A+gengeral+overview+of+interlanguage+fossilization

97A gengeral overview of interlanguage fossilization徐 菁 长春师范学院 外语学院 吉林 长春 130032[中图分类号]：K825.46 [文献标识码]：A [文章编号]：1002-2139(2010)-15-0097-02IntroductionInterlanguage fossilization is a common phenomenon in the field of second language acquisition. Over the past 30 years or so, many researchers and linguists have made various careful studies on the phenomenon of fossilization and they have achieved a lot of insights in the studies and contributed greatly to foreign language teaching and learning. The study on fossilization phenomenon in SLA has been attracting more and more people’s attention.I. The concept of “fossilization”:1.The definition of interlanguageThe term interlanguage was proposed by famous linguist Larry Selinker in 1972 in his thesis with the same title. It was used to refer to the systematic knowledge of language which is independent of the native language and the target language system which the language learner is trying to learn. It takes the mother tongue as the starting point, and gradually approaches to the target language and it is a dynamic language system. Most of the English teachers and language learners have this kind of experience: unlike the previous period when they can make progress steadily, they just didn’t have any progress after several years of studying the language and reach a certain period, at least they cannot see obvious progress.The term has come to be used with different but related meaning: 1) to refer to the series of interlocking systems which characterize acquisition; 2) to refer to the system that is observed at a single stage of development (i.e. ‘an interlanguage’); 3) to refer to particular mother tongue/target language communication. In short, interlanguage refers to the interim grammar, or the continuum of the systematic knowledge of the target language, built by second language learners on their way to the target language. It is between the mother tongue and the target language and develops gradually, with the input increasing, toward the target language. The following figureshows the development of an interlanguage:Development of the Interlanguage 2. The notion of fossilizationSelinker (1972) remarks that perhaps a mere 5% of learners succeed in learning a second language, they can achieve native-speaker competence. That is, over 95% of L2 learners fail to reach the end of the interlanguage continuum. This is perhaps the most striking feature that distinguishes the second from the first language acquisition: children’s grammar generally does not get stuck at an interim stage short of full L1 competence, whereas the grammar of second language learners typically does. Selinker (1972) suggests that there is a psychological mechanism that underlies the production of fossilized items, which he terms as ‘fossilization’. Later researchers try to define fossilization from different perspectives, thus the definitions of fossilization vary a great deal. But Selinker’s original 1972 definition remains the most widely accepted one, which goes as follows: Fossilizable linguistic phenomena are linguistic items, rules and subsystems which speakers of a particular native language will tend to keep in their interlanguage relative to a particular target language, no matter what the age of the learner or amount of explanation and instruction he receives in the target language”.Ellis also gives a definition of fossilization: Fossilization occurs in most languages and cannot be remedied by further instruction. Fossilized structures can be realized as errors or as correct target language forms. If, when fossilization occurs, the learner has reached a stage of development in which feature X in his interlanguage has assumed the same form as in the target language, then fossilization of the correct form will occur. If, however, the learner has reached a stage in which feature Y still does not have the same form as the target language, then fossilization will manifest itself as an error. Selinker makes it clear that fossilization applies to both non-target language and target language forms. What should be noticed here is that the presently and commonly accepted concept of fossilization is slightly different from what Selinker meant in 1972. Thus, it is evident that fossilization occurs not only when learners produce errors but also when they produce target-like utterances. Present understanding about this concept of fossilization focuses more, however, on the learner’s error.II. Types of fossilizationSelinker classified fossilization according to its form and property. In form, fossilization falls into two major categories, namely individual fossilization and group fossilization. In property, it can be divided into temporary fossilization and permanent fossilization.1.Individual fossilization and group fossilizationIndividual fossilization is the persistence of individual learner’s interlanguage development, while the group fossilization is the plateau in the diachronic development of a community language. Individual fossilization consists mainly of two types: error reappearance and language competence fossilization. The former type is the repeated appearance of inappropriate IL structures, which are not restricted to syntactic structures in L2 learners’output in spite of any corrective feedback. This type of fossilization, i.e. error reappearance, can be easily found in the interlanguage of beginners or learners with low proficiency. On the contrary, language competence fossilization is usually found in the L2 learners who have been learning the target language for a long period of time or the learners who are very fluent speakers of the L2. This type of fossilization is the plateau in the development of L2 learners’ phonological, syntactic, lexical and pragmatic competence. When an L2 learner is incapable to convert new L2 input into intake, or is unable to realize the inappropriate structures in his IL, he falls in the swamp of competence fossilization. In fact, the boundary between error reappearance and competence fossilization is more ambiguous in the current studies, because researchers notice that reappearing errors are often the demonstrations of competence fossilization. This new relationship is gradually recognized as a theoretical prerequisite for the empirical studies on fossilization.Group fossilization is the process through which some established language variations have been widely accepted by the whole community (Selinker, 1972). Such variations are treated as the standard language of the community, which leads to a new dialect. Although the study on group fossilization is not directly SLA related, its results often shed light on individual fossilization. For example, pidginization, which can illustrate the process of group fossilization in a certain degree, is said to resemble the early stage of individual IL development.2.Permanent fossilization and temporary fossilizationAccording to Selinker, some fossilized language forms get stuck in the interlanguage forever. This is permanent fossilization. Other fossilized forms can change into standardized forms with the provision of optimal input. This kind of fossilization is temporary, it is also called stabilization. This discrimination is of much practical significance. It is hopeful to overcome stabilization or temporary fossilization while permanent fossilization is hard to eradicate.Many Chinese researchers believe that the classification into temporary and permanent fossilization attaches great significance to the study on the second language learning and teaching in China, because the interlanguage systems of most Chinese students are at the temporary fossilization stage, which is also name “plateau period” or “sophomore phenomenon”. The following figure can illustrate the development of Chinese students’ language competence which follows a CI-TF-CII-PFpattern: Pattern of Chinese students’ development(Dai Weidong&Niu Qiang, 1999)The CI (1st climax of acquisition) stage is also named incubation period, during which learners accumulate the basic knowledge of pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary gradually and solidly. After this period, a vast majority of learners are obstructed from striding into the CII (2nd climax of acquisition) stage but stepping into TF stage where their IL competence seems to come to a halt no matter what input they receive, though it is hypothesized that learners in TF stage may enter the CII stage if they are exposed to “optimal input”. However, this hypothesis lacks accurate empirical evidence, hence it is hard to judge whether learners’ stabilized interlanguage develops.ConclusionTo sum up, there is no uniform answer of what fossilization is, however, from the miscellaneous conceptions, two broad and uncontroversial features (by now) are acceptable, namely: that fossilization involves premature cessation of development in defiance of optimal learning conditions; and that fossilizable structures are persistent over time, against any enviornmental influences, including consistent natural exposure to the target language and pedagogic interventions. Types of fossilization reveal its stages, characters, including objectives. Nevertheless, the issues of why L2 learners are unable to reach the level of competence they have intrigued many linguistics, researchers as well as teachers. It is prominent for language teachers to understand fossilization with a view to teaching language efficiently.References:[1] Selinker.L.Interlanguage [J]. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 1972.[2] Lemendella, J.T. General principles of neurofunctional organization and their manifestations in primary and non-primary language acquisition [J]. Language Learning, 1977, (27), 155-196.[3] Ellis,R. The Study of Second Language Acquisition [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994.[4] Rod Ellis. Underastanding Second Language Acquisition[M]. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 1999.[5] Richards,J.C. Error Analysis [M] London: Longman Group Limited, 1974.[6] 杨连瑞 张德禄等 二语习得研究与中国外语教学[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社[7] 牛强.过渡语的石化现象及其教学启示[J].外语与外语教学, 2000.（4）：28-31.,98A gengeral overview of interlanguage fossilization作者：徐菁作者单位：刊名：青年文学家英文刊名：THE YOUTH WRITERS年，卷(期)：2010(15)1.牛强过渡语的石化现象及其教学启示 2000(04)2.杨连瑞;张德禄二语习得研究与中国外语教学3.Richards,J.C Error Analysis 19744.Rod Ellis Underastanding Second Language Acquisition 19995.Ellis R The Study of Second Language Acquisition 19946.Lemendella,J.T General principles of neurofunctional organization and their manifestations in primary and nonprimary language acquisition 1977(27)7.Selinker.L Interlanguage 19721.赵冰The Analysis of L2 Learners'Fossilization in Interlanguage[期刊论文]-江西理工大学学报2008,29(3)2.周雅娴Interlanguage Theory and English Teaching[期刊论文]-读与写(教育教学刊)2009,6(7)3.李渝An Investigation into the Interlanguage of Advanced learner,College English Teacher[期刊论文]-读与写（教育教学刊）2007,4(9)4.李津津.Li Jinjin中介语石化现象和英语语言学习[期刊论文]-中国科技信息2009(16)5.徐菁Factors contributing to fossilization[期刊论文]-青年文学家2010(14)6.周玉萍.吕卉.ZHOU Yu-ping.LV Hui第二语言习得中的中介语僵化现象成因分析[期刊论文]-通化师范学院学报2009,30(7)7.丁文昭Interlanguage and English Teaching[期刊论文]-科技信息2010(14)8.白凤欣.BAI Feng-xin国内第二语言习得中介语及其石化现象理论研究综述[期刊论文]-河北师范大学学报（哲学社会科学版）2007,30(4)9.吴丁娥第二语言习得中的过渡语及其僵化研究[期刊论文]-外语教学2001,22(2)本文链接：/Periodical_qnwxj201015080.aspx。