Universidad de Costa Rica - Sede de Occidente
Revista Pensamiento Actual - Vol 21 - No. 37 2021
ISSN Impreso: 1409-0112 ISSN Electrónico 2215-3586
Educación y Lengua
Período Diciembre 2021-Mayo 2022
116.
- 127.
DOI 10.15517/PA.V21I37.48977
Roberto Mesén-Hidalgo - Juan Carlos Sandí-Delgado
116
Language-use Mistakes and Interlanguage Development in ESL Learners:
Generalizations and Learning Strategies
Errores de uso de Lenguage e Interlenguaje en estudiantes de un segundo idioma: generalizaciones y
estrategias de aprendizaje
Roberto Mesén-Hidalgo1
Juan Carlos Sandí-Delgado2
Fecha de recepción: 02-01-2021
Fecha de aceptación: 15-08-2021
Abstract
This article of scientific research brings together the results of a case study developed to identify factors that interfere during the deve-
lopment of interlanguage (IL) in the acquisition of a Second Language (SLA) at the higher education level. The research is carried out
with a mixed approach that focuses on a descriptive -experimental type. First, the literature review addresses the generalities of IL and
the description of previous experiences in IL development. The learning strategies analysis focuses on how to promote the SLA process
through IL. Secondly, an experimental case study is implemented with 10 students enrolled in a written communication course at the
Universidad de Costa Rica to identify factors that intervene during IL’s development. To this end, the students were asked to write compo-
sitions that were evaluated to identify the learners’ errors and analyze them in terms of learners’ language misinformation to determine
the aspects of IL that affect the learners’ language acquisition process. In conclusion, the learners’ language errors were influenced by
the student’s profile, creative constructions, overgeneralizations and simplification, transfer of training, and interlanguage level. Finally,
it is advisable to execute actions to raise awareness of the IL impact on the SLA process. In the future, efforts will be made to propose
the design of a set of learning strategies that aim to overcome the stages of interlanguage in the SLA process.
Keywords: interlanguage, second language acquisition, learning strategies, interlanguage development, higher education.
Resumen
Este artículo de investigación científica reúne resultados de un estudio de caso desarrollado para determinar factores que intervienen durante
el desarrollo del interlenguaje (IL) en la Adquisición de una Segunda Lengua (SLA) en educación superior. La investigación se realiza con
un enfoque mixto de tipo descriptiva-experimental. Primero, la revisión de literatura aborda las generalidades del interlenguaje y describe
experiencias previas en el desarrollo del IL. Posteriormente, se analizan estrategias de aprendizaje que podrían intervenir en el proceso de
SLA durante el IL. En segundo lugar, se implementa un estudio de caso experimental con 10 estudiantes mayores de edad inscritos en un
curso de comunicación escrita en la Universidad de Costa Rica para identificar factores que intervienen durante el desarrollo del IL. Para
ello, los estudiantes escriben unas composiciones las cuales son evaluadas para identificar errores relacionados a la desinformación del
uso de idioma y determinar los aspectos de IL que podrían afectar el proceso de adquisición de lenguaje. Se concluye que, factores como el
perfil del estudiantado, construcciones creativas, generalizaciones y simplificación, transferencia de capacitación y el nivel de interlenguaje,
podrían influir en la desinformación de uso del idioma por parte de los estudiantes. Finalmente, es recomendable ejecutar acciones para
sensibilizar sobre la importancia del impacto que tiene el IL en el proceso de SLA. A futuro se trabajará en la confección de una propuesta
para diseñar estrategias de aprendizaje orientadas a superar las etapas del interlenguaje en el proceso de SLA.
Palabras clave: interlenguaje, adquisición de una segunda lengua, estrategias de aprendizaje, desarrollo del interlenguaje, educación superior.
1
Magíster en Lingüística Aplicada. Docente e Investigador en la Universidad de Costa Rica, Sede del Caribe, Limón, Costa Rica. Correo
electrónico: roberto.mesen@ucr.ac.cr, ORCID: 0000-0002-9318-7569
2
Magíster en Tecnología Informática Aplicada en Educción. Docente e Investigador en la Universidad de Costa Rica, Recinto de Guápiles -
Sede del Atlántico, Limón, Costa Rica. Correo electrónico: juan.sandidelgado@ucr.ac.cr, ORCID: 0000-0003-3932-3045
Educación y Lengua
117
I. Introduction
of different teaching and learning strategies to overcome
IL. For example, Sykes and Cohen (2018) suggest a
It has been widely understood that acquiring a second
strategy for interlanguage pragmatics that concentrates
language becomes quite challenging for learners.
on learners’ pragmatic knowledge, pragmatic analysis,
In this process, learners make different language
learner subjectivity, and learner awareness. In short, it
mistakes during the time they study a second language.
