INTERLANGUAGE

Unit 1

Introduction

1.1 Background

     An interlanguage is a type of speech or writing developed by people during the process of learning a new language, when the learner is starting to gain proficiency in the new, or “target,” language but has not mastered it. It is a distorted form of the target language that contains errors caused by inappropriately using aspects of the learner's native language while trying to speak the target language, incorrectly applying the target language's grammar or pronunciation rules or trying to express concepts in the target language by using more basic words the learner already knows. This is normal during the process of learning a new language. Every interlanguage is specific to the person speaking it and evolves as he or she continues to learn the target language.

     Although they are both formed from elements of multiple languages, an interlanguage should not be confused with a pidgin or Creole language. Pidgin language is an improvised form of communication created by two or more people who do not share a language in common, while a Creole language is a language that originally arose from a mixture of different languages but has become a natural language in its own right, with children in the society where it is spoken growing up with it as their native language. An interlanguage, on the other hand, is always unique to a particular individual and is by definition never anyone's first language, as it is partially a product of a different language that the speaker already knows.

     Interlanguage typically contain elements of the speaker's original language. For example, in English an adjective appears before the noun it modifies, while in French the adjective usually comes after the noun. Thus, an English speaker learning French who knows that the French words for “green” and “fish” are vert and poisson, respectively, might call a green fish “un vert poisson,” when un poisson vert is actually correct. The interlanguage of a French person learning English might contain the opposite error, causing him or her to say things like “a fish green.”

     An interlanguage can also contain errors caused by knowing the target language's general rules but following them too rigidly. A non-native speaker might conjugate irregular verbs according to the rules of regular verbs, similarly to the way small children learning their first language often do. This can produce mistakes like saying “goed” instead of “went” or “you am” instead of “you are,” for example.

     Language learners may also over-apply previous lessons about how the target language differs from their native language. For instance, while adjectives in French usually follow the noun, there are exceptions. Petit, French for “small,” is an example of this. Once an English speaker has learned how French adjectives generally work, he or she might overgeneralize the knowledge and incorrectly refer to a small fish as “un poisson petit” rather than the correct un petit poisson. The particular way a learner incorrectly applies the rules of the target language depend on when and how they were learned in the first place. An English speaker who had not yet learned that most French adjectives follow rather than precede nouns would be unlikely to make a mistake like “un poisson petit,” for instance.

    Finally, an interlanguage can contain attempts to express things the learner has not yet learned in the target language, using his or her limited existing knowledge of it.

1.2 Focused Questions

1. What is the definition of interlanguage?

2.  What is error analysis?

 

Unit 2

discussion

2.1 Definition of interlanguage

     The term interlanguage was defined by Selinker (1972) as the separate linguistic system evidenced when adult second-language learners attempt to express meaning in a language they are in the process of learning. This linguistic system encompasses not just phonology, morphology, and syntax, but also the lexical, pragmatic, and discourse levels of the interlanguage. The interlanguage system is clearly not simply the native language  morphological and syntactic system relexified with target language vocabulary; that is, it is not the morphological and syntactic system that would have been evidenced had the learner

tried to express those meanings in his or her native language. Just as clearly, it is not the target language system that would have been evidenced had native speakers of the target language tried to express those same meanings. Rather, the interlanguage differs systematically from both the native language and the target language.

     Interlanguage is usually thought of as characteristic only of adult second-language learners (but see ‘Revised Interlanguage Hypothesis’ below), that is, learners who have passed puberty and thus cannot be expected to be able to employ the language acquisition device (LAD) – that innate language learning structure that was instrumental in their acquisition of their native language. Children acquiring second languages are thought to have the ability to re-engage the LAD and thus to avoid the error pattern and ultimate fossilization that characterize the interlanguages of adult second-language learners.

     Central to the notion of interlanguage is the phenomenon of fossilization – that process in which the learner’s interlanguage stops developing, apparently permanently. Second-language learners who begin their study of the second language after puberty do not succeed in developing a linguistic system that approaches that developed by children acquiring that language natively. This observation led Selinker to hypothesize that adults use a latent psychological structure (instead of a LAD) to acquire second languages.

