1.

Cognitive and Linguistic Constraints on Phoneme Isolation

in Dutch Kindergartners (EJ796049)

Author(s): de Graaff, Pub Date: 2008-08-00

Saskia; Hasselman, Pub Type(s): Journal
Fred; Bosman, Anna Articles;
M. T.; Verhoeven, Reports -
Ludo Evaluative
Source: Learning and Peer-Reviewed: Yes
Instruction, v18 n4
p391-403 Aug 2008

Abstract:
This study investigated whether task instructions affect sound-
isolation performance. The effects of phoneme class and phoneme
position were also assessed. Two hundred Dutch kindergartners
were presented with a free-sound-isolation task and its constrained
counterparts: an initial-, a middle-, and a final-sound-isolation task.
All tasks contained 17 CVC words. Children's performance on the
free-sound-isolation task was better than on the constrained tasks.
On all four tasks, children made fewer errors in isolating the initial
phoneme than the final phoneme. Isolating the middle phoneme
proved to be the most demanding. The effect of phoneme class
depended on the type of task and on phoneme position. Findings
were placed against the background of sonority and word-final
phoneme vocalization in Dutch. (Contains 1 table and 2 figures.)

2. Limits on Learning Phonotactic Constraints from Recent

Production Experience (EJ809720)

Author(s): Warker, Jill Pub Date: 2008-09-00

A.; Dell, Gary Pub Type(s): Journal
S.; Whalen, Articles;
Christine Reports -
A.; Gereg, Research
Samantha
Peer-Reviewed: Yes
Source: Journal of
Experimental
Psychology:
Learning, Memory,
 and Cognition, v34
n5 p1289-1295
Sep 2008

Abstract:
Adults can learn new artificial phonotactic constraints by
producing syllables that exhibit the constraints. The experiments
presented here tested the limits of phonotactic learning in
production using speech errors as an implicit measure of
learning. Experiment 1 tested a constraint in which the placement
of a consonant as an onset or coda depended on the identity of a
nonadjacent consonant. Par

3. Effects of Onset- and Rhyme-Related Distractors on

Phonological Processing in Children with Specific
Language Impairment (EJ811643)

Author(s): Seiger-Gardner, Pub Date: 2008-10-00

Liat; Brooks, Pub Type(s): Journal
Patricia J. Articles;
Source: Journal of Speech, Reports -
Language, and Research
Hearing Research, Peer-Reviewed: Yes
v51 n5 p1263-
1281 Oct 2008

Abstract:
Purpose: This study used the cross-modal picture-word
interference task of P. J. Brooks and B. MacWhinney (2000) to
compare effects of phonologically related words on lexical access
in children with specific language impairment (SLI). Method:
Children (7;1 [years;months]-11;2) named pictures while
ignoring auditory distractors. Three stimulus asynchrony
conditions varied the timing of distractors

4. Spanish-Speaking Children's Spelling Errors with

English Vowel Sounds that Are Represented by Different
Graphemes in English and Spanish Words (EJ813150)

Author(s): Sun-Alperin, M. Pub Date: 2008-10-00

 Kendra; Wang, Min Pub Type(s): Journal
Articles;
Source: Contemporary
Reports -
Educational
Research
Psychology, v33 n4
p932-948 Oct 2008 Peer-Reviewed: Yes

Abstract:
Vowels in Spanish have direct one-to-one letter-sound
correspondences, whereas vowels in English usually have
multiple spellings. For native Spanish-speaking children learning
to spell in English, this transition from a shallow to a deep
orthography could potentially cause difficulties. We examined
whether the spelling of English vowel sounds was particularly
difficult for native Spanish-speaking

5. Canonical and Epenthetic Plural Marking in Spanish-

Speaking Children with Specific Language Impairment
(EJ813842)

Author(s): Grinstead, Pub Date: 2008-10-00

John; Cantu- Pub Type(s): Journal
Sanchez, Articles;
Myriam; Flores- Reports -
Avalos, Blanca Research
Source: Language Peer-Reviewed: Yes
Acquisition: A
Journal of
Developmental
Linguistics, v15 n4
p329-349 Oct 2008

Abstract:
In this study, we investigate whether specific language
impairment (SLI) manifests itself grammatically in the same way
in Spanish and English with respect to nominal plural marking.
English-speaking children with SLI are very proficient at marking
plural on nouns. Spanish has two main nominal plural
allomorphs: /s/ and /es/. The /es/ allomorph has received
multiple theoretical treatments,

6. Learning Correct Responses and Errors in the Hebb

Repetition Effect: Two Faces of the Same Coin (EJ793380)

Author(s): Couture, Pub Date: 2008-05-00

Mathieu; Lafond, Pub Type(s): Journal
Daniel; Tremblay, Articles;
Sebastien Reports -
Source: Journal of Evaluative
Experimental Peer-Reviewed: Yes
Psychology:
Learning, Memory,
and Cognition, v34
n3 p524-532 May
2008

Abstract:
In a serial recall task, the "Hebb repetition effect" occurs when
recall performance improves for a sequence repeated throughout
the experimental session. This phenomenon has been replicated
many times. Nevertheless, such cumulative learning seldom leads
to perfect recall of the whole sequence, and errors persist. Here
the authors report evidence that there is another side to the Hebb

7. Past Tense Morphology in Cri Du Chat Syndrome:

Experimental Evidence (EJ791086)

Author(s): Wium, Pub Date: 2008-04-00

Kristin; Kristoffersen, Pub Type(s): Journal
Kristian Emil Articles;
Source: Clinical Linguistics & Reports -
Phonetics, v22 n4-5 Research
p401-406 Apr 2008 Peer-Reviewed: Yes

Abstract:
It has been observed that persons with Cri du chat syndrome
(CDCS) have poor language production. However, very few studies
have addressed the question whether all aspects of language
production are equally afflicted, or whether there are differences
between for instance phonological and morphological abilities. The
present study was aimed at investigating to what extent persons
with CDCS inflect
8. Perception and Confusion of Speech Sounds by Adults
with a Cochlear Implant (EJ791070)

Author(s): Rodvik, Arne K. Pub Date: 2008-04-00

Source: Clinical Linguistics Pub Type(s): Journal
& Phonetics, v22 Articles;
n4-5 p371-378 Apr Reports -
2008 Research
Peer-Reviewed: Yes

Abstract:
The aim of this pilot study was to identify the most common
speech sound confusions of 5 Norwegian cochlear implanted post-
lingually deafened adults. We played recorded nonwords, aCa, iCi
and bVb, to our informants, asked them to repeat what they
heard, recorded their repetitions and transcribed these
phonetically. We arranged the collected data in confusion
matrices to find the most common and m

9. Training 8-Year-Old French Immersion Students in

Metalinguistic Analysis: An Innovation in Form-Focused
Pedagogy (EJ789257)

Author(s): Bouffard, Laura Pub Date: 2008-00-00

Annie; Sarkar, Pub Type(s): Journal
Mela Articles;
Source: Language Reports -
Awareness, v17 n1 Evaluative
p3-24 2008 Peer-Reviewed: No

Abstract:
Most research on language awareness in a second language (L2)
has been carried out with adult learners. This research presents
data showing that pedagogical techniques can be devised
enabling children as young as 8 to develop metalinguistic
awareness of their emerging L2 system. Building on existing work
by Canadian researchers, this classroom-based study
investigated tasks designed to

10. Fortition and Lenition Patterns in the Acquisition of

Obstruents by Children with Cochlear Implants
(EJ787180)

Author(s): Kim, Pub Date: 2008-03-00

Jungsun; Chin, Pub Type(s): Journal
Steven B. Articles;
Source: Clinical Linguistics Reports -
& Phonetics, v22 Evaluative
n3 p233-251 Mar Peer-Reviewed: Yes
2008

