Error analysis (linguistics)
1 Errors Denition
According to J. Richard et al, (2002), an error is the use
of a word, speech act or grammatical items in such a way
it seems imperfect and signicant of an incomplete learn-
ing (184). It is considered by Norrish (1983, p. 7) as a
systematic deviation that happens when a learner has not
learnt something, and consistently gets it wrong. How-
ever, the attempts made to put the error into context have
always gone hand in hand with either Language Learn-
ing and Second Language acquisition processes, Hen-
drickson (1987:357) mentioned that errors are Signal
that indicate an actual Learning process taking place and
that the learner has not yet mastered or shown a well-
structured competence in the target language.
All the denitions seemed to stress either on the system-
atic deviations triggered in the language learning process,
or its indications of the actual situation of the language
learner themselves which will later help the monitor be
it an applied linguist or particularly the language teacher
to solve the problem respecting one of the approaches ar-
gued in the Error Analysis (Anefnaf 2017) , the occur-
rence of errors doesnt only indicate that the learner has
not learned something yet, but also it gives the linguist the
idea of whether the teaching method applied was eec- The actual state of the speaker somehow involves and in-
tive or it needs to be changed.
According to Corder (1976) errors are signicant of three
things, rst to the teacher, in that they tell him, if he or
she undertakes a systematic analysis, how far towards that
goal the learner has progressed and, consequently, what
remains for him to learn. Second, they provide the re-
searcher with evidence of how language is learned or ac-
quired, and what strategies or procedures the learner is
employing in his discovery of the language. Third (and
in a sense this is their most important aspect) they are
indispensable to the learner himself, because we can re-
gard the making of errors as a device the learner uses
in order to learn (p. 167). The occurrence of errors is 3 Error Analysis Approach
merely signs of the present inadequacy of our teaching
methods (Corder 1976, p. 163).
There have been two schools of thought when it comes
to errors analysis and philosophy, the rst one, according
to Corder (1967) linked the errors commitment with the
teaching method arguing that if the teaching method was
adequate, the errors would not be committed, the second
school believed that we live in an imperfect world and that
errors correction is something real and the applied linguist
cannot do without it no matter what teaching approach
they may use.
2 Errors Vs Mistakes
Chomsky (1965) made a distinguishing explanation of
competence and performance on which, later on, the
identication of Mistakes and Errors will be possi-
ble, Chomsky stated that We thus make a fundamen-
tal distinction between competence (the speaker-hearers
knowledge of his language) and performance (the actual
use of language in concrete situations) ( 1956, p. 4).
In other words, errors are thought of as indications of
an incomplete learning, and that the speaker or hearer
has not yet accumulated a satised language knowledge
which can enable them to avoid linguistics misuse. Relat-
ing knowledge with competence was signicant enough
to represent that the competence of the speaker is judged
by means of errors that concern the amount of linguistic
data he or she has been exposed to, however, performance
which is the actual use of language does not represent the
language knowledge that the speaker has. According to J.
Richard et al (2002) people may have the competence to
produce an innitely long sentence but when they actually
attempt to use this knowledge (to perform) there are
many reasons why they restrict the number of adjectives,
adverbs, and clauses in any one sentence (2002, 392).
uences the speakers performance by either causing a
good performance or mistakes. Thus, it is quite obvi-
ous that there are some kind of interrelationship between
competence and performance; somehow, a speaker can
perform well if he or she has had already a satised lin-
guistics knowledge. As a support to this, Corder (1967)
mentioned that Mistakes are of no signicance to the
process of language learning (P. 167).
Before the rise of Error Analysis approach, Contrastive
Analysis had been the dominant approach used in deal-
ing and conceptualizing the learners errors in the 1950s,
this approach had often gone hand in hand with concept
of L1 Interference and precisely the Interlingual eect
(Anefnaf Z. 2017), it claimed that the main cause of com-
mitting errors in the process of second language learning
is the L1, in other words, the linguistic background of
the language learners badly aects the production in the
target language.
1
2 4 ERRORS TYPES
X. Fang and J. Xue-mei (2007) pointed out that Con-
trastive analysis hypothesis claimed that the principal bar-
rier to second language acquisition is the interference of
the rst language system with the second language sys-