is suggested that strategies used in ELT may respond
Consequently, before learners achieve advanced language
to language knowledge and analysis. Also, feedback has
competence, they tend to misuse words by making errors
an important role. Feedback and EA present strategies
in the second language
that are essential to provide learners with input to
reconstruct their errors. For example, Ambridge, Pine,
In this process for achieving language competence,
Rowland, and Young (2008) aim at the relevance of
learners speak an interlanguage which is a learner’s
feedback for the learners’ recovery of overgeneralization
dialect created by translating forms of the first language
inaccuracies.
and oversimplifying others in the target language (Chen
& Xu, 2019; Sánchez, 2016). In this conception of learner’s
In response to the previous issue, this research presents
dialect, learners tend to make language mistakes that
an analysis linked to the factors that interfere during
affect their second language use. According to Chen
the learners’ interlanguage in SLA. For this analysis,
and Xu (2019, p. 1) the “Interlanguage is crucial for
different factors and learning strategies are considered
the understanding of human language acquisition and
to identify how they may affect language use during
development”. In understanding this, some aspects about
the learners’ IL development. The analysis aims at the
interlanguage become relevant to clarify, especially
understanding of some factors of IL in the process of
because learners’ interlanguage development may vary
SLA. Furthermore, the analysis also aims to identify how
from one individual to another. In this sense, Gonzales,
the factors identified influence the learners’ language
Gerken, and Gómez (2018) and Nycz (2013) refer to
use. The identification of these factors may serve future
idiosyncratic factors as an individual’s dialect. It means
research to implement a set of teaching strategies to
an idiosyncratic dialect. Even though this assumption is
minimize IL impact and favor the learners’ SLA.
not far from the truth, learners might share some factors
that directly influence interlanguage development; for
From now on, this article is organized as follows: section
example, learners share some common mistakes at
2 discusses the concept of interlanguage. Besides, it
certain levels of language proficiency.
identifies the result of previous experiences in which
interlanguage has been the object of study. Section
Approaching these mistakes becomes crucial for
3 describes the research methodology used. Section
language instructors because they have to help learners
4 analyzes and discusses the results of the different
to overcome those mistakes. In terms of methodological
factors that intervene during IL development in SLA.
strategies that exist to overcome IL stages in SLA, it is
This analysis includes the strategies used by language
also crucial to highlight the role of error analysis (EA) in
learners during interlanguage. Section 5 summarizes
this aspect which is “developed and applied to uncover
the main aspects of the conclusions and suggestions
the systems underlying the mistakes” (Mcdowell &
for future work.
Liardét, 2020, p.18).
II. Theoretical Background
Even though EA is not a direct strategy to remediate
the challenges identified during learners’ IL, it provides
This section offers different definitions for the term
language teachers with data to face the different
interlanguage. It also presents previous experiences in
language misuse found in ELT (Hasbún, 2008). In this
which IL has been the object of study due to its impact
context, the EA function may aim at allowing the design
during SLA. Besides, it allows stating validated theory that
118
Revista Pensamiento Actual - Vol 21 - No. 37 2021 - Universidad de Costa Rica - Sede de Occidente
serves the research questions with answers to understand
Jiang, Ouyang, and Liu (2019) conducted a research to
the factors that affect language use in the SLA process.
analyze the typological structures of the interlanguage of
341 Chinese English language learners from two different
2.1. Interlanguage Definition
secondary schools and a university in China. The study
showed and confirmed that with the progress of second
It is essential to mention the existence of varied definitions
language skills, students’ interlanguage system develops
and concepts for the term interlanguage. However, those
from the native language towards the target language in
definitions and concepts are approached differently
terms of linguistic typology.
depending on the author or researcher’s focus. For
example, Alemi, Eslami, & Rezanejad (2014) define
In the Velayat University of Iran, Sajjad and Rahmani
interlanguage as the study of non-native speakers’
(2015) studied the pre-intermediate EF learners’
linguistic development and action. Also, Pereira (2021,
interlanguage in a class of freshmen. This study aimed
p. 4) defines this concept “as a dynamic process or
at coming up with a comprehension of the EL learners’
continuum that evolves as the learner is exposed to the
interlanguage growth. This was a case study where the
L2 input”.
researchers observed and recorded students’ language
performance in different tasks. This study allowed
The concept of interlanguage used for the purpose of
researchers to evaluate interlanguage development in
this study responds to the authors’ elaboration based
line with linguistic developments studied in the class.
on the definition presented by other researchers (Chao,
The authors concluded that the study benefitted language
2013; Buyse, Fernández, & Verveckken, 2015; Sánchez,
instructors by generating data on learners’ oral production
2016; Chen & Xu, 2019; Jiang, Ouyang, & Liu, 2019) who
and its relation to interlanguage. They concluded that
define interlanguage as a dialect created by students who
the study still requires further replications, but the
learn a second language in which they use forms of the
data collected eased the understanding of interlanguage
first language (L1) and generalize forms of the second
development.
