the part of the learner seems to be the major cause for the occurrence of errors.

 1. Aspects of the study

It is crucial, at first, to give a brief description of the main aspects of our study. They are

1. subjects of the study
2. method of collection of the data

 1.1. Subjects of the study

The subjects of this study are ( 30 ) Libyan students at the first year \ Dept. of English \ the 7th of April University / the academic year 1996 - 1997. Most of these students have studied English for at least three years. One, therefore, can posit that they are at an intermediate stage of learning the language. The writer of this paper was himself the teacher of these students at the university. Concerning their age, they varied from 18 to 21 years old. Arabic is their mother-tongue (henceforth, MT) and is the medium of instruction, whereas English is seen as a foreign language which students study and use in class only.

 1.2. Method of collection of the data

The answers of ten comprehension questions as part of a term-exam have been chosen to be the source of the erroneous structures produced by these students. The selection of this technique, i.e. the comprehension questions, might be attributed to the fact that such procedure requires free production in the target language (henceforth, TL), i.e. the students have to generate their own grammar. However, 64 erroneous structures were selected to be examined and analyzed in this study. We will attempt through the following section to present the method applied in the classification of these errors as well as the means of analyzing them.   

 2. Method of analysis

First of all, the erroneous structures were classified into three main categories:

1. morphological errors
2. syntactic errors
3. lexical errors

 Table 1 shows these three categories of errors with the number and percentage of each type.

  

                (Table 1: No. & Percentage of Error Categories)

 Secondly, the errors in each category were divided into more subcategories so as to cover the various types of error ( see table 2 ).

 The other points which might require some investigation are degree of deviation from L2 norm and the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the study. We believe that any deviant structure which leaves no doubt of its unacceptable form is to be taken as an error. Besides, the lower frequency of an error might not necessarily indicate that this type of error is less difficult than the others. On the contrary, a process of avoidance might cause a considerable decrease in the number of errors. Concerning the quantitative aspects of the study, in fact, we do not claim that the type of errors found in the selected structures are more serious than the other types, which for various reasons cannot be seen in the present data.

 However, in the remaining part of this paper, we will attempt to analyze most of the types of error shown in table 2 and specify possible causes for their occurrence.

 

             (Table 2: Number & percentage of error subcategories)

 2.1. Morphological Errors

It has been observed that morphological errors constituted %79.5 of the total number of errors in the collected data (see table 1). A careful examination of these errors revealed that most of them could be attributed to two main sources:

1. interference from the MT, i.e. interlingual errors.
2. interference from the other structures of English itself, i.e. intralingual errors.

 However, our effort of classifying these errors was not entirely successful. We noticed that some of the errors could be interpreted as inter- and intralingual errors, i.e. there is some sort of overlap between these phenomena. This matter will be examined whenever the situation arises. It has been found that %29.5 of the total number of the morphological errors could be traced to interference from the MT, whereas %70.5 of these errors are attributable to interference from the other structures of English (see table 3). This might indicate that the majority of the morphological errors are caused by the TL itself rather than the MT. In other words, L1 interference factor tends to play a minor role in the occurrence of these errors in comparison with other far more important contributory factors.

 However, we hope that our attempt of analyzing what we regard to be the most important types of error in this category will reflect the main characteristics of these errors.

 2.1.1. Omission of verb to be

It has been noticed [ Scott & Tucker, 1974: 77 ] that Arabic-speaking students tend to omit the copula in the construction of utterances which require the use of this verb. This might be attributed to the fact that ‘verb to be’ does not exist in Arabic. Therefore, the omission of the copula could be interpreted as a negative transfer from the MT, i.e. the Arab learners tend to construct their utterances according to a rule from L1. We often find sentences like:

 * 1. ---because he very late.

* 2. ---because Sunday a holiday.

 Meanwhile, the omission of the auxiliary ‘be’ could be taken as an intralingual error. For instance, in the construction of the progressive, learners often add ‘ing’ to the base verb but omit the auxiliary. Such error cannot be attributed to MT interference because learners seem to know the rule of this aspect which does not exist in Arabic. It might rather indicate a developmental stage in the process of acquiring the TL, i.e. the learners have not yet mastered the L2 rule of the progressive aspect. Furthermore, it might imply that the learners are employing the strategy of simplification as a way of reducing the burden of the complex system of the new language. Here are some examples taken from the collected data.

 * 3. He having breakfast.

* 4. When the telephone rang, the writer still having breakfast.

