Interlanguage

Interlanguage or, more explicitly, interim language is an emerging linguistic system that has been developed by a learner of a second language (or L2) who has not become fully proficient yet but is approximating the target language: preserving some features of their first language (or L1), or overgeneralizing target language rules in speaking or writing the target language and creating innovations. An interlanguage is idiosyncratically based on the learners' experiences with the L2. It can fossilize in any of its developmental stages. The interlanguage rules are shaped by: L1 transfer, transfer of training, strategies of L2 learning (e.g. simplification), strategies of L2 communication (or communication strategies like circumlocution), and overgeneralization of the target language patterns.
Interlanguage is based on the theory that there is a "psychological structure latent in the brain" which is activated when one attempts to learn a second language. Larry Selinker proposed the theory of interlanguage (1972), noting that in a given situation the utterances produced by the learner are different from those native speakers would produce had they attempted to convey the same meaning. This comparison reveals a separate linguistic system. This system can be observed when studying the utterances of the learners who attempt to produce a target language norm. Those utterances can be observed to be variable across different contexts; that is, interlanguage becomes more or less target-like when produced in different social contexts (Tarone, 1979; Selinker & Douglas, 1985).
To study the psychological processes involved one should compare the interlanguage of the learner with two things:
1. Utterances in the native language to convey the same message made by the learner
2. Utterances in the target language to convey the same message made by the native speaker of that language.
]References
 Selinker, L. (1972), Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10, 209-241.
 Selinker, L., & Douglas, D. (1985). Wrestling with 'context' in interlanguage theory. Applied Linguistics, 6, 190-204.
 Tarone, E. (1979). Interlanguage as chameleon. Language Learning 29(1), 181-191.
[edit]Further reading
 Chambers, J.K. (1995), Sociolinguistic Theory, Oxford, England: Blackwell; p249-251.
 J. C. Richards, Error Analysis: Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition, Longman Press, 1974, pp. 34–36.
 Tarone, E. (2001), Interlanguage. In R. Mesthrie (Ed.). Concise Encyclopedia of Sociolinguistics. (pp. 475–481) Oxford: Elsevier Science.

Sources
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlanguage
If you are learning English and your mother tongue is French then you create for yourself an intermediary system that is built with part English and part French. This new system you create for yourself is called interlanguage. It is the intermediary language that is between the first language, French in this case, and the second language, English.
While learning a second language, learners build up a system for themselves which is different in some ways from their first language and second language systems. The system which the learners build up for themselves has been given various names but the most widely used terminology is that suggested by Selinker (1974). He calls this Interlanguage to emphasize the structurally intermediate status of the learner’s language system between his mother tongue and his target language. A detailed study of this Interlanguage could help us to understand the learners’ problems better and try to provide timely help to learners, so that they achieve competence in the language they are trying to learn.
Selinker’s theory of Interlanguage
Based on the theory that there is a ‘psychological structure latent in the brain’ which is activated when one attempts to learn a second language. Selinker (1972) proposes the theory of Interlanguage. Selinker says that in a given situation the utterances produced by the learner are different from those native speakers would produce had they attempted to convey the same meaning. This comparison reveals a separate linguistic system. This system can be observed when we study the utterances of the learners who attempt to produce a target language norm.
To study the psychological processes involved one should compare the Interlanguage of the learner with two things. These two things are as under:
(1) Utterances in the native language to convey the same message made by the learner
(2) Utterances in the target language to convey the same message made by the native speaker of that language
Ac cording to Selinker five central processes are responsible for this Interlanguage. They are:
(1) language transfer
(2) transfer of training
(3) strategies of second language learning
(4) strategies of second language communication and
(5) overgeneralization
Jean D’Souza (1977) thinks these five processes could be reduced to three for according to him there is no clear cut distinction between processes three, four and five. According to him overgeneralization could include strategies of second language learning and strategies of second language communication. Besides he points out that it is not always possible to say with certainty whether a learner uses a particular form because he thinks it is enough to communicate effectively or because he is using a particular strategy.
Following are the three processes suggested by Jean D’Souza:
(1) transfer from previous learning experience; errors due to interference;
(2) simplification and overgeneralization of elements of the target language system; errors due to learning strategies; and
(3) errors arising from teaching methods and materials employed; ‘teaching induced’ errors.
Sources
www.teachingstylesonline.com/interlanguage.html
Interlanguage