Abstract:
This paper investigates patterns of error production in 10 children
who use cochlear implants, focusing specifically on the acquisition
of obstruents. Two broad patterns of production errors are
investigated, fortition (or strengthening) errors and lenition (or
weakening) errors. It is proposed that fortition error patterns
tend to be related to the process of phonological development,
because
 Error Analysis
A comprehensive bibliography
Bernd Spillner
Library and Information Sources in Linguistics 12
1991. xxxix, 552 pp.
Publishing status: Available
Hardbound – In stock
978 90 272 3731 6 / EUR 160.00 / USD 240.00
Errors are information. In contrastive linguistics, they are thought
to be caused by unconscious transfer of mother tongue structures
to the system of the target language and give information about
both systems. In the interlanguage hypothesis of second language
acquisition, errors are indicative of the different intermediate
learning levels and are useful pedagogical feedback. In both cases
error analysis is an essential methodological tool for diagnosis and
evaluation of the language acquisition process. Errors, too, give
information in psychoanalysis (e.g., the Freudian slip), in language
universal research, and in other fields of linguistics, such as
linguistic change.This bibliography is intended to stimulate study
into cross-language, cross-discipline and cross-theoretical, as well
as for language universal, use of the numerous, but sometimes
hard to come by, error analysis studies. 5398 titles covering the
period 1578 up to 1990 (with work in more than 144 languages
and language families) are cited, cross-referenced, and described.
The subject areas covered are numerous. For example:
Theoretical Linguistics (Linguistic Typology, Cognitive Linguistics),
Historical Linguistics (Language Change), Applied Linguistics (e.g.
Speech Disorders), Translation, Mother Tongue Acquisition,
Foreign Language Learning (Negative Transfer, Intralingual and
Interlingual Errors), Psychoanalysis (Slips of the Tongue),
Typography, Shorthand, Clinical Linguistics and Speech Pathology,
Reading Research, Automatic Error Detection, Contact Linguistics
(Code-switching, Interference), etc.

Next to students picking their ears with their pencils while kicking their neighbours'
chairs and muttering secret deprecations in advanced Mother Tongue in the middle of
your explanation of the future perfect continuous, it's probably the most annoying
phenomenon in the business: students of all ages, walks and IQs repeating the same
mistakes interminably despite frequent and focused reminders of forms they have
learned and still remember (when their attention is drawn to them).

Krashen explains this phenomenon in terms of three hypotheses:

1. The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis

2. The Natural Order Hypothesis
3. The Monitor Hypothesis

The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis states that acquisition and learning are different
phenomena. We may learn, for example, a great deal about the workings of a car
without ever being able to fix one, simply because knowledge about something does
not constitute knowledge of something. We may complete a weekend diving course
and complete a handful of successful recreational dives, only to forget a few weeks
down the road what exactly we're supposed to check before we enter the water, how
to swim efficiently with flippers, and how to tell our partner that we're out of air.

I will discuss what I see as the elements involved in this disparity further down the
page or later in this blog. For now, you need only think of a time when you forgot to
do or apply something you had learned and then were reminded of, only to declare,
"Ah! I knew that!"

The Natural Order Hypothesis states that some items of a language, namely functors,
are acquired in a certain order which is consistent across learners, ages, and first
languages. In the context of Krashen's theory, it is this hypothesis that explains the
discrepancy between learning and acquisition. Items may be learned, or brought into
our awareness, even applied under conditions of present awareness, in any order, but
will only be truly mastered, or acquired, in an order which is natural to the
learner/acquirer. The basic principle of natural order underlies our assumptions, based
on millenia of observation, about children's motor development. First they flop, then
they the flip, then they roll around, then they sit, then they crawl, then they walk, then
they jump, then they run, then they dance, and so on. Something like that. The
difference is that in motor development, acquisition of one skill requires or is
expedited by acquisition of the previous one, while in language acquisition, no such
skill-based "seriation" is apparent.

The Monitor Hypothesis states that learned language can be drawn upon under
conditions which allow the learner time to draw upon them, most often conditions
which require or remind the learner to draw upon them. Think how often you have
stalled or frozen in the middle of a task because you could not instinctively recall the
next step, perhaps because the next step did not come easily to mind or because
pressure of some sort forced you to rely on second nature. The Monitor Hypothesis
suggests that language items (specifically grammar items) which have not become
second nature require deliberate thinking before they will manifest themselves in
language production. When we have leisure to employ the Monitor or when we know
that correct grammatical form is essential to the success of an utterance, we check our
utterances before sharing them.
Taken together, these three hypotheses seem to me to explain the problems that I am
currently bent on helping students overcome.

Error Analysis: Review

OUTLINE

1. Introduction
2. Error Analysis (EA): its roots and development
3. EA in 1970s: popularity and criticism
4. EA in 1990s: new perspective
3.1. Data Driven Learning and EA
3.2. Negative Evidence and EA
5. EA in Learner Corpora Research
4.1. Comparison of EA in 1970s with EA based on learner corpora
4.2. Similarity and differences
4.3. Significance of learner language analysis on computer
INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, I am going to discuss the significance of evaluating Error Analysis

(EA) studies in 1970s and early 1980s and set the proper perspective toward the
use of learner corpora in analysing learner language errors in order to better
understand the process and sequence of acquisition of English as a
second/foreign language.

Before 1960s, when the behaviouristic viewpoint of language learning was

prevailing, learner errors were considered something undesirable and to be
avoided. It is because in behaviourists perspectives, people learn by responding
to external stimuli and receiving proper reinforcement. A proper habit is being
formed by reinforcement, hence learning takes place. Therefore, errors were
considered to be a wrong response to the stimulus, which should be corrected
immediately after they were made. Unless corrected properly, the error became a
habit and a wrong behavioural pattern would stick in your mind.

This viewpoint of learning influenced greatly the language classroom, where

teachers concentrated on the mimicry and memorisation of target forms and tried
to instill the correct patterns of the form into learners' mind. If learners made any
mistake while repeating words, phrases or sentences, the teacher corrected their
mistakes immediately. Errors were regarded as something you should avoid and
making an error was considered to be fatal to proper language learning
processes.

This belief of learning was eventually discarded by the well-known radically

different perspective proposed by N. Chomsky (1957). He wrote in his paper
against B.F. Skinner, that human learning, especially language acquisition, cannot
be explained by simply starting off with a "tabula rasa" state of mind. He claimed
that human beings must have a certain kind of innate capacity which can guide
you through a vast number of sentence generation possibilities and have a child
acquire a grammar of that language until the age of five or six with almost no
exception. He called this capacity "Universal Grammar" and claimed that it is this
very human faculty that linguistics aims to pursue.

This swing-back of pendulum toward a rationalistic view of language ability lead

many language teachers to discredit the behaviouristic language learning style
and emphasize cognitive-code learning approach. Hence, learners were
encouraged to work on more conscious grammar exercises based on certain rules
and deductive learning began to be focused again. This application of new
linguistic insights, however, did not bear much fruit since Chomsky himself
commented that a linguistic theory of the kind he pursued had little to offer for
actual language learning or teaching (Chomksy 1966) .

In the school of applied linguistics, however, this shift towards the innate human
capacity raised a growing interest in the learner's powers of hypothesis formation
as he moves towards the bilingual competence sufficient for his communicative
needs. One major result of this shift of attention was an increasing concern in the
monitoring and analysis of learner language. The concepts of 'interlanguage' and
'approximative system' presented challenging areas of descriptive enquiry.

In 1970s and early 80s, a large number of papers on error analysis were published
throughout the world. However, it lost its attention and enthusiasm gradually as
more and more criticism was made against the approach and method of error
analysis. As the present writer makes an attempt to analyse learner language
oncomputer, it is essential to review the previous work of error analysis and
identify what it aimed to achieve and how it failed. Otherwise, it could be just a
repetition of what was already done a decade ago and not very much meaningful.
Error analysis using learner corpora must be significantly different from traditional
error analysis, in quality and quantity. I would like to show the readers whether
that is really the case.

I will first review some classic articles on error analysis by Corder, Selinker,
Richards, among others and try to establish what the original purpose of error
analysis was like or what it inteded to do. Then I will describe the criticisms
against error analysis in 80s and early 90s and summarise what traditional error
analysis failed to offer. Next, I will introduce recent research results on the role of
negative evidence in language learning and data-driven learning in order to show
the effectiveness of giving feedback to learners about their common errors in a
new language learning perspective. Finally, I would like to make a systematic
comparison between traditional error analysis and "learner corpus-based" error
analysis so that hopefully I can convince the readers of the powers of learner
corpora in systematic investigation of learner language.
Error Analysis (EA): its roots and development

Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991) claims that the study of SLA can be said to have
passed through a series of phases defined by the modes of inquiry researchers
have utilized in their work: contrastive analysis, error analysis, performance
analysis and discourse analysis (p.81). As we look into the roots and development
of error analysis, let us first overview contrastive analysis so as to gain better
insight into how error analysis became more popular among SLA researchers.

Contrastive Analysis

Before the SLA field as we know it today was establised, from the 1940s to the
1960s, contrastive analyses were conducted, in which two languages were
systematically compared. Researchers at that time were motivated by the
prospect of being able to identify points of similarity and difference between
native languages (NLs) and target languages (TLs). There was a strong belief that
a more effective pedagogy would result when these were taken into
consideration. Charles Fries, one of the leading applied linguists of the day, said:
"The most efficient materials are those that are based upon a scientific
description of the language to be learned, carefully compared witha parallel
description of the native language of the learner."(Fries 1945: 9)

Robert Lado, Fries' colleague at the University of Michigan, also expressed the
importance of contrastive analysis in language teaching material design:

Individuals tend to transfer the forms and meanings and the distribution of forms
and meanings of their native language and culture to the foreign language and
culture - both productively when attempting to speak the language and to act in
the culture and receptively when attempting to grasp and understand the
language and the culture as practised by natives. (Lado 1957, in Larsen-Freeman
& Long 1991:52-53)

This claim is still quite appealing to anyone who has attempted to learn or teach a
foreign language. We encounter so many examples of the interfering effects of
our NLs.

Lado went on to say a more controversial position, however, when he claimed

that "those elements that are similar to his native language will be simple for him,
and those elements that are different will be difficult" (Lado 1957:2). This
conviction that linguistic differences could be used to predict learning difficulty
produced the notion of the contrastive analysis hypothesis (CAH): "Where two
languages were similar, positive transfer would occur; where they were different,
negative transfer, or interference, would result." (Larsen-Freeman & Long 1991:
53)
Corder (1967): Introduction of the Concept 'Error Analysis'

It was S.P. Corder who first advocated in ELT/applied linguistics community the
importance of errors in language learning process. In Corder (1967), he mentions
the paradigm shift in linguistics from a behaviouristic view of language to a more
rationalistic view and claims that in language teaching one noticeable effect is to
shift the emphasis away from teaching towards a study of learning. He
emphasises great potential for applying new hypotheses about how languages are
learned in L1 to the learning of a second language. He says "Within this context
the study of errors takes on a new importance and will I believe contribute to a
verification or rejection of the new hypothesis." (in Richards 1974:.21)

Corder goes on to say that in L1 acquisition we interpret child's 'incorrect'

utterances as being evidence that he is in the process of acquiring language and
that for those who attempt to describe his knowledge of the language at any point
in its development, it is the 'errors' which provide the important evidence.(ibid.:
23) In second language acquisition, Corder proposed as a working hypothesis that
some of the strategies adopted by the learner of a second language are
substantially the same as those by which a first language is acquired. (It does not
mean, however, the course or sequence of learning is the same in L1 and L2.) By
classifying the errors that learners made, researchers could learn a great deal
about the SLA process by inferring the strategies that second language learners
were adopting. It is in this Corder's seminal paper that he adds to our thinking by
discussing the function of errors for the learners themselves. For learners
themselves, errors are 'indispensable,' since the making of errors can be regarded
as a divice the learner uses in order to learn. (Selinker 1992: 150)

Selinker (1992) pointed out the two highly significant contributions that Corder
made: "that the errors of a learner, whether adult or child, are (a) not random, but
are in fact systematic, and are (b) not 'negative' or 'interfering' in any way with
learning a TL but are, on the contrary, a necessary positive factor, indicative of
testing hypotheses. (ibid:151) Such contribution in Corder (1967) began to
provide a framework for the study of adult learner lanugage. Along with the
influence of studies in L1 acquisition and concepts provided by Contrastive
Analysis (especially language transfer) and by the interlanguage hypothesis (e.g.
fossilization, backsliding, langauge transfer, communication and learning
strategies), this paper provided the impetus for many SLA empirical studies.

