Writing Error: A Review of Interlingual and Intralingual Interference in EFL Context

Abstract

This paper aims to review the theoretical concept of interlingual interference of the mother tongue, Thai to the target language, English and intralingual interference found in EFL student writing in Thai context with the attempt to define the existence of errors according to their sources. This review article also exemplifies some frequent errors normally found in Thai student writing based on three perspectives of interlingual interference; lexical, syntactic and discourse interference and seven aspects of intralingual interference; false analogy, misanalysis, incomplete rule application, exploiting redundancy, overlooking cooccurrence restrictions, hypercorrection and overgeneralization. The pedagogical implication for EFL context is also discussed.

Native and Target Language Influence on the Students’ Interlanguage Production: A Case of Indonesian Efl Compositions

“…They found that students' NL influenced their English writing. TL influence found in this study also includes both lexical and grammatical aspects, and this corresponds to the findings of Falhasiri et al (2011), Qaid (2011, Kaweera (2013), and NaPhuket (2015). They found various instances of intralingual error, ill-forms of the TL use which were not traceable to their NL.…”

“…This is one of the main sources for the IL production in this study. A similar problem was found in the studies of Kaweera (2013) and Na-Phuket (2015) in which the students' English writings were influenced by their NL, resulting in interlingual errors, whereas the learning strategies used to deal with the complexity of English resulted in intralingual errors. This is convincing that the students' reliance on the acquired language knowledge of NL and some of the TL provides us with information of their linguistic development and learning process.…”

“…This is convincing that the students' reliance on the acquired language knowledge of NL and some of the TL provides us with information of their linguistic development and learning process. In sum, it can also be inferred that when there is a gap in the student's knowledge in the TL, they tend to borrow their NL words in order to fill in the existing gaps of English vocabulary (Choroleeva, 2009), and at the same time they apply grammar rules they already acquired from the TL by overgeneralizing or simplifying the rules (Kaweera, 2013).…”

“…Likewise, Qaid (2011) who studied intralingual errors made by Yemeni's students found six types of errors, consisting of omission as the dominant error, addition, fragment, word choice, and simplification. Along the same lines, Kaweera's (2013) study found that the interlingual interference includes lexical, syntactic, and discourse interference and seven intralingual interference includes false analogy, misanalysis, incomplete rule application, exploiting redundancy, overlooking co-occurrence restrictions, hypercorrection, and overgeneralization. Finally, Na-Pukhet and Normah's (2015) study found that the most frequent types of errors were word choice, verb tense, and preposition.…”

An Analysis of Errors in Written English Sentences: A Case Study of Thai EFL Students

“…Kaweera (2013), for example, concludes that there are two main sources of errors, namely interlingual interference and intralingual interference. The first one is a negative transfer of learners' first language.…”