 In general, it was found that the omission of the auxiliary and copula was the most frequent error among the Arab-speaking students. With regard to its sources, it is believed that the non-existence of this structure in Arabic is a major cause for its occurrence, though the lack of mastery of the L2 rule should be taken into consideration as well.

 2.1.2. Lack of agreement between subject and its verb

This type of error accounted for %13.5 of the total number of morphological errors in our collected data (see table 2). It has been noticed that all the erroneous structures are intralingual (see table 3). This type of error could be traced to the incomplete application of rules. In other words, it might represent the degree of development of the rules required to produce acceptable utterances. Here are some examples taken from our data:

 * 5. Each elephant have a trainer.

* 6. ---because he have holiday.

* 7. The trainer rub the skin elephant.

* 8. ---because they was waiting someone to welcome the new year.

 All these examples clarify that learners tend to ignore the rules concerning the agreement between subject and its verb ( verb to have, verb to be, third singular-s ). These deviant structures might indicate that the learners are simply ignorant of some aspects of these rules.

 

(Table 3: Number & percentage of inter and intralingual errors in the morphological category)

 2.1.3. Errors in the use of prepositions                                                                                                           

These errors accounted for %12 of the total number of morphological errors in our   data. It is claimed  [ Scott & Tucker, 1974: 85 ]  that this type of error might occur because there is no one-to-one correspondence between Arabic and English prepositions. In fact, any Arabic preposition could be translated into several prepositions in English. This often leads to confusion and misuse of the structural item. However, errors of preposition were found to be of two main types: substitution and redundancy. Errors of substitution could be traced to an interference from the MT as well as from other English forms. Here are some examples taken from our data:

* 9.   The writer gets up very late because in Sundays a holidays.

* 10. He went to bed very late in night. 

* 11. ---because wanted for welcome the new year.

 Whereas the errors in examples (9,10,11) are typical errors for MT interference, the error in ( 12 ) is considered to be as a result of confusion between the various uses of prepositions in English. Arab learners often confuse ‘by / with’, ‘from / of’, ‘in / at’, ‘for / about’ and ‘below / under’. The reason for such confusion might be that the students learn the semantic meaning of the English prepositions before they learn the restrictions on their use.

Arab learners also tend to use prepositions redundantly. The redundant use of prepositions can be attributed to MT interference. The following example illustrates this:

 * 12. We go on New Year’s Eve to home.

 2.1.4. Errors in the use of articles

Arabic nouns are marked as definite or indefinite by the presence or absence of the article, i.e. the indefinite article does not exist in Arabic. The non-existence of the indefinite article in Arabic often leads to a state of confusion and therefore the occurrence of errors. However, a consideration of some instances of our students’ errors might be useful. The following are examples of this type of error:

 * 13. ---because he have holiday.

* 14. The aunt Lucy phoned the writer.

* 15. ---because the Sunday a holiday.

 The omission of the indefinite article in (13) as well as the redundant use of the definite article in (14,15) could be attributed to the phenomenon of MT interference. In fact, these errors are typical translations of the Arabic structures.

Other examples which might be examined are the following:

 * 16. ---because [ a ] Sunday a holiday.

* 17. The most talented beasts in the circus [ an ] elephants.

 The misuse of the indefinite articles ( a, an ) in these two examples could be traced, however, to the confusion between the rule restrictions of articles in English.

 2.1.5. Errors in tenses

It is crucial, at first, to note that Arabic has only two tenses: the perfect which is used to express complete actions, and the imperfect tense which is used for incomplete actions. These tenses correspond very roughly to English past and present. The future is expressed in Arabic by using a prefix or a function word before the verb. The imperfect tense is used for this purpose. The progressive and perfective aspects do not exist in Arabic ( note that the perfect tense in Arabic correspond to past tense ). However, tenses in general are seen as a problematic area for Arab learners. These errors constituted %25 of the total number of morphological errors in our data. Here are some examples of this type of error:

 * 18. He [ was stay ] in his bed.

* 19. Lucy [ is phoned ] the writer.

* 20. It [ was stopped at five to twelve.

* 21. ---because they [ were wanted ] the new year.

* 22. When the telephone rang, the writer [ was already got up ].

 We believe that the major factors which induce these errors are the complex system of English tenses, and the teaching techniques employed  in  the  presentation  of  the  various  verb  forms.  For  instance, contrastive  presentation of  two or more  tenses  might  lead  to  a state  of confusion which often leads the learners to build up false hypotheses and therefore produce errors. However, the present writer believes that the mastery of tenses comes at a late stage of acquisition for our learners in general. Therefore, errors in this area of the language should be taken as real indicators of the learner’s transitional competence.