language (L2). Besides, it is crucial to highlight that this
concept may vary in correspondence to the researchers
The studies showed how learners’ language production
and their expertise in the field.
relates to their IL development. For understanding these
learners’ production, there is a need to study mistakes
2.2. Previous Experiences in Interlanguage
that they shared to obtain data about language use during
Development during SLA
the IL development. The different studies also made it
evident that it is required to develop and implement
In the Netherlands, in the University College Utrecht, a
pedagogical strategies that boost learners’ cognitive skills
study was conducted with 13 students whose average age
through innovative teaching processes (Cruz-Sancho &
was 18 who had a beginner Spanish level. The research
Sandí-Delgado, 2014; Sandí-Delgado & Cruz-Alvarado,
focused on examining the experiences interrelated
2017; Sandí-Delgado, Hidalgo-Arias, & Cruz-Alvarado,
to language acquisition. For the study, learners were
2015). In line with this, it becomes crucial to identify the
requested to write an essay. The essays were analyzed
IL development factors during the SLA process. In doing
to identify and characterize the learners’ use of Spanish
this, innovative strategies may be developed shortly to
language past forms. The results showed a list of students’
minimize the negative impact of IL factors that intervene
common mistakes in the conjugation of Spanish verbs in
in learners’ language use during SLA.
the simple past. These results motivated the researcher
(González, 2005) to design an innovative learning strategy
that could allow learners to acquire second language
competencies to conjugate verbs in the past tense.
Educación y Lengua
119
III. Methodology
Then, to find articles on the concept and previous
experiences in interlanguage development during SLA,
The study was developed through a descriptive-
the research strategy consisted of querying various
experimental mixed approach. In response to the study’s
scientific and academic databases (Martínez, 2016),
purpose, the focus was to identify the factors influencing
such as ScienceDirect, SCOPUS, IEEE Xplore Digital
learners’ language use during the IL development in SLA
Library, EBSCO and, springer. These databases were
in higher education. The study was organized in two
chosen because they offered easy access to the required
stages: the first one related to the collection of theoretical
information; for example, articles published in national
information associated with the concept of interlanguage
and international journals, and referee-evaluated
and the result of previous experiences in which the IL role
publications in proceedings for congresses recognized by
has been the object of study. The second stage focused
the international scientific community (Cruz-Alvarado &
on the development of the experimental case study with
Sandí-Delgado, 2017; Sandí-Delgado & Sanz, 2020). Then,
students. The study’s main objective was to identify the
some keywords and search strings like interlanguage,
factors that interfere during the development of IL in the
error analysis, second language acquisition, learning
acquisition of a second language at the higher education
strategies, and others were set in Spanish and English
level. In this case study, students wrote a composition that
for the topics relevant for this research.
helped the course’s instructor to identify the mistakes
made by the learners in the use of language. Then, the
In the second stage, an experimental case study was
language instructor categorized the mistakes. As the final
developed with ten students of legal age averaging from
step, the mistakes identified were described by resorting
18 to 27 in a written communication course of the English
to the information concerning IL.
Teaching major at the Universidad de Costa Rica (UCR).
The course corresponds to a pre-intermediate level where
In this regard, a systematic literature review was
students are expected to develop their communicative
carried out in the first stage. It corresponded to what
functions in the five linguistic skills: listening, speaking,
was indicated by Kitchenham, Brereton, Budgen, Turner,
reading, writing, and culture. The course has a particular
Bailey, and Linkman (2009) which consists of defining
focus on writing paragraphs. The students come from
research questions, search strategies for information
public high schools where they first entered into contact
sources, keywords and search strings, and reference
with English during their teenage years. The students
inclusion and exclusion criteria based on country of origin,
were instructed to write a free topic descriptive paragraph
language, and area of interest.
of ten lines to diagnose their language use in the writing
skill.
Concerning the importance of the analysis, some
generalities of IL are considered. That is why, for
The language instructor evaluated the different
conducting the analysis, the following research questions
paragraphs written by the learners. In this stage, the
(RQs) were defined according to Kitchenham et al.,
instructor followed the steps suggested by González
(2009). RQ1. What is the role of interlanguage in SLA?
(2005), which identify and characterize the learners’
RQ2. What factors interfere with learners’ language
most common language errors into groups and categories
use during the interlanguage development in the SLA?
for analysis. Then, students’ language mistakes were
RQ3. What learners’ strategies are mentioned in the
identified and characterized in terms of language use
literature oriented at the explanation of IL in SLA? RQ4.