tem and that a scientic, structural comparison of the two
languages in question would enable people to predict and
describe which are problems and which are not. Error
Analysis approach overwhelmed and announced the de-
cline of the Contrastive Analysis which was only eective
in phonology. and According to J. Richard et al. (2002)
EA developed as a branch of Linguistics in the 1960s and
it came to light to argue that the mother tongue was not
the main and the only source of the errors committed by
the learners. In addition, Hashim, A. (1999) mentioned
that the language eect is more complex and these errors
can be caused even by the target language itself and by
the applied communicative strategies as well as the type
and quality of the second language instructions.
The aim of EA according to J. Richard et al (2002) is,
rst, to identify strategies which learners use in language
learning, in terms of the approaches and strategies used in
both of teaching and learning. Second, to try to identify
the causes of learners errors, that is, investigating the mo-
tives behind committing such errors as the rst attempt to
eradicate them. Third, to obtain information on common
diculties in Language Learning, as an aid to teaching or
in the preparation of the teaching materials,
The two major causes of error, coined by the Error Anal-
ysis approach, are the Interlingual error which is an error
made by the Learners Linguistic background and Native
language interference, and the Intralingual error which
is the error committed by the learners when they misuse
some Target Language rules, considering that the error
cause lies within and between the target language itself
and the Learners false application of certain target lan-
guage rules.
Error analysis in SLA was established in the 1960s by
Corder and colleagues.[1] Error analysis (EA) was an al-
ternative to contrastive analysis, an approach inuenced
by behaviorism through which applied linguists sought to
use the formal distinctions between the learners rst and
second languages to predict errors. Error analysis showed
that contrastive analysis was unable to predict a great ma-
jority of errors, although its more valuable aspects have
been incorporated into the study of language transfer. A
key nding of error analysis has been that many learner
errors are produced by learners making faulty inferences
about the rules of the new language.
Error analysts distinguish between errors, which are sys-
tematic, and mistakes, which are not. They often seek
to develop a typology of errors. Error can be classi-
ed according to basic type: omissive, additive, substi-
tutive or related to word order. They can be classied
by how apparent they are: overt errors such as I an-
gry are obvious even out of context, whereas covert er-
rors are evident only in context. Closely related to this
is the classication according to domain, the breadth of
context which the analyst must examine, and extent, the
breadth of the utterance which must be changed in order
to x the error. Errors may also be classied according
to the level of language: phonological errors, vocabulary
or lexical errors, syntactic errors, and so on. They may
be assessed according to the degree to which they inter-
fere with communication: global errors make an utter-
ance dicult to understand, while local errors do not. In
the above example, I angry would be a local error, since
the meaning is apparent.
From the beginning, error analysis was beset with
methodological problems. In particular, the above ty-
pologies are problematic: from linguistic data alone, it
is often impossible to reliably determine what kind of
error a learner is making. Also, error analysis can deal
eectively only with learner production (speaking and
writing) and not with learner reception (listening and
reading). Furthermore, it cannot account for learner use
of communicative strategies such as avoidance, in which
learners simply do not use a form with which they are
uncomfortable. For these reasons, although error analy-
sis is still used to investigate specic questions in SLA,
the quest for an overarching theory of learner errors has
largely been abandoned. In the mid-1970s, Corder and
others moved on to a more wide-ranging approach to
learner language, known as interlanguage.
Error analysis is closely related to the study of error treat-
ment in language teaching. Today, the study of errors is
particularly relevant for focus on form teaching method-
ology.
In second language acquisition, error analysis studies
the types and causes of language errors. Errors are
classied[2] according to:
modality (i.e., level of prociency 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. oc-
casional errors/errors in performance)
cause (e.g., interference, interlanguage)
norm vs. system
4 Errors Types
Linguists have always been attempting to describe the
types of errors committed by the language learners, and
that is exactly the best way to start with, as it helps out
the applied linguist to identify where the problem lies.
According to Dulay et al. (1982) errors take place when
 3

the learner change the surface structure in a particularly part of the Overgeneralizations, (this later is subtitled into
systematic manner (p. 150), thus, the error, no matter Natural and developmental learning stage errors), D.E are
what form and type it is, represent a damage at the level results of normal pattern of development, such us (come
of the target language production. = comed) and (break = breaked), D.E indicates that the
Errors have been classied by J. Richard et al (2002) into learner has started developing their linguistic knowledge
two categories. The Interlingual Error and the Intralin- and fail to reproduce the rules they have lately been ex-
gual Error, those two elements refer respectively to the posed to in target language learning.
negative inuence of both the speakers native language, Induced errors: as known as Transfer of Training, errors
and the target language itself. Interlingual error is caused caused by misleading teaching examples, teachers, some-
by the interference of the native language L1 (also known times, unconditionally, explain a rule without highlight-
as interference, linguistic interference, and crosslinguis- ing the exceptions or the intended message they would
tic inuence), whereby the learner tends to use their lin- want to convey. J. Richard et al. (2002) provided an ex-
guistic knowledge of L1 on some Linguistic features in ample that occurs at the level of teaching prepositions and
the target language, however, it often leads to making er- particularly at where the teacher may hold up a box
rors. The example, provided by J. Richard et al (2002) and say I am looking at the box , the students may un-
the incorrect French sentence Elle regarde les (She derstand that at means under , they may later utter
sees them), produced according to the word order of the cat is at the table instead of the cat is under the
English, instead of the correct French sentence Elle les table. Errors of avoidance: these errors occur when the
regarde (Literally, She them sees). (P. 267) shows the learner fail to apply certain target language rules just be-
type of errors aroused by the negative eect of the native cause they are thought of to be too dicult. Errors of
language interference. Intralingual error is an error that overproduction: in the early stages of language learning,
takes place due to a particular misuse of a particular rule learners are supposed to have not yet acquired and accu-
of the target language, it is, in fact, quite the opposite of mulated a satised linguistic knowledge which can enable
Interlingual error, it puts the target language into focus, them to use the nite rules of the target language in order
the target language in this perspective is thought of as an to produce innite structures, most of the time, begin-
error cause. Furthermore, J. Richard, et al. (2002) con- ners overproduce, in such a way, they frequently repeat a
sider it as one which results from faulty or partial learn- particular structure.
ing of the target language. (p.267) thus the intralingual
error is classied as follow: Overgenerations: in Linguis-
tic, overgeneralizations error occur when the speaker ap-
plies a grammatical rule in cases where it doesnt apply.
5 Error Analysis Experiments (
Richard et al, (2002) mentioned that they are caused by Morocco as a case of study ) Mr.
extension of target language rules to inappropriate con-
text. (P.185). this kind of errors have been committed
Zakariae Anefnaf
while dealing with regular and irregular verbs, as well as
the application of plural forms. E.g. (Tooth == Tooths PS: This part is taken from Z. Anefnafs research
rather than teeth) and (he goes == he goed rather than
went). Simplications: they are resulting from learn-
ers producing simpler linguistic forms than those found 5.1 Diculties of learning English in Mo-
in the target language, in other words, learners attempt rocco
to be linguistically creative and produce their own poetic
sentences/utterances, they may actually be successful in As we have mentioned before in our theoretical part
doing it, but it is not necessary the case, Corder (as cited that the four basic skills of a language are the speak-
in Mahmoud 2014:276) mentioned that learners do not ing/writing/reading/listening, these skills are usually used
have the complex system which they could simplify. This to test the learning development. Moreover, we decided
kind of errors is committed through both of Omission and to make this question for the sake of knowing where the
addition of some linguistic elements at the level of either Moroccans English learning diculties at the very begin-
the Spelling or grammar. A. Mahmoud (2014) provided ning of the process lie. However, and for the rst time,
examples based on a research conducted on written En- we gave the participants to cross more than one choice
glish of Arabic-speaking second year University students: because we were sure that, beginners nd diculties at
(A) Spelling: omission of silent letters: * no (= know) * many levels, and the results were:
dout (= doubt) * weit (weight) (B) Grammar: [1] Omis-
sion: * We wait ^ the bus all the time. * He was ^ clever The results indicate that 54 participants have encountered
and has ^ understanding father. [2] Addition: * Students diculties at the level speaking, and 44 found writing
are do their researches every semester. * Both the boys skill dicult to develop, and the diculties at the level
and the girls they can study together. of listening were encountered by 33 of the participants,
and lastly, 13 goes to the reading skill.
Developmental Errors: this kind of errors is somehow
These results enable us to conclude that Moroccans have
4 6 STEPS