     The five psycholinguistic processes of this latent psychological structure that shape interlanguage were hypothesized (Selinker, 1972) to be (a) native language transfer, (b) overgeneralization of target language rules, (c) transfer of training, (d) strategies of communication, and (e) strategies of learning. Native language transfer, the process that contrastive analysts had proposed as the sole shaper of learner language, still has a major role to play in the interlanguage hypothesis; though it is not the only process involved, there is ample research evidence that it does play an important role in shaping learners’ interlanguage

system. Selinker (1972, 1992; following Weinreich, 1968: 7) suggested that the way in which this happens is that learners make ‘interlingual identifications’ in approaching the task of learning a second language: they perceive certain units as the same in their NL, IL, and TL. So, for example, they may perceive NL ‘table’ as exactly the same as TL ‘mesa,’ and develop an interlanguage in which mesa can (erroneously in terms of the TL) be used in expressions like ‘table of contents,’ ‘table the motion,’ and so on. Selinker followed enrich in pointing out an interesting paradox in second-language acquisition: in traditional structural linguistics, units are defined in relation to the linguistic system in which they occur and have no meaning outside that system. However, in making interlingual identifications, second-language learners typically ‘stretch’ linguistic units by perceiving them as the same in meaning across three systems. An interesting research issue is how they do this and what sorts of units are used in this way; for example, they could be linguistic units like the taxonomic phoneme or the allophone, or syllables. Selinker raised questions about the ability of traditional linguistics frameworks, based as they are on assumptions of monolingualism, to handle interlanguage data in which transfer across three linguistic systems plays a central role.

     A second psycholinguistic process is that of overgeneralization of target language rules. This is a process that is also widely observed in child language acquisition: the learner shows evidence of  having mastered a general rule, but does not yet know all the exceptions to that rule. So, for example, the learner may use the past tense marker-ed for all verbs, regular and irregular alike: walked, wanted, hugged, laughed, *drinked, *hitted, *goed. The overgeneralization error shows clear evidence of progress, in that it shows that the learner has mastered a target language rule, but it also shows what the learner has yet to learn. To the extent that second-language learners make overgeneralization errors, one might argue that

they are using the same process as that employed by first-language learners.

    Transfer of training occurs when the second-language learner applies rules learned from instructors or textbooks. Sometimes this learning is successful; that is, the resulting interlanguage rule is indistinguishable from the target language rule. But sometimes errors result. For example, a lesson plan or textbook that describes the past perfect tense as the ‘past past’ can lead the learner to erroneously use the past perfect for the absolute distant past – for all events that occurred long ago, whether or not the speaker is relating these to any more recent or fore grounded event, as in the isolated statement, *‘My relatives had come from Italy in the 1700s.’ These have also been called ‘induced errors.’

     Strategies of communication are used by the learner to resolve communication problems when the interlanguage system seems unequal to the task. When, in the attempt to communicate meaning, the learner feels that the linguistic item needed is not available to him, he can resort to a variety of strategies of communication in getting that meaning across. So, for example, if the learner wants to refer to an electrical cord in English and does not know the exact lexical item to use in referring to it, he can call it ‘a tube,’ ‘a kind of corder that you use for electric thing I don’t exactly the name,’ or ‘a wire with eh two plugs in each side.’ The linguistic forms and patterns used in such attempts may become more or less

permanent parts of the learner’s interlanguage (see Communicative Language Teaching).

     Strategies of learning are used by the learner in aconscious attempt to master the target language. One such strategy of learning is learners’ conscious comparison of what they produce in IL with the NL and a perceived target, setting up interlingual identifications (see the example given above for transfer). Other examples of learning strategies are the use of

mnemonics to remember target vocabulary, the memorizing of verb declensions or textbook dialogues, the use of flash cards, and so on. Clearly, such strategies are often successful, but they can also result in error. Memorized lists can get confused with one another, for example, or the mnemonic mediator word may become confused with the TL word. An example of the latter might be that an English speaking learner of Spanish might use a mediator word pot in order to remember that the Spanish word for duck is pato – but might end up using pot in

interlanguage references to a duck.

     Research evidence was provided to show that all five of these psycholinguistic processes could affect the construction of interlanguages, and a call for more research went out. Many research projects were undertaken in response to this call to investigate each of these hypothesized processes, and the result was a flurry of papers, conferences, and publications, and ultimately something that was referred to as a field of research on second-language acquisition.

2.2 Error analysis

     It was the British applied linguist, Pit Corder, who re-focussed attention on error from the perspective of language processing and language acquisition. In his seminal (1967) paper “The significance of learners’ errors” he stressed the learner’s positive cognitive contribution to learning. His view was that the learner is engaged in a process of discovering the language. The learner forms hypotheses based on language input and tests those hypotheses in speech production. In this view errors are not only an inevitable but also, very importantly, a necessary feature of learner language, without which improvement cannot occur. Corder coined the term “transitional competence” to indicate the essential dynamism and flux of the

language learner’s evolving system. A learner’s errors, according to Corder (1967), represent the discrepancy between the transitional competence of that learner and the target language. Drawing heavily on Chomsky’s (1965) view of first language acquisition, he suggested that just as for the child acquiring its mother tongue the language evolves in a more or less fixed pattern, so the foreign language learner may possess an “inbuilt syllabus” which determines the order in which the language system is acquired and which is largely independent of the order of the external syllabus according to which the classroom learner is ostensibly learning. Corder further suggested that studying error might supply clues to this inbuilt order of acquisition, persistent errors indicating those elements acquired late. Corder, however, invoked Chomsky’s (1965) distinction between “competence” and performance” to draw a distinction between true errors of competence and errors of performance, which he denoted as mere “mistakes”, the product of “chance circumstances” analogous to slips of the tongue in the native language (Corder 1967: 166). These performance “mistakes”, he maintained, say nothing about the underlying speaker competence and should therefore be excluded from analysis. In a later paper Corder (1971: 107-108) suggested that error analysis should include not only “overt” errors but “covert” errors. Covert errors, unlike overt errors, are formally

acceptable but do not express the meaning intended by the learner. For example, “I want to know the English” is a formally correct sentence, but it would be a covert error if the learner wanted to express the meaning carried by “I want to know English”.

The procedure for error analysis was elaborated by Corder (1974) as comprising five stages:

• selection of a corpus of language

• identification of errors in the corpus

• classification of the errors identified

• explanation of the psycholinguistic causes of the errors

• evaluation (error gravity ranking) of the errors

In fact, error analysis has turned out to be more problematic than one might expect for various reasons. There are problems of identification. Notwithstanding native-speaker intuitions, error is difficult to define and can by no means always be unambiguously identified in production (Hughes / Lascaratou 1982). The distinction between “errors” and “mistakes” is highly problematic since in performance correct andincorrect forms of a single target often occur side by side. Learner transitional competence has been found to be highly variable, influenced by various external factors such as situation, interlocutor, speech versus

writing, and certain internal factors, especially anxiety. Furthermore, there appears to be a middle ground between completely acceptable language and erroneous language, which may variously be judged as infelicitous, stylistically inappropriate, non-nativelike, obscure (Azevedo 1980; Pawley / Syder 1983).

     There are problems of classification. Classification of errors depends on error being localisable to the domains of phonology/graphology, morphology, syntax, lexis, discourse. This is by no means always unproblematic, for example when inaccurate pronunciation or orthography produces another word. Counting of errors becomes problematic when multiple errors occur in close proximity or one error occurs within an already erroneous element. For example “The man is drunken” for “The man has drowned” could be counted as one mistake (“is drunken” for “has drowned”), two mistakes (“is” for “has” and “drunken” for “drowned”), or three mistakes if we add (“drunken” for “drunk”). Burt and Kiparsky (1974) first drew attention to what they called “global errors”, which are difficult to localise to a

specific item and seem to extend over the whole sentence. An example might be a sentence like “Well, there’s a great hurry around”.

     There are problems in assigning psycholinguistic causes. Assigning psycholinguistic causes to error is by its very nature speculative, particularly for global errors. In practice, it is often difficult to decide whether an error is caused by language transfer or not. Often various factors seem to interact to produce error, including first language influence, intrinsic difficulty of the sub-system of the foreign language, but also factors such as communicative strategies have to be considered, where learners have a deficit, perhaps a lexical deficit which they seek to compensate for. To do this, they may coin a word, use an L1 word, anglicise an L1 word, use a more general L1 word, use a near synonym, paraphrase, resort to non-linguistic strategies or appeal to their interlocutor.

     There are problems of error evaluation. Studies of errors in English have found great differences in error gravity rankings among individual judges who may employ quite different sets of criteria. In particular, native-speaker judges who are not language teachers tend to employ communicative criteria, judging an error as less serious if it does not impede communication and more serious if it does. By contrast, language teachers, and particularly language teachers who are not native speakers of English but are native speakers of the learner’s native language, tend to employ formal criteria, judging errors particularly harshly that violate rