Contrastive linguistics an introduction Tadeusz Piotrowski Contrastive linguistics

Contrastive linguistics: an introduction Tadeusz Piotrowski

Contrastive linguistics: what is it? n Contrastive linguistics is the systematic comparison of two or more languages, with the aim of describing their similarities and differences, n focusing, however, on differences, n it is predominantly practical. n n The term “contrastive linguistics” n was used for the first time by Whorf in 1941.

Basics n Form n lecture n attendance required n Prerequisites n knowledge of basic linguistic notions

Textbooks n Fisiak J. , Lipińska-Grzegorek M. , Zabrocki T. , 1978/1987. n An Introductory English-Polish Contrastive Grammar n Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe n Krzeszowski T. P. , 1984. n Gramatyka angielska dla Polaków. n PWN. Warszawa n Willim, E. and Mańczak-Wohlfeld, E. , 1997. n A contrastive approach to problems with English. n Kraków: PWN.

CL and linguistics n general linguistics n theory of linguistics n similarities in languages § what is common to all languages in the world n comparative linguistics n n differences between languages typology of languages § aiming at classification of all languages in the world n n synchronic or diachronic

CL and comparative linguistics n contrastive linguistics (CL) n differences (and similarities) between two (usually) languages

contrastive linguistics n differences (usually) between two (usually) languages basis for typological description n mainly practical applications n n translation foreign language teaching and learning bilingual lexicography (dictionaries) n why differences? n it is assumed that the two languages are similar except for the points described as different

CL in linguistics n the languages being compared can be related n Polish and English n or can be unrelated n like Polish and Chinese n can be from the same historical period n Polish and English in the 20 th c. n or can be from different historical periods n English and Polish from the 16 th and the 20 th c.

CL in linguistics n usually, however, n CL is synchronic comparative linguistics n without the historical dimension n CL can be n theoretical n applied

theoretical CL n gives an exhaustive account of the differences and similarities between two or more languages, n provides an adequate model for their comparison.

applied CL n on the basis of theoretical framework n provided by theoretical CA/CS, n gives the researcher the information necessary n to conduct actual contrastive analyses.

CL: terms n contrastive linguistics (or its methods) is also called contrastive studies n contrastive analysis n interlingual linguistics n

the rationale for studying CL n who: n prospective teachers of a foreign language

CL and a FL teacher n why: n contrastive studies are (were) used as a means of predicting and/or n explaining difficulties of second language learners n with a particular mother tongue (Polish) n in learning a particular target language (English) n however, CL does not explain all problems of foreign language students

CL and a FL teacher n other hypotheses to explain the problems in learning/teaching a foreign language error analysis n performance analysis n interlanguage studies n language awareness studies n n these belong to applied linguistics n foreign language learnign/teaching methodology

advantages n it is suggested that n when FL learners are made aware of L 1: L 2 contrasts n this makes it easier for them n to learn difficult FL structures n L 1 interference accounts for some 30% of error.

what to compare n early contrastive studies focused on microlinguistic analysis phonology/phonetics n grammar (syntax, inflection) n lexis n n today there also n contrastive pragmatics n n cross-cultural/intercultural pragmatics contrastive rhetoric

what to compare n microlinguistic analysis: examples n What are the consonant phonemes in languages X and Y? n How do they differ in inventory, realization, and distribution? What is the tense system of languages X and Y? n What are the verbs of saying in languages X and Y? n

what to compare n pragmatic analysis: examples n How is cohesion expressed in languages X and Y? n How are the speech acts of apologizing and requesting expressed in languages X and n Y? n How are conversations opened and closed in languages X and Y?

this course n mainly practical n basic theoretical notions n a review of microlinguistic contrasts

how to compare? n what is the basis for comparison? n comparison of seemingly related phenomena: n “to compare them would be tantamount to putting ten-ton lorries and banana skins in the same class on the grounds that neither ought to be left on footpaths”. n Carl James (1980). Contrastive Analysis. London: Longman, p : 167

how to compare? n object A n object B n either have something in common n n and we can compare them or do not have anything in common n and we cannot compare them n it is arguably difficult to find objects that do not have anything in common n but: n God and. . .

how to compare? n that something in common n is not A n is not B n is C n C is called Tertium Comparationis (TC)

Tertium Comparationis n what is common in comparison between languages n is probably the meaning of a pair of sentences, in other words, n their translation equivalence n

translation equivalence n there is one big problem n CL n n translation is not about systems n n studies the systems of two languages it is about texts this is a basic distinction in linguistics n n n system and text langue and parole competence and performance

translation equivalence n text translation n translation of a particular sentence depends n on other sentences around it (context) n on the function of the whole text n n its stylistic level the user of the text n system translation n translation of sentences without any context n though the most probable one is used

translation equivalence n Eng. : n I loved you. n Pol. : n Kochałem n kochałam n kochałom n cię n ciebie n was n Panów n Panie n Państwa

kochałom: an example n „. . . to chybam ja się przesuwało dalej i wchodziło w krąg następnego spojrzenia. . . w miarę postępów [mej wędrówki] powiększałom się i rozpoznawałom siebie. . . ” n Stanisław Lem Maska

system and text equivalence n that is why n system equivalence can be called n correspondence n text equivalence can be called n equivalence

Equivalence/Tertium Comparationis n What is, in fact, equivalence? n we know it is based on a Tertium Comparationis n but what use as a TC?

TC: requirements n TC should be n external to both languages n n a category based on one language has no counterpart usable n for teachers: can be used without extensive theoretical studies

TC in lexical equivalence concept (word) sign- - - - -referent (object)

TC in lexical equivalence n Either referents or concepts can be treated as TCs. n We can reject referents as a TC because, there are no pure references, n the very act of distinguishing a referent depends to a large degree on the relevant language n Engl. finger Pol. palec n

TC in lexical equivalence n Concepts can be also rejected. n They are not suitably external to any language an English word has an English meaning n a Polish word has a Polish meaning n n They are theoretical constructs depending on a language. n Other views.

TC n TC should be external to the two languages n but it should include them n language use? n situation of use of both languages n translation is used in situations when both language are used

situations n "How meaning X is expressed in L 1 and L 2? „ n This is a question based on meaning. n This question goes from the vague notion of meaning, n about which there is little theoretical agreement, n goes to two unknowns: n L 1 and L 2 items. n We can say that we have to do with three unknown objects here.

situations n How else can one find similarities/contrasts in meaning between two languages? n "In the situation S, when an expression X is used by the L 2 speaker to speak of Z, what would be the most natural expression Y used by the L 1 speaker? ". n n n This does not depend on any theoretical assumptions. it includes two known entities (S and X), which are used to reach the third entity (Y). Competent bilinguals can easily answer such questions.

Situations n Situations are either typical of L 1 or of L 2, n and linguistic expressions are included in the situations, not vice versa. n Situations, in turn, cannot be separated from wider contexts, n ultimately from the context of culture.

Situations-applicability n Lyons (1977). Semantics. CUP. n a particular lexeme (or expression, or whole utterance) is applicable (i. e. may be correctly applied) in a certain context, situational or linguistic. . . ; n it is applicable to individuals or properties of individuals. n We may use the term 'applicability', in fact, for any relation that can be established between elements or units of language. . . and entities in, or aspects of, the world in which the language operates.

Equivalence: other types n Tomasz Krzeszowski n statistical equivalence n system equivalence n semanto-syntactic equivalence n rule equivalence n pragmatic equivalence