The Analysis of L2 Learners'Fossilization in Interlanguage

第29卷第3期江西理工大学学报Vol.29,No.32008年6月JOURNALOF JIANGXI UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE ANDTECHNOLOGYJun . 2008文章编号:1007-1229(2008 )03 -0076-03The Analysis of L2 Learners’Fossilizationin Interlanguage*广东外语外贸大学硕士研究生:赵冰指导教师:余卫华研究方向:英语语言学及应用语言学论文答辩时间:2007年1月Abstract: The author designed a questionnaire, emailed and interviewed thirty advanced L2 learners who work asL2 lecturers in a university to get a survey on the processing of fssiliation in their foreign language leaming andteaching from the causes of purpose of learming, teaching tasks and other factors involved. All of the subjectsthought that their command of the target language was not as good as a native speaker s of target language in manyaspects. That is ,there existed fosilization among them. However, most of them agreed that their command of thetarget language was adequate for their professional and communication needs. Results also suggest that fosilizationcan be conscious to this group of L2 learners; it is deeply related with the L2 learners’motivations; it can beaffected by personal features such as ages, leamning styles and teaching tasks; it is changeable and unpredictable;and it is difficult to eradicate.Key words: interlanguage;fossilization;L2 learners; motivation; input ;outputCLC number:H31Article character:AIntroduction(1 )Background of the study.Most L2 learmers and lecturers find that after they reached a certain stage ofdevelopment, they can not achieve L2 proficiency further. American linguist, Selinker'noted that many L2 learmers(perhaps as many as 95 percent) fail to reach target language competence. They stop learning when theirinter-language contains at least some rules different from those of the target language system. An importantcharacteritic that can be observed in the study of the interlanguage of second and foreign language learners is thefact that some language features that are part of the learmers ’interlanguage and differ from the correct or moreadequate target language form do not seem to follow any kind of progression towards proficiency in the targetlanguage but quite the opposite网These interlanguage forms seem to be used by language learners in spite of theirtheoretical capacity (both linguistic and intellectual) to include the right target language form in their interlanguagerepertoire.This phenomenon of certain linguistic features becoming fixed in some or , most learners' interlanguage hasbeen referred to in the literature , after Selinker as fsslization.(2)Research questions.The phenomenon mentioned above leads us to consider the reason why majority of theL2 learners (advanced learners included) stop progressing in their acquisition of the target language and why somekinds of errors tend to persist in their interlanguage , and what are the traces of their fosilization processing.Language teachers in colleges are considered as advanced L2 language learmers, with good command of foreignlanguages. They have double identity-- advanced English learmers and English teachers. Does the phenomenonalso exist among them ?In what way?1 Design of InterviewsThe author selected a group of 30 L2 lecturers in a university中国煤化Iage teachers fromdiferent language backgrounds and sharing the common featurlYHCNM H Gee in the foreignlanguage and a need of the foreign language in their profession. Information was gathered through the use of此文为删节稿,原论文约2万字.第29卷第3期ZHAO bing:The Analysis of L2 Learners' Fossilization in Interlanguage77introspective techniques based on a set of questions and topics which the individuals answered and commented inthe interviews. With regard to the data collection, it is important initially to state that the focus of research is not ontracing developmental patterms of acquisition as characteristicTable1 Age of subjectsof early SLA research. The interview data has been collectedOver50 40- 4930-39Under 30from subjects who have been acquiring and using English forNumber214many years in a s0- called English-using environmentfollowing several years of formal English training and leamingTable2 Teaching years of subjectsin China or some English- -spoken countries. The object ofTeachingyears Over 2010-195-10obtaining the data is then to characterize the English language914competence of the subjects after long exposure to a formalTable3 Degree of subjectsgrounding in the language, and to search for evidence (DegreePH.D.persistent fossilized structures and features .The followingtables (1-3 )will give basic information of these thirty subjects.2 Data Analysis and Interpretation2.1 Motivations and attitude of the subjects'L2 learning and teachingFrom the gathering of the subjects' answers, we could find a very interesting fact that almost all of the subjectsconsidered that their command of the target language was not as good as a native speaker s of that target language inmany different areas, such as pronunciation, vocabulary, set expressions and fluency, and more interestingly, theyalso thought that their interlanguage had somehow stopped progressing in many different aspects in the last fewyears. Some people mentioned that they found they were only progressing if at all, in the area of the terminology andforms most strongly related to the teaching or professional situation. So as we can see, according to the individuals’own perception of their IL, their interlanguage has become fossilized. That is to say, they obviously reached aplateau in their learming.However, when asked“how do you think your commanding of the target language afects your teaching?"Twenty- -nine of them thought that their command of the target language is definitely enough both for their