EA in 1970s: popularity and criticism

REFERENCES (to be completed)

Chomsky, N. (1959) A review of B.F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior. Language, 35,

pp.26-58.

Chomsky, N. (1966) Research on language learning and linguistics. Report of the

Northeast Conference, 1966, pp. ??

Corder, S.P. (1967) The significance of learners' errors. Reprinted in J.C.Richards

(ed.) (1974, 1984) Error Analysis: Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition.
London: Longman, pp. 19 - 27 (Originally in International Review of Applied
Linguistics, 5 (4))

Fries, C.C. (1945) Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Language. Ann
Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Larsen-Freeman, D. & Long, M. (1991) An Introduction to Second Language

Acquisition Research. New York: Longman.

Error analysis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Error analysis is the study of kind and quantity of error that occurs, particularly in
the fields of applied mathematics (particularly numerical analysis), applied linguistics
and statistics.
Contents
[hide]

• 1 Error analysis in numerical modelling

• 2 Error analysis in language teaching
• 3 Error analysis in molecular dynamics
simulation
• 4 Error Analysis in Undergraduate Science
Laboratory
• 5 References
• 6 See also

• 7 External links

Error analysis in numerical modelling

In numerical simulation or modelling of real systems, error analysis is concerned with
the changes in the output of the model as the parameters to the model vary about a
mean.

For instance, in a system modelled as a function of two variables z = f(x,y). Error

analysis deals with the propagation of the numerical errors in x and y (around mean
values and ) to error in z (around a mean ).[1]

In numerical analysis, error analysis comprises both forward error analysis and
backward error analysis. Forward error analysis involves the analysis of a function
which is an approximation (usually a finite polynomial) to a function to determine the
bounds on the error in the approximation, i.e. to find ε such that . Backward error
analysis involves the analysis of the approximation function , to determine the bounds
on the parameters such that the result z' = z.[2]

Error analysis in language teaching

In language teaching, error analysis studies the types and causes of language errors.
Errors are classified[3]according to:

• modality (i.e. level of proficiency in speaking, writing, reading,

listening)
• linguistic levels (i.e. pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, style)
• form (e.g. omission, insertion, substitution)
• type (systematic errors/errors in competence vs. occasional
errors/errors in performance)
• cause (e.g. interference, interlanguage)
• norm vs. system

Error analysis in molecular dynamics simulation

In molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, there are errors due to inadequate sampling
of the phase space or infrequently occurring events, these lead to the statistical error
due to random fluctuation in the measurements.

For a series of M measurements of a fluctuating property A, the mean value is:

When these M measurements are independent, the variance of the mean <A> is:

but in most MD simulations, there is correlation between quantity A at different time,

so the variance of the mean <A> will be underestimated as the effective number of
independent measurements is actually less than M. In such situations we rewrite the
variance as :

where φμ is the autocorrelation function defined by

We can then use the autocorrelation function to estimate the error bar. Luckily, we
have a much simpler method based on block averaging.[4]

Error Analysis in Undergraduate Science Laboratory

Error Analysis in an Undergraduate Science Laboratory

References
1. ^ James W. Haefner (1996). Modeling Biological Systems: Principles
and Applications. Springer, 186–189. ISBN 0412042010.
2. ^ Francis J. Scheid (1988). Schaum's Outline of Theory and Problems
of Numerical Analysis. McGraw-Hill Professional, 11. ISBN 0070552215.
3. ^ Cf. Bussmann, Hadumod (1996), Routledge Dictionary of Language
and Linguistics, London: Routledge, s.v. error analysis. A comprehensive
bibligraphy was published by Bernd Spillner (1991), Error Analysis,
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
4. ^ D. C. Rapaport, The Art of Molecular Dynamics Simulation,
Cambridge University Press.

See also
• Errors and residuals in statistics

• For Error Analysis in Applied Linguistics see Contrastive analysis

External links
[1] – Definitions and graphical explanation.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Error_analysis"
Categories: Mathematics stubs | Numerical analysis