(lexical complexity) and word choice. For making the
What methodological strategies exist in the literature
characterization clearer, the most common mistakes
oriented at overcoming language use errors during the
made by the learners were grouped into the following
development of IL in SLA?
categories: (1) verbs with -ed inflectional wrongly used,
(2) -ing form of verb misplaced in context, and (3) word
choice.
120
Revista Pensamiento Actual - Vol 21 - No. 37 2021 - Universidad de Costa Rica - Sede de Occidente
The learners’ characterization and categorization of
shows errors made by learners in their compositions
mistakes serve the qualitative analysis to explain the
using verbs conjugated with the -ed inflectional marker.
errors in terms of IL factors; for example, creative
constructions, overgeneralizations and simplification,
Table 1. Learners’ Mistakes on the Use of -ed
transfer of training, age, and interlanguage level.
Number
Learner’s Mistakes
IV. Results and Discussion
1
Surgeons were allowed to removed it from her.
This section focuses on presenting the results and
2
Parents could not exchanged kids habits.
the discussion of errors identified and characterized
Source: Authors’ own elaboration, 2021.
in the learners’ compositions in a pre-intermediate
course of writing. The results are presented in two
As shown, even though two learners might know the
main groups of language use (1) lexical complexity
rules of regular verb conjugation in terms of the -ed
(-ing and -ed use) and (2) word choice. The analysis
inflectional because it is one content studied in a written
considers interlanguage factors such as creative
communication course before, they had trouble using
constructions, transfer of training, level of interlanguage,
the verbs correctly. For example, one learner correctly
learners’ pre-intermediate level, learning strategies,
conjugated the sentence’s main verb in the simple past,
overgeneralization, and age.
but by error, the non-finite verb is conjugated in the past.
A second learner used the verb in the past, which is wrong
In carrying out this analysis, it is crucial to keep in
because an auxiliary for the past is already used.
mind that the concept learners’ linguistic systems result
in a combination of two different systems, most of the
Then, table 2 makes evident learners’ errors in using
time the learners’ first and second languages (Sajjad &
the -ing form of the verb.
Rahmani, 2015). It indicates the complexity of this type
of analysis since it addresses the factors of interlanguage.
Table 2. Learners’ Mistakes on the Use of
-ing
After having gone over the learners’ compositions, the
results showed that learners had the following language
Number
Learner’s Mistakes
errors in their paragraphs. These language errors were
1
Students refused constant supporting to their
selected for the analysis in response to the repetitive
classmates.
times of occurrence and the characterization. The error
2
When they leading a cause for problems.
categories were identified in the use of -ed, the use of -ing,
3
Parents can carrying their kids for walks.
and word choice. In this view, out of the ten compositions
written by the students, two learners made evident their
4
In this way, obesity can show a reducing.
trouble to use verbs in the simple past appropriately, five
5
Furthermore, it might lead to conflictings.
learners showed wrong use of the -ing form of verbs,
and one learner struggled with word choice. The errors
Source: Authors’ own elaboration, 2021.
made by the eight students are presented and analyzed
in the categories mentioned previously.
In this aspect, three learners used the -ing form to create
nouns, but they misused them. For example, they used
Tables 1, 2, and 3 show and describe the mistakes made
supporting instead of support, reducing instead of reduce,
by the students in the categories learners’ errors on
and conflicting instead of conflict. Two learners also used
the use of -ed, learners’ errors on the use of -ing, and
two verbs in the -ing form to substitute simple forms of
learners’ mistakes in word choice (these mistakes are
the verbs. The previous issue is observable in examples
approached and interpreted in detail further). Table 1
number 2 and 3.
Educación y Lengua
121
Table 3 shows learners’ language use errors in their
In line with the information above, if once students read
choices of words.
the word supporting and they understood that supporting
works as a noun in the context they read it, there would
Table 3. Learners’ Mistakes in Word Choice
be a high chance for learners to misuse it in a new
context. This appreciation might respond to the factor
Number
Learner’s Mistakes
called creative construction, which can be understood
as a subconscious process through which the student
1
The leisure time maybe relaxing.
gradually organizes the language they hear, according to
2
They breath in the machine to know the alcohol
the rules they have built to enhance the understanding and
level in their blood.
generation of sentences (Chen & Xu, 2019; Chung, Chen,
Source: Authors’ own elaboration, 2021.
& Geva, 2019; Dulay, Burt, & Krashen, 1982). These same
authors (Dulay et al., 1982) add that some of the errors
In this respect, one learner used maybe instead of may
identified in the student results were committed because
be. Also, a second learner chose the noun breath instead
of this process of creative construction, the tendency
of the verb breathe. These are clear errors of word choice.
to use regular forms where possible, and secondly, to
simplify elements and structures. These mistakes may
In the extracted excerpts, the errors may be identified as
also serve to explain by considering the overgeneralization
word choice and use (lexical complexity). These mistakes
features, regularization, and simplification. In supporting
focus on (a) verbs with -ed inflectional wrongly used, (b)
this, it can be said that (Chung, Chen, & Geva, 2019):
-ing form of verb misplaced in context, and (c) the wrong
choice of words. These language issues are the result of IL
The previous information refers to the L2
in lexical use. Even though Chen and Xu (2019, p.2) hold
learner’s evolving system of rules regarding the
that “most L2 studies in linguistic complexity, and lexical
L2. It develops from various processes that take
complexity, in particular, are concerned with word types
place as individuals learn the L2. These include
and tokens”, they also say “how words are used in context
transfer from the L1, as well as contrastive
has not received the attention it warrants” (p.19). The
interference from the L2, and overgeneralization
latter might be the result and explanation of why these
of newly encountered rules (p.150).
errors took place in a class of a pre-intermediate level.
It may be inferred that former high school-instructors
In this view, language transfer, contrastive interference,
probably had not given the right treatment to this issue.
and overgeneralization are the first explanations in an
However, more information about instruction will be
attempt to justify why the errors could have happened.
addressed in the next lines. At this point, it is clear that
the learner’s specific language performance corresponds
Transfer of training is another explanation for the
to the general linguistic system of the language. In this
errors identified in the learners’ compositions. What
particular case, these language mistakes lead students
teachers teach and how they teach it may positively or
to make wrong assumptions to correct language use just
negatively impact learners’ learning (Cruz-Alvarado,
because they have studied those constructions before, but
Sandí-Delgado, & Víquez-Barrantes, 2017; Sandí-Delgado
they do not know how to use them according to verb tense
& Cruz-Alvarado, 2016). Therefore, the continuous
and sentence context This language issue also connects
training process could be considered a relevant aspect
to what different authors (AlHammadi, 2016; Long, 1990;
during second language acquisition and interlanguage
Newport, 1990) call psycholinguistics of second language
development (Chen & Xu, 2019). The mistakes identified
equivalents of idiolects. It refers to how an individual
in the learners’ compositions might also respond to poor
speaks or writes within the whole system of a particular
training. In line with this, Bowles and Healy (2017, p.
language.
256) add that “difficult training can slow acquisition
of information”. In this view, learners may retain
122
Revista Pensamiento Actual - Vol 21 - No. 37 2021 - Universidad de Costa Rica - Sede de Occidente
information that is not accurate, and they can transfer
Furthermore, reinforcing the fact above, Sykes and
that information in other contexts of language use.
Cohen (2018) identify that in IL strategies, the primary
purpose for learners’ confidence relies on providing
This position holds that if instructors in the early stages
them with the proficiency required to be competent
of learning carried out proper training, the possibilities
speakers in multilingual speech. For achieving this,
for excellent transfer of training would come up with
language teachers must also be confident in language
better results in the learners’ language use. For example,
use so that learners can use the new language correctly
learners could have had better language use in their
in response to appropriate exposure. An appropriate
compositions for diagnosis. This clearly shows how the
language exposure may move learners to immediate
lack of sufficient training may end in adverse instruction.
creativity. Through immediate creativity, learners try
That is why instructors must provide input and ensure
to use what they have just learned to make sentences
effective learners’ intake of the contents.
of their own in response to good modeling. As aimed
by the authors, this strategy may be one of the possible
The possible level of interlanguage is another aspect to
answers here. Lower-level teachers should probably have
consider in the explanation for these learners’ errors. A
only provided incomprehensible input, so learners’ intake
related study carried out by Sajjad and Rahmani (2015)
was not necessarily appropriate. Consequently, their use
draw to the conclusion that:
of words is not correct and mistakes are identified.
Students with intermediate communicative
Now, it is also crucial to recall that these learners were
proficiency are at “Before native-like stages”
diagnosed at the beginning of the pre-intermediate
and they gain, nearly, a full access of their innate
level. The diagnosis’ results showed that they were at
systems. In that level, through the stages, students
the early stages of the pre-intermediate level, and they
had certain linguistic problems although they
still faced problems of their previous language level. In
were proficient enough to communicate. This
this view, learners are expected to not fully master the
was because their interlanguage needed time to
topics studied and it may set a chance for learners to
be exactly functional like Target language (p. 416).
make mistakes.