professionand for their communication needs. The remarks also proved that this group thought although their interlanguagehad somehow stopped progressing in many different aspects during their teaching, they were progressing in the areaof the terminology and forms most strongly related to the teaching or professional situation. And this remark alsobrings about a question which I think is fundamental if we are to understand the process of fosilization ininterlanguage: the notion of purpose.2.2 Input and outputIn the interviews of our group, when they were asked about what they thought to be the causes of theirfossilization, thirty of them were all agreed in considering the fact that they had rare chance to live in a foreigncountry of target language that this implies, was the main reason for fossilization. In a rich environment ofauthentic language, in theory , this immersion experience should provide the appropriate type of“input " whichwould lead to the acquisition of correct forms and structures F. In practice, however, because much of this authenticlanguage is beyond the input threshold of the learner ,it is useless for acquisition .2.33 Personal featuresAccording to the data, we would recognize that the learner is not simply a language learming machine, that is,he does simply absorb syntax, phonology and lexicon- -he is an actor in the social world and is therefore concermedwith the pragmatic aspect of language- how to do what, and whet中国煤化iegste, and knowsthat he cannot speak in the same way to everyone, that he can noWe can distinguishpersonal features which can afect fosilization in the followingYHCNMHGCognitive style: Following the studies of skehan', we can point out that from a cognitive point of view, one candistinguish between field dependent and field independent individuals. Although originally this was a distinction78江西理工大学学报2008年6月derived from studies of psychology, more precisely from the field of perception, it has also been related to languagelearmning同Put briefly, field dependent learners are more inclined to interpersonal situations, wanting contact withother people, and engaging in verbal interaction with them. This should be beneficial for exposure to language andtherefore language development through interaction. On the other hand, field independent individuals are supposedto have greater analytic and cognitive restructuring capabilities. And more importantly for our purpose, fieldindependents seems to be more resistant to fossilization and show a better capacity to restructure and develop interlanguage systems more readily.Secondly, the role of risk-taking has been considered to be, from the point of view of foreign learming, generallyand pervasively good. Concerming the matter of our paper, it has been suggested that adventurous learners are morelikely to change and also more resistant to fosilization.Finally it should also be mentioned within this description of cognitive and personality factors, that it has beenshown that there is no relationship at all between intellectual capacities and fosilization.2.4 Teaching tasks as a teacherThese 30 lecturers could be cassified into several categories according to their dfferent teaching tasks: the begin-ning courses in the university; the advanced courses and the courses with modern technology. During the interviews,all the subjects admitted the cassfcation of the above three courses. They all hold the viewpoint that it is often theweaker teachers who are assigned the elementary courses, while the advanced classes are taught by the teachers whohave a stronger command of language. It seemed that the degree of feeling fosilized decreased with the rising of thedifficulties of the teaching tasks. In other words, two factors can lead to fosilization: contact with inccurate studentsand the acceptance of inaccurate speech production. It is evident that all the subjects here did think they could notspeak target language accurately in class. And the teachers who teach the beginning courses evaluated worse abouttheir weak performance in class.Two of the teachers even thought owing to their teaching beginning courses, it was hardfor them to use their interlanguage accurately at the advanced level in a native or near-native way.3 Conclusion3.1 A direct conclusionIf we take for granted that these determining causes of fssilization are, i.e. on the hand the idea of purpose andon the other the motivation, it follows that a change both in motivation and purposes can revitalize the learming pro-cess and bring the subjects closer to the target language阿By the way of questioning, we could mention the fact thatthis group of L2 learners possibly may be satisfied with their current fossilization of the commanding of the foreignlanguage or else their fosilization would simply end up in their getting a new chance to contact the target languageenvironment to get developed later.3.2 Some investigations of fossilizationTo recapitulate these last considerations, I would like to emphasize the fllowing facts about fssilization:一it can be conscious,- -it is not experienced as a problem by individuals,一it is deeply connected to the idea of purpose,-it is changeable, i.e. it can be modified if purposes and factors vary,-it is difcult to eradicate,一and finally, it is unpredictable.References:(15Selinker L.Reliscovering Inerlanguag(M}. White Plains: Longnan Publishing Group.1992.[]Elie Rod. Inerlangage and the "Ntunl" Route ol Develpment [M. Oxford:Oxfor中国煤化工([3余卫华中国高校的英语教学:主题内容沉浸法研究[M.广州:新世纪出版社20CNMHG[4)Skehan P. Individual Dfrencee in Seond Language Leaming[M]. London: Edward[5]朱曼殊,缪小春心理语言学[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,1990.614 强过渡语石化现象及其教学启示J.外语与外语教学200.(>):28.