 2.2. Syntactic errors

Syntactic errors accounted for %12.5 of the total number of errors in the collected data. They were classified into two subcategories ( see table 2 ). It was also found that MT interference and interference from the other forms of English seem to be the main source for the occurrence of these errors. However, we faced the same difficulty of overlap between these sorts of error. Table 4 gives an approximate view of the number and percentage of inter- as well as intralingual errors.

 

                    ( Table 4: Number and percentage of syntactic errors )

 2.2.1. Errors in word order

These errors accounted for %62.5 of the total number of syntactic errors in the collected data ( see table 2 ). Such erroneous structures indicate that learners are employing their limited experience and knowledge of the target language in the construction of its various structures. This type of error can be seen in the following examples:

 * 23. ---because holiday his on Sundays.

* 24. Elephant each have a trainer.

* 25. No, doesn’t the circus have any trouble with its elephants.

 Though these errors reveal the degree of development of the learners’ linguistic competence, we found it difficult to specify obvious sources for their occurrence. MT interference and interference from other forms of English seem as usual to be the main causes for this type of deviation ( see table 4 ). However, one might also postulate that faulty comprehension in the teaching process could be the reason for false hypotheses,  and therefore the production of deviant structures.

 2.2.2. Errors in the negative

Arab learners, in general, tend to  drop the auxiliary when they construct a  negative  form  in English. This type of error might be regarded as being similar to the ones made by a child when acquiring his native language, i.e. the same strategy of simplification is being employed in the process of acquiring the foreign language. On the other hand, one might argue that since the auxiliary does not exist in Arabic, these errors could be traced to MT interference. In fact, it is difficult to determine one source for this kind of error. It might be postulated that a combination of both transfer and simplification could be the cause for these errors, i.e. the learner is applying these two strategies altogether when encountering the TL. The following is an example taken from our data: 

 * 26. The circus not have any trouble with its elephants.

 The error in this example could be seen as an interference from Arabic in which the negative is formed of ‘not + the present form of the verb’. Meanwhile, the same error could also be taken as a matter of simplification. Let us look at another example:

 * 27. ---because the clock wasn’t strike.

 The type of error here is far from being the result of employing the strategies of transfer or simplification. Such an error could be seen as an inadequate application of the rule, i.e. the learner has not yet mastered the restrictions of negative formation rule in English.

 2.3. Lexical errors

The error types within this domain involve two main categories. These are:

1. confusion of words on the grounds of formal similarity
2. confusion of words on the grounds of meaning.

These errors, however, constituted only %8 of the total number of our collected data. Table 5 below shows the number and percentage of the main two types of error in this category. Both types will be examined and traced to their causes in the following two sections.

 

                     (Table 5: Type & percentage of lexical errors)  

• Confusion of words on the grounds of formal similarity

Learners often tend to confuse words which are similar in form, but different in meaning. Instances of this type are given:

 * 28. ---because it was the last day of the year and they [went] to

          welcome the new year. [wanted]

* 29 ---because Sunday is [whole day]. [holiday]

 This type of error could be attributed to the procedures applied in teaching or testing these elements. For example, if a learner is asked to select a suitable word to fill in the blank in the following sentence

 Some rivers are ------------ polluted. [heavy / heavily]

 we should expect a state of confusion and therefore the occurrence of an error.

 2.3.2. Confusion of words on the grounds of meaning

Learners were also found to confuse words which have some sort of semantic relationship. They simply fail to use the correct element in the right position. We often find errors like the ones given below:

 * 30 [Her] aunt Lucy phoned the writer. [His]

* 31. People gathered under the town hall clock [until] welcome the new year. [so as to]

 These errors which might indicate a particular stage of development in the learner’s linguistic competence could be traced to some teaching techniques which focus on the presentation of related pairs of words, e.g. 

 I am [looking for] a baby sitter to [look after] my baby.

 In general, lexical errors were found to be the result of a state of confusion between the various elements of English itself. MT interference has no clear role in the occurrence of these errors.

 3. Conclusion

Through the process of analyzing our learners’ errors we came to certain conclusions. First, it was found that MT interference plays a minor role in the occurrence of errors when compared with other important factors. On the other hand, we found that learners employ a combination of strategies in the process of encountering the target language. These strategies seem to be the major source for the learners’ errors, i.e. they result from the task of processing data and inducing rules which the learner is constantly testing their validity.

The study of errors, therefore, could provide us with a picture of the linguistic development of a learner and give us indicators of the strategies utilized in approaching the TL (see Corder, 1974: 125).

However, we believe that any remedial procedures should take into consideration these strategies which seem to be responsible for the whole process of language learning. 