Whenever one acquires second or another language, one develops a so called ?interlanguage?, which is developed by him/ her as a system of rules and applications that can either bear the properties and rules of L1, properties and rules of both L1 and L2, but can also not possess features of neither. There are a number of theories, both in favour and against this theory, and it is still developing and adapting to new information.
The term ?interlanguage? was first coined and developed in the interlanguage theory published in 1972 under the authorship of Larry Selinker, a well known SLA theorist. The term ?interlanguage? is ?used to refer to both the internal system that a learner has constructed at a single point in time ( ?an interlanguage? ) and the series of interconnected systems that characterize the learner?s progress over time ( [?]?interlanguage continuum?).? (Ellis, 1994:350) Although, Selinker can be considered the father of interlanguage, the same phenomenon was described by other theorists, like Nemser (1971) and Corder (1971), but under different terms, such as ?approximative systems? and ?idiosyncratic dialects? or ?transitional competence?. (Ellis, 1985)
The theory of interlanguage is very important to the process of Second Language Acquisition, because it was the first major attempt to explain this process, and because it was one of the few theories of that that time, which was not in contradiction to the critical period hypothesis. It is also important due to the fact that many other theories were developed out of it. To explain the process SLA, the theory of interlanguage asks three important questions. Firstly, it asks what processes are involved and responsible for interlanguage construction. Secondly, it addresses a question on the nature of interlanguage continuum. Thirdly, it asks for an explanation to the fact that most learners do not achieve the full L2 competence. (Ellis, 1994)
Selinker (1972) points out five cognitive processes involved in interlanguage construction, or so called ?latent psychological structure?:
1. Language Transfer ? where some items, rules and structures of L1 can be transferred to production of L2. (e.g. Polish English learner can utter: *am at home - not mentioning the subject as in his L1 subject is indicated by the ending of the verb, therefore omitted)
2. Transfer of Training ? when language teaching creates interlanguage rules that are not of the L2 and which result in the way the learners were taught (e.g. when teacher overuses utterances with the use of ?he?, which therefore discourages the use of ?she?)
3. Strategies of Second Language Learning ? e.g. simplification, when for example the learner uses only one form of a verb
4. Communicative Strategies ? when ,for instance, learner omits grammatically redundant items in an utterance, producing ill-formed sentences (e.g. *I saw beautiful girl ? omitting an ?a? article)
5. Overgeneralization of L2 material ? where the learner tries to use L2 grammatical rules in the way there would not be used by a native speaker (e.g. *What does she doing now? )
This list was developed on the basis of hypothesis testing and was one of the first attempts to specify the processes of L2 acquisition. Although the list itself raises a number of questions and doubts(e.g. why are language transfer and overgeneralization mentioned separately from learning strategies, of which they are examples), it certainly is an important one, as it ?introduced a number of key distinctions, such as the difference between ?learning? and ?communication strategies?.? (Ellis,1994)
Interlanguage is perceived as "systematic because learners behave grammatically."(Ellis,1994:352). It means that the L2 learners rely on its rules to produce new sentences. In addition, Corder claims that learners formulate hypotheses about the target language while they get the input. Hypotheses are accepted, if they are able to communicate without any problems, and misunderstanding and are rejected, if "their output fails to communicate and is corrected."(Ellis, 1994:352)
Aside the processes involved in interlanguage construction, interlanguage theory also revolves around 7 main principles:
? First of all, the learner constructs a system of abstract linguistic rules which underlines the comprehension and production( the system referred to as ?interlanguage?) ? The learner uses it jest as native speaker uses linguistic competence ( and they allow him/her to produce novel sentences)
? Secondly, the language learner?s grammar is permeable, as it is incomplete and unstable the way he/she built it. It vulnerable to new linguistic forms and rules, which can be derived either internally (e.g. transfer from L1 or overgeneralization of an interlanguage rule) or externally (i.e. through exposure to L2 input)
? Thirdly, L2 learner?s competence is transitional. Due to the fact that the interlanguage is permeable (previous principle) it is constantly revised and therefore each stage in language learning has its own interlanguage based and overlapping one another as it is derived from the one from the previous stage (all those ?interlanguages? form the ?interlanguage continuum?)
? Another principle tells us that the learner?s competence is variable, at any stage of development. This variability reflects the form ? function correlations (which comprise the grammar rules of a given stage of development); Although this principle is able to account for the insights provided by form ? function analyses, it raises many controversies and is claimed by some linguists, like Adjemian(1976), Bialystok, Sharwood ? Smith (1985) and Gregg, that competence variability is not an account of interlanguage.
? Fifth principle says that interlanguage development refects the operation of cognitive learning strategies. Although there are lots of various explanation to the processes involved in construction of interlanguages, according to Cancino and other theorists, there are a number of cognitive learning processes, such as L1 transfer, overgeneralization and simplification, comprising intrlanguage, and according to this view we not necessarily us the LAD in SLA.
? Another principle tells us that interlanguage can also reflect the operation of communication strategies (conclusion on the theory in the previous principle)
? The last important principle in interlanguage theory says that the interlanguage may fossilize. This means not only that they stop developing in the direction of progress but it can also mean that they reach a certain level and do not progress any more as there in so need for further development.
(Ellis,1990:51-53)

In conclusion, the theory of interlanguage, coined by Selinker(1972) and the base for all the empirical research into the nature of SLA and it?s errors, is a constantly developing theory and changing it?s face in the light of new facts.

Bibliography

Ellis, Rod.(1985). Understanding Second Language. Oxford University Press: Oxford
Ellis, Rod.(1990). Instructed Second Language Acquisition: Learning in the classroom. Oxford: Basil Blackwell
Ellis, Rod.(1994). The study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Cook, Vivian J.(1993).Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. Houndmills: Macmillan
Grass, Susan M., Selinker, Larry.(2001). Second Language Acquisition: An Introductory Course.(2nd ed.) Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Saville-Troike, Muriel. (2006). Introducing second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Sources
www.sciaga.pl/.../86220-87-interlaguage_essay_o_interlanguage_inter_language