This aspect of IL might be the case of the said learners
As Sajjad and Rahmani (2015, p. 416) define “pre-
and why they still make these language errors. They
intermediate students based on the features presented are
are in the process of input and intake. It means that
in Middle Stages of IL Access. It should be mentioned that
even though the learners might be exposed to correct
in these stages the cognitive processes are more complex
input, their intake is what prevails. Sometimes the intake
and burdensome”. The type of mistakes identified clearly
does not necessarily respond to the input received. In
made this fact evident.
regards to this topic, Lee, Plonsky, and Saito (2020) have
addressed how learners transform input into intake by
Consequently, the learners’ level is an aspect to be
internalizing data and restructuring interlanguage to
considered in the given analysis. As the authors
produce meaning. In reading the former and the latter,
mentioned, it is essential to understand that even though
it is possible to understand the vital role a language
“levels are somehow describable, the stages are not clear-
teacher has in devising learning activities that ensure the
cut. It means students have different capabilities and
learners’ proper intake. These activities may also bring
rates of development in language use which are based
opportunities for learners to produce comprehensible
on their participation, motivation, personal factors like
output (Shehadeh, 2003). In doing this, language
hesitation, and intelligence” (Sajjad & Rahmani, 2015, p.
instructors could minimize learners’ mistakes.
416). Therefore, beyond what the interlanguage level may
allow learners to do in language competence, individual
factors might also be considered.
Educación y Lengua
123
These mistakes should respond to how learners use
overgeneralization. The main issue about this does not
them to facilitate their language learning in terms of
rely on the problem, but the treatment given to it. In line
learning strategies. As mentioned earlier, the causes
with this, Ambridge, Pine, Rowland, and Young (2008,
that drive these errors as consequences might vary
p.88), suggest that “many overgeneralization mistakes,
from one learner to another. However, the input is
for example, past-tense overregularization (e.g., runned)
validated because learners acknowledged words such as
are relatively non-problematic”. For these problems, the
supporting, removed, leading, maybe, carrying, reducing,
authors argue “corrective feedback in the form of recasts,
breath, conflicting, and exchanged. Even though their
requests for clarification and misunderstandings. Whilst
intake demonstrates to be wrong, learners may resort
it seems likely that such feedback aids the recovery from
to (i) cognitive strategies, (ii) metacognitive strategies,
overgeneralization mistakes” (Ambridge et al., 2008, p.
and even (iii) social/affective strategies. In this view, the
88). Then again, this corrective feedback is essential.
different mistakes identified might result from a process
If language instructors provide learners with effective
where learners transformed material by recombining
feedback, they will have a better opportunity to notice,
known elements to construct a meaningful sentence,
reformulate, and reconstruct their interlanguage.
but they failed. However, the learner should be able to
use the word correctly through corrective feedback and
Age is also a very salient factor when analyzing learners’
more learning activities that ensure their intake. The
IL. As shown in some studies, age determines and may
learners might also resort to selective attention once
help to anticipate specific issues when learning a second
corrective feedback is given. This corrective feedback
language. In this respect, Bonfieni, Branigan, Pickering,
may be provided when learners make language errors
and Sorace (2019, p.160) roundly state that “L2 age of
to carefully plan, monitor, and evaluate their learning
acquisition predicts overall latencies in accessing the L2”.
next time. That is why input enhancement is vital for
In the case study, age perfectly matches the learners’
learners to implement their learning strategies. In this
case because all of them started learning English in their
sense, Ghasemi and Muhammad (2014) add:
teenage years, where the exposure to the language in
public high schools did not include all linguistic skills. As
Input enhancement can vary depending on
claimed by the learners, their instruction corresponded
whether it is achieved internally or externally.
to reading comprehension exercises explained in their
Internal enhancement occurs when the learner
first language mainly. This late exposure and the lack
notices the form himself or herself through
of efficient language instruction may explain why the
the outcome of internal cognitive processes or
learners do not master language properly and make
learning strategies, and external enhancement
the mistakes identified. Learner’s motivation toward
occurs when the form is noticed through external
language, articulatory problems, retention issues,
agents, such as the teacher or external operations
commitment, and even the idiosyncratic use of language
carried out on the input (p.565).
are elements requested to have a better understanding
to try to explain the reasons why the learners came up
Besides all this, overgeneralization might be a possible
with the mistakes mentioned. Al-jarrah (2016) refers
response to the different problems identified in
to the idiosyncratic use, where learners, despite the
students’ compositions. Overgeneralization is part of
structure rule-based, tend to create forms based on their
students’ IL since they learn a structure, and then this
idiosyncrasy. The author means that learners build an
is overgeneralized in a context where the term learned
approximate system by taking from the L1 and L2 set of
does not match. In this case, overgeneralization can
rules; they build their own specific grammar. This factor
perfectly match as an explanation for the problem
is commonly identified at certain levels, but it is necessary
due to its close relation with the characteristics it has.
to know the individuals’ profile to determine whether
Having learned and dealt with a stock of vocabulary, but
their characteristics end or not in language use -issues.
having wrongly used it, clearly suggests a problem of
Lastly, the method used in previous stages of learning
124
Revista Pensamiento Actual - Vol 21 - No. 37 2021 - Universidad de Costa Rica - Sede de Occidente
may drive learners to the IL identified. Most students
Finally, the investigation concludes that the set of
responded to a process of learning through presentation,
learners’ language errors analyzed brings light in terms
practice, and production. In regards to this, different
of analyzing the distinctive IL generalities. Besides, the
authors (Hismanoglu & Hismanoglu, 2011; Najjari, 2014)
opportunity to take action to raise awareness of the IL
claim that investigations have shown that most students
impact on the SLA process. As future work, it may be
who had excellent knowledge in the practice phase did
considered to design a set of strategies to guide language
not transfer this skill to the production phase. Even
teachers’ practice in minimizing language errors due to
though they manage to have successful results in the
IL during SLA.
production phase, it is difficult for them to transfer that
skill outside the classroom. That is why learners’ errors
may also respond to this fact.
VI. References
V. Conclusions and future work
Alemi, M., Eslami, Z. R., & Rezanejad, A. (2014). Rating
In line with the discussion, it can be showed that the
EFL Learners ’ Interlanguage Pragmatic
inferences made through the learners’ production, review of
Competence by Non-Native English Speaking
literature, analysis of previous experiences, and in response
to the RQs, the following conclusions derive. First, the article
sbspro.2014.03.403
in its purpose of identifying the distinctive generalities of
IL and in response to the first and second RQs showed how
AlHammadi, F. S. (2016). Psycholinguistic determinants
the generalization identified in the learners’ work aims at
of immigrant second language acquisition.
a problem of lexical complexity explained by IL problems
with a) creative constructions, b) overgeneralization and
lingua.2016.03.001
simplification, c) transfer of training, d) learners’ level of
interlanguage, and e) age. Besides, in response to the third
Al-jarrah, R. S. (2016). A suggested model of corrective
RQ, it is shown that learners adopt strategies for these
feedback provision. Ampersand, 3, 98-107.
language errors to happen. Among the learners’ strategies,
cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies, social-
affective strategies, selective attention, input enhancement
Ambridge, B., Pine, J. M., Rowland, C. F., & Young, C.
(learners’ intake), and overgeneralization were related to
R. (2008). The effect of verb semantic class and
different learners’ language errors. Moreover, concerning
verb frequency (entrenchment) on children’s
RQ4, it is evident that three findings are highlighted. First,
and adults’ graded judgements of argument-
EA stands to provide language teachers with enough data
structure overgeneralization mistakes. Cognition,
to act and face learners’ language problems. Second, an
106
(1),
approach to interlanguage pragmatics is suggested. This
cognition.2006.12.015
approach suggests that learners’ IL issues should be
faced by implementing ELT strategies that respond to
Bonfieni, M., Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., & Sorace, A.
language knowledge and analysis. In addition to these
(2019). Language experience modulates bilingual
two findings, the role of effective feedback has a crucial
language control: The effect of proficiency, age of
impact by providing learners with the opportunity to
acquisition, and exposure on language switching.
notice, reformulate, and reconstruct or restructure their
interlanguage. These results are in line with the insights
org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2018.11.004
presented by Chen and Xu (2019) who state that lexical
mistakes take place due to IL complexity, and they require
attention warrants for learners’ language improvement.
Educación y Lengua
125
Bowles, A. R., & Healy, A. F. (2017). Training and Transfer
Cruz-Sancho, S., & Sandí-Delgado, J. C. (2014). Importancia
of Word Identification: Foreign Language Speech
de la educación superior en el desarrollo
Rate. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and
profesional para la población estudiantil. III
Congreso Internacional de Educación Superior
jarmac.2017.04.001
(CIESUP), 633-650. Heredia, Costa Rica:
Universidad Nacional de Costa Rica (UNA).
Buyse, K., Fernández, L., & Verveckken, K. (2015). The
Reference to L1 and L2 in SFL: Proposals Based
on the Aprescrilov Learner Corpus. Procedia -
Dulay, H., Burt, M., & Krashen, S. (1982). Language two.
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 173, 274-278.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Ghasemi, M., & Muhammad, A. (2014). Textual
Chao, K.-W. (2013). Análisis de la interlengua de los
Enhancement and Input Processing Effects on the
aprendices costarricenses de dos escuelas
Intake of Present and Past Simple Tenses. Procedia
públicas. Revista de Lenguas Modernas, 18,
- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 562-571.
ac.cr/index.php/rlm/article/view/12364
Gonzales, K., Gerken, L., & Gómez, R. L. (2018). How
Chen, H., & Xu, H. (2019). Quantitative linguistics
who is talking matters as much as what they
approach to interlanguage development: study
say to infant language learners. Cognitive
based on the Guangwai-Lancaster Chinese
cogpsych.2018.04.003
org/10.1016/j.lingua.2019.102736
González, P. (2005). La distribución de los morfemas
Chung, S. C., Chen, X., & Geva, E. (2019). Deconstructing
gramaticales de aspecto en interlenguaje.
and reconstructing cross-language transfer in
Estudios de Lingüística del Español, 22, 1-5.
bilingual reading development: An interactive
framework. Journal of Neurolinguistics,
Elies/article/view/195616
50,
jneuroling.2018.01.003
Hasbún, L. (2008). Fossilization and Acquisition: A Study
of Learner Language. Revista de Filología y
Cruz-Alvarado, M. A., & Sandí-Delgado, J. C. (2017).
Lingüística de la Universidad de Costa Rica, 33(1),
Systems and technologies that facilitate the
indoor positioning. Revista Pensamiento Actual,
Hismanoglu, M., & Hismanoglu, S. (2011). Task-based
ucr.ac.cr/index.php/pensamiento-actual/article/
language teaching: What every EFL teacher
view/31585
should do. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Cruz-Alvarado, M. A., Sandí-Delgado, J. C., & Víquez-
sbspro.2011.03.049
Barrantes, I. G. (2017). Design of innovative
educational situations as a teaching strategy
Jiang, J., Ouyang, J., & Liu, H. (2019). Interlanguage: a
to strengthen the teaching -learning process.
perspective of quantitative linguistic typology.
Didasc@lia: Didáctica y Educación, 8(2), 99-116.
org/10.1016/j.langsci.2019.04.004
articulo?codigo=6632895
126
Revista Pensamiento Actual - Vol 21 - No. 37 2021 - Universidad de Costa Rica - Sede de Occidente
Kitchenham, B., Brereton, O. P., Budgen, D., Turner,
Pereira, R. C. (2021). Epenthesis and deletion as strategies
M., Bailey, J. y Linkman, S. (2009). Systematic
to acquire complex syllabic structures: Strategies
literature reviews in software engineering - A
in the Interlanguage of Brazilian learners of
systematic literature review. Information and
German as a foreign language. System, 98, 1-16.
org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009
Sajjad, S., & Rahmani, H. (2015). Studying the Pre-
Lee, B., Plonsky, L., & Saito, K. (2020). The effects of
Intermediate Iranian EL Learners ` Interlanguage
perception- vs. production-based pronunciation
and the Contribution of their Innate System to
the Development of their Oral Communicative
org/10.1016/j.system.2019.102185
Proficiency. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Long, M. H. (1990). Maturational constraints on
sbspro.2015.06.057
language development. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 12(3), 251-285. https://
Sánchez, A. (2016). The diagnostic and evaluative
doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100009165
functions in the contrastive interlanguage
analysis based on corpus. Linred, 13, 1-14.
Martínez, L. J.
(2016). Cómo buscar y usar
información científica: Guía para estudiantes
pdf/LR_articulo_28122015.pdf
universitarios 2016. Recuperado de http://
eprints.rclis.org/29934/7/Como_buscar_usar_
Sandí-Delgado, J. C., & Cruz-Alvarado, M. A. (2016).
informacion_2016.pdf
Propuesta metodológica de enseñanza y
aprendizaje para innovar la educación superior.
Mcdowell, L., & Liardét, C. (2020). Towards specialized
language support: An elaborated framework for
org/10.15517/isucr.v17i36.27100
Error Analysis. English for Specific Purposes, 57,
Sandí-Delgado, J. C., & Cruz-Alvarado, M. A. (2017).
La simulación como recurso electrónico
Najjari, R. (2014). Implementation of Task-based Language
para potenciar las habilidades cognitivas del
Teaching in Iran: Theoretical and Practical
estudiantado. Revista InterSedes, 18(37), 1-31.
Considerations. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
sbspro.2014.03.547
Sandí-Delgado, J. C., Hidalgo-Arias, K., & Cruz-Alvarado,
M. A. (2015). Comunicación educativa: Las TIC
Newport, E. L. (1990). Maturational constraints on
en los procesos educativos. XIV Jornadas y II
language learning. Cognitive Science, 14(1), 11-28.
Congreso Internacional del Maestro Investigador.
Avances y Perspectivas, 1-23. Medellín, Colombia:
Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana. Recuperado
Nycz, J. (2013). Changing words or changing rules?
Second dialect acquisition and phonological
representation. Journal of Pragmatics, 52, 49-62.
Sandí-Delgado, J. C., & Sanz, C. V. (2020). Juegos serios
para potenciar la adquisición de competencias
digitales en la formación del profesorado. Revista
revedu.v44i1.37228
Educación y Lengua
127
Shehadeh, A. (2003). Learner output, hypothesis testing,
and internalizing linguistic knowledge. System,
251X(03)00018-6
Sykes, J. M., & Cohen, A. D. (2018). Strategies and
interlanguage pragmatics: Explicit and
comprehensive. Studies in Second Language
Learning and Teaching, 8(2), 381-402. https://
doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2018.8.2.9