 Appendix 1

 Give suitable answers to the following questions: 

1. Why does the writer get up very late on Sundays?
2. Who phoned the writer?
3. At what time did the clock stop?
4. What was the writer doing when the telephone rang?
5. Where was the writer when Aunt Lucy phoned?
6. Does the circus have any trouble with its elephants?
7. What does each elephant have?
8. What does the trainer do?
9. What are the most talented beasts in the circus?
10. Where did we go on New Year’s Eve?

 Appendix 2

 I ) Morphological Errors 

Omission of verb to be

1. He having breakfast.
2. He still having breakfast.
3. ---because he very late.
4. When the telephone rang the writer still having breakfast.
5. ---because Sunday a holiday.
6. The elephants most talented beasts in the circus.
7. The most talented beasts in the circus the elephants.

   Lack of agreement between subject and its verb

1. ---because he sometimes stay in bed until lunch time.
2. The writer get up very late on Sundays because the Sundays is his holiday.
3. ---because Sundays is a holiday.
4. ---because he have holiday.
5. because they was waiting someone to welcome the new year.
6. Each elephant have a trainer.
7. The trainer rub the skin elephant.

Errors in the use of preposition

1. The writer gets up very late---because [ in ] Sundays a holidays.
2. ---because he went to bed very late [ in ] night.
3. His aunt Lucy phoned [ to ] him.
4. We go on New Year’s Eve to home.
5. ---because wanted welcome [ to ] the new year.
6. The writer [ in ] home when aunt Lucy phoned.

 Errors in the use of participles and infinitives

1. He was hasing his breakfast.
2. He was have breakfast.
3. ---because wanted for welcome the new year
4. The writer was look out of the window.
5. ---because he doesn’t have any work to doing.
6. ---because they were waited the new year.

 Errors in the use of articles

1. ----because the Sunday is a holiday.
2. ---because he have holiday.
3. ---because a Sunday a holiday.
4. The aunt Lucy phoned the writer.
5. The most talented beasts in the circus an elephants.

 Errors in tenses

1. The writer was looked out of the window.
2. He was have breakfast.
3. The writer has breakfast. [was having ]
4. He was stay in his bed.
5. The writer got up very late on Sundays.
6. When the telephone rang the writer was already got up.
7. The writer had already get up.
8. Aunt Lucy was phoned the writer.
9. Lucy is phoned the writer.
10. It was stopped at five to twelve.
11. The clock stop at five to twelve.
12. Lucy was phoned the writer.
13. ---because they were waited the new year.

 Omission of the subject

1. ---because sometimes stay in bed until lunch time.
2. ---because were waited to welcome the new year.
3. ---because refused to welcome the new year.
4. ---because welcome the new year.
5. ---because waited for welcome the new year.

 Errors in the possessive

1. The trainer rubs the skin elephant.
2. The trainer rubs the elephant skin.

 

 II ) Syntactic Errors

 Errors in word order

1. ---because is on Sundays a holiday.
2. ---because holiday his on Sundays.
3. Elephant each have a trainer.
4. No, [doesn’t] the circus have any trouble with its elephants.
5. [doesn’t] the circus have any trouble with its elephants.

 Errors in the negative

1. ---because the clock wasn’t strike.
2. No, the circus have any trouble with its elephants.
3. The circus not have any trouble with its elephants.

 III ) Lexical Errors

 Confusion of words on the grounds of formal similarity

1. ---because it was the last day of the year and they went [ wanted ] to

      welcome the new year.

  2. ---because Sundays is whole [holiday].

 Confusion of words on the grounds of meaning

1. [Her] aunt Lucy phoned the writer. [ his ]
2. [Your] aunt Lucy phoned the writer. [ his ]
3. People gathered under the town hall clock [ until ] welcome the new

      year. [so as to]

 References

 Corder, S.P. (1974) “Error Analysis”, in J.P.B. Allen & S. Pit Corder

           (eds.). Techniques in Applied Linguistics.  London:  Oxford University Press.

Corder, S.P. (1981). Error Analysis and Interlanguage. Oxford: OUP.

Dulay, H.C., M.K. Burt & S. Krashen (1982). Language Two. Oxford: OUP.

Richards, Jack C.  (1971). “A Non-contrastive Approach to Error Analysis”, ELT.

           Vol. 25, pp. 204-19.

Richards, Jack C. (1974). Error Analysis: Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition. London: Longman.

Sharma, S.K. ( 1981 ). “ Error Analysis: Why and How ”, in English Teaching Forum, July, 1981.