problems at the level of the production in the process of is actually just the second foreign language in Morocco,
English Learning, we can apparently notice that speak- and, nally, Moroccans may view that immediate correc-
ing/writing are the most frequent problem that a huge tions simply more eective than delayed ones.
number of the participants have had, so that applied lin-
guists along with teachers should innovate new techniques
that primarily focus on improving the production of the 5.4 Preferred correction manner
English Learners in Morocco.
This question has to do with the second part of the correc-
tion situation which is the correction manner, we tended
5.2 The cause of Errors in Morocco to know how the participants would like to be corrected
and how they would like to x the errors. However,
The question was thoroughly chosen as it will either ap- we provided the participants with three choices; Self-
prove or deny the approach of Error Analysis in our com- correction correction, peer correction and teacher correc-
munity, Morocco, however, Error Analysis claims that tion. And the results were as follow:
the causes of the Errors commitment do not only lie in
the target language, we tended to ask the participants in- The results might have been anticipated, 53% of English
directly about what was the causes of their committing Learners prefer teacher correction, 26% of them prefer
errors, whether it was the L1, L2 or Both and the results Self-correction, and 21% prefer Peer Corrections.
were as follow: These results can only show that students trust more their
The results have shown that 43% of the participants teacher than both of their classmates and themselves, and
thought that both of the L1 and L2 are the causes of the since that Self-correction is considered to be the most ef-
results of the errors they have made, and after that comes fective one as we have mentioned in our theoretical part.
the native language alone as the source of the errors ac- Consequently, teachers should rst teach their students
cording to the perspective of 37% of the participants, how to properly correct their errors and mistakes, and,
and, lastly, the target language is considered by 20% of in the meanwhile, building up trust between the students.
them as the only source of errors. However, all the three kind of corrections should be set
together in order to eradicate and get rid of the errors
The results, somehow, go hand in hand with the approach
of error analysis, they indicate that the errors analysis
approach is actually applicable to the Moroccan Com-
munity, thus, while trying to reduce and get rid of the 6 Steps
problems predicted through the systematic comparison
between L1 and L2, the applied Linguists should also fo- According to linguist Corder, the following are the steps
cus on the complexity and the false application of the lin- in any typical EA research:[3]
guistic elements within and between the target language
as well.
1. collecting samples of learner language

