Abstract
Interference is the transferral of elements from one language to another. Here, the concept of interference will also be used in the more general sense of errors caused by a situation in which two languages are in contact with each other.1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
The term “error” is used here to mean a dynamic force which helps the child learn more, defined as an intermediate state between not knowing and knowing [Nickel, 1972].
“The glottal stop is performed by completely closing the vocal chords and thus keeping them from vibrating and not allowing the air to pass freely. When this occlusion of the vocal chords is released, the air escapes all at once” [Canepari, 1979, p. 71].
Weinreich [1974, p. 50 foll.] follows Bloomfield in distinguishing between bound morphemes (described above) and free morphemes, which are in reality prepositions and adverbs. Thus, for example, the superlative is expressed in German using a suffix (bound morpheme): the root schön (beautiful) + the suffix er = schöner. In Italian, the same superlative is expressed by means of a free morpheme and an adjective, giving più bello. In this work, free morphemes are treated as lexical interferences.
For ample treatment of adult interferences in various languages, see Weinreich [1974]. However, Weinreich uses a classification which differs slightly from that used here. What are here termed semantic interferences are considered by him to be lexical interferences, and he does not consider lexical interferences as they are defined above.
On this subject, Rosenzweig says [1963, p. 64], “It should be taken as an axiom that there is no bilingualism without interferences.”
On this subject, see Redlinger and Park [1980], who also observed that the speech of their bilingual subjects contained fewer and fewer instances of lexical and mixed interference as they grew older.
Almost all authors who have considered this subject (see the authors quoted by Weinreich [1974], and Swain and Wesche [1975]) have found that the nouns are the part of speech most often called upon to substitute in another language.
Swain [1973] also observes that Michael used two languages to express one noun phrase, but unlike Lisa, Michael also transferred entire noun phrases to the other language.
One interesting example is “Blumenauer Deutsch”, which has not yet been sufficiently described, although it is mentioned in Lenard [1970].
Interferences using ge were observed by Weinreich [1974] in adult subjects as well.
As Gumperz and Chavez [1972, p. 88] rightly note, “one might, by way of explanation, simply state that both codes are equally admissible in some contexts and the code switching is merely a matter of the individual’s momentary inclination”. With respect to this “momentary inclination”, Schönpflug [1977] is correct in saying, “We must not forget the weariness and stress which cause the person to make interferences he would ordinarily never make”.
Swain and Wesche [1975, p. 18] came to the same conclusion in their analysis of Michael’s interferences: “The necessity of communicating almost simultaneously with unilingual speakers ... clearly resulted in considerably more linguistic interference in the child’s speech than was exhibited in unilingual situations in either language”.
In her analysis of the interferences made by her Italian — English bilingual son Adriano (6;5 – 8;0), Foster-Meloni [1978] observed the same results as those observed for Lisa. On the whole, Adriano used few interferences, and most were lexical; nouns were transferred more than other parts of speech. The lexical interferences occurred in interaction with his mother (a bilingual), and depended upon the language the words were normally used in.
The concept of Zwischensprache (“intermediate language”) described by Zydatiss [1976, p. 9] could also be applied to simultaneous bilinguals: “It seems that the L2 learner blends the rule systems of three different sources. h 1, L2, and one which does not belong to L1 or L2”.
Cunze’s subject Dunia [1980] produced examples which were identical to those of Lisa and Giulia for hören and sentire. In addition, Dunia used böse and cattivo (“bad”) as exact equivalents, although cattivo can refer to animate and inanimate objects, while böse refers only to animate objects.
Dunia turns to her friend and says, “Cattiva!” and then, “Lisa böse”. So far, so good. But later, when she is eating pine nuts, she says, “Cattivo pinoli” (“bad pine nuts”) and then “böse pinoli”, when she should have used schlecht instead of böse.
Such interferences are quite frequent between two Romance languages, such as Portuguese and Italian. As Ervin and Osgood state [1954, p. 17], “Interference is most likely to occur when the languages are closely related”. See also Zydatiss [1976], who deals with the subject at length.
According to Titone [1981, p. 92], “the social and economic level of the subject is an aspect of crucial importance in any investigation of bilingualism”. For further treatment of this aspect, see Peal and Lambert [1962], and Viera [1976].
See also examples 9 and 10, p. 171, and the example in Sect. 5.6, p. 190.
See Richard [1971], Nemser [1971], Corder [1971], Selinker [1972], Dulay and Burt [1974a], Schönpflug [1977], and Schachter and Celce-Murcia [1977].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1983 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Taeschner, T. (1983). Interferences. In: The Sun is Feminine. Springer Series in Language and Communication, vol 13. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48329-5_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48329-5_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-48331-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-48329-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive