'They Speaked and Wrote Real Good': Judgements of Non-native and Native Grammar

Forty adult native speakers (NSs) listened to a non-native speaker's (NNS) reading of well-formed sentences and those containing grammatical errors of three types (NNS, egregious NS, and high frequency NS). Identified errors were judged for gravity on a 5-point scale. Contrary to our hypothesis, there appears to be no penalty when NNSs make grammatical errors that are also made by some NSs. A second experiment included 20 NS experts, 20 NS non-experts, and 20 advanced proficiency NNSs. All groups identified the three error types and rated them for gravity and annoyance in an aural task; they then identified the same errors in a written task. NNSs and NS experts outperformed non-expert NSs on high frequency NS errors, presumably because of heightened language awareness. The NNSs were significantly more annoyed by high frequency NS and NNS errors than were the NSs and considered all errors to be more serious than did the NSs. Identification of NNS errors was significantly better for all NSs in the aural than in the written mode, but NS experts identified more high frequency NS errors on the written task than on the aural. The differential findings can be attributed to error salience and language awareness.

[1]  P. Lennon,et al.  Error: Some Problems of Definition, Identification, and Distinction , 1991 .

[2]  Joan M. Fayer,et al.  Native and Nonnative Judgments of Intelligibility and Irritation , 1987 .

[3]  Tracey M. Derwing,et al.  Processing Time, Accent, and Comprehensibility in the Perception of Native and Foreign-Accented Speech , 1995, Language and speech.

[4]  P. Garrett,et al.  The English genitive apostrophe: judgements of errors and implications for teaching , 1993 .

[5]  A. Khalil.  Communicative Error Evaluation: Native Speakers' Evaluation and Interpretation of Written Errors of Arab EFL Learners , 1985 .

[6]  J. Norris,et al.  Effectiveness of L2 Instruction: A Research Synthesis and Quantitative Meta‐analysis , 2000 .

[7]  Robert L. Politzer,et al.  Errors of English Speakers of German As Perceived and Evaluated by German Natives , 1978 .

[8]  Michael Dordick,et al.  Testing for a hierarchy of the communicative interference value of ESL errors , 1996 .

[9]  Linda Gaylord Piazza.  French Tolerance for Grammatical Errors Made by Americans , 1980 .

[10]  Rudolf Kalin,et al.  Discrimination in Evaluative Judgments against Foreign-Accented Job Candidates , 1978 .

[11]  Birgit Henriksen,et al.  NATIVE SPEAKER REACTIONS TO LEARNERS' SPOKEN INTERLANGUAGE 1 , 1980 .

[12]  Comprehension, Irritation and Error Hierarchies , 1985 .

[13]  Carl James,et al.  Errors in Language Learning and Use: Exploring Error Analysis , 1998 .

[14]  Eileen M. Brennan,et al.  Measurements of accent and attitude toward Mexican-American speech , 1981 .

[15]  Kenneth D. Chastain,et al.  Native Speaker Reaction to Instructor-Identified Student Second-Language Errors. , 1980 .

[16]  Kathleen Y. Ensz.  French Attitudes toward Typical Speech Errors of American Speakers of French. , 1982 .

[17]  Eirlys E. Davies,et al.  Error evaluation: the importance of viewpoint , 1983 .

[18]  Victoria A. Murphy,et al.  The effect of modality on a grammaticality judgement task , 1997 .

[19]  R. Schmidt.  The role of consciousness in second language learning , 1990 .

[20]  J. S. Johnson,et al.  Critical Period Effects in Second Language Acquisition: The Effect of Written versus Auditory Materials on the Assessment of Grammatical Competence† , 1992 .

[21]  Chryssoula Lascaratou,et al.  Competing criteria for error gravity , 1982 .

[22]  N. Spada.  Form-Focussed Instruction and Second Language Acquisition: A Review of Classroom and Laboratory Research , 1997, Language Teaching.

[23]  Dana Mcdaniel,et al.  Eliciting Judgments of Grammaticality and Reference , 1998 .