下载掌阅APP，畅读海量书库
立即打开
The study of SLA started from the study of the language that learners produce at different stages of their development.The study of learner language（interlanguage） is necessary because it can provide researchers with important information about how learners learn an L2.An understanding of interlanguage and its characteristics is fundamental to the study of SLA.It paves the way for further investigation of SLA from linguistic，psychological，and socio-cultural perspectives in the following chapters.
It is necessary to briefly review the background to the study of interlanguage.In the late 1960s，researchers began to show considerable interest in the empirical study of L2 acquisition.Why did this happen？Two main reasons could explain such a phenomenon.One was related to the need to investigate the claims of competing theories.According to the early contrastive analysis hypothesis（CAH），L2 learners were strongly influenced by their L1.Thus，some researchers（for example，Lado，1957），contended that errors were mainly the result of transfer of L1 habits.This theory oflearning was challenged by Chomsky's attack on behaviorism and by the research on L1 acquisition.According to research on first language acquisition，children did not seem to learn their mother tongue as a set of habits but rather seem to construct mental rules.This challenge to CAH created the necessary climate for empirical study of L2 acquisition.Researchers asked，and attempted to find answers to，questions such as：Were learners’errors the result of L1 transfer？Did L2 learners，like L1 learners，construct unique mental rules？These questions could not be answered without the study of interlanguage.
The second main reason was directly connected with language pedagogy.Audiolingual method and oral/situational approach were the prevailing methods of the day.They both emphasized structuring the input to the learner and controlling output in order to minimize errors.However，it was noted that children were successful in acquiring L1 without such a structured learning environment.Also，many L2 learners seemed to be successful in learning an L2 in natural settings.Thus，it was even argued that the teacher's“interference”impedes，rather than facilitates，L2 learning in the classroom.But how did L2 learners learn in natural settings？What strategies did they use？What made some learners more successful than others？All these questions invite empirical enquiry.Many early SLA studies investigated L2 learners in naturalistic or mixed settings in order to find what experiences worked for them，so that suitable copies could be introduced into the language classroom.
The empirical studies，though mainly descriptive，were theoretical.In the late 1960s and 1970s a growing consensus was reached that behaviorist theories of L2 learning were inadequate.It was argued that learners’L2 development was guided by a“built-in-syllabus”.The term“interlanguage”was coined to refer to the special mental grammars that learners constructed during the course of their development.Learners are playing an active role in constructing these grammars.Their behavior，including their errors，is rule-governed，and the language they produce—interlanguage—reflected the strategies they used to construct temporary grammatical rules.