5.3 Preferred Correction time 2. identifying the errors

After identifying the error and its cause, the major part, 3. describing the errors
which is correcting it, takes place. However, this question
has to do with the error correction time preferred by the 4. explaining the errors
learners themselves, whether immediate or delayed ones.
The results were as follow: 5. evaluating/correcting the errors
the results indicate 72% of the participants prefer being
corrected immediately corrected, yet only 28% see that collection of errors: the nature and quantity of errors is
delayed ones would be better. likely to vary depending on whether the data consist of
Immediate corrections can annoy the learners whose per- natural, spontaneous language use or careful, elicited lan-
sonality is not strong enough to perceive corrections as guage use.
tools which enable them to improve and develop either Corder (1973) distinguished two kinds of elicita-
the accuracy or uency. However, the fact that Moroc- tion:clinical and experimental elicitation. clinical elici-
cans, through our survey, seemed to prefer immediate tation involves getting the informant to produce data of
corrections which may be thought of as indication of sev- any sort, for example by means of general interview or
eral interpretations. First of all, Moroccans personality writing a composition. experimental elicitation involves
while learning English is probably strong enough to han- the use of special instrument to elicit data containing the
dle the interruptions. Second of all, Moroccans, maybe, linguistic features such as a series of pictures which had
do not feel ashamed of making errors in English, which been designed to elicit specic features.
 5

7 Bibliography [2] Cf. Bussmann, Hadumod (1996), Routledge Dictionary

of Language and Linguistics, London: Routledge, s.v.
error analysis. A comprehensive bibliography was pub-
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax.
lished by Bernd Spillner (1991), Error Analysis, Amster-
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. P. 4 dam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Corder, Pit. (1967). the signicance of learners errors.
[3] Ellis, Rod (1994). The Study of Second Language Acqui-
International Review of Applied Linguistics, 161-170
sition. p. 48.
Dulay, H., Burt, M., & Krashen, S.D. (1982). Language
two. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 150 down-
loaded from http://libgen.me/view.php?id=827673
Edje, J (1989). Mistakes and Correction. London: Long-
man. P. 26
Fang, X. & Xue-mei, J. (2007). Error analysis and the
EFL classroom teaching: US-China education review,
4(9), pp. 1014.
Hashim, A. (1999). Crosslinguistic inuence in the writ-
ten English of Malay undergraduates: Journal of Modern
Languages, 12, (1), pp. 5976.
Hendrickson, J.M. (1987). Error correction in foreign
language teaching: Recent theory, research, and practice.
In M.H. Long & J.C. Richards (Eds.), Methodology in
TESOL: A book of readings. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
p. 357
Mahmoud, A. (2014). Simplication in language learn-
ing: what do learners simplify? Studies in English Lan-
guage Teaching, 2(3). (P. 276) retrieved from www.
scholink.org/ojs/index.php/selt
Norrish, J. (1983). Language learners and their errors.
London: Macmillan Press. P. 7
Richards, J. C. & Schmidt, R. (2002). Dictionary of lan-
guage teaching and applied linguistics (3rd Ed.). London:
Longman.
Richards J. C., & Rodgers T. S.(2001). Approaches and
Methods in Language Teaching. (2nd edition), Cam-
bridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. P. 153
Anefnaf. Z ( 2017) English Learning: Linguistic
aws, Sais Faculty of Arts and Humanities, USMBA,
Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/33999467/
English_Learning_in_Morocco_Linguistic_Flaws

8 See also
Error (linguistics)
Error treatment (linguistics)
Second language acquisition

9 Notes
[1] Corder, S. P. (1967). The signicance of learners er-
rors. International Review of Applied Linguistics. 5:
160170. doi:10.1515/iral.1967.5.1-4.161.
6 10 TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

10 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

10.1 Text
Error analysis (linguistics) Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Error_analysis_(linguistics)?oldid=797646183 Contributors: Bearcat,
Rjwilmsi, GnniX, Cydebot, Cnilep, Mr. Stradivarius, SchreiberBike, Yobot, AnomieBOT, Klbrain, AsceticRose, BG19bot, Adventur-
ousSquirrel, Finnegas, Me, Myself, and I are Here, Crystallizedcarbon, Bender the Bot, Zack.the.linguist and Anonymous: 11

10.2 Images

10.3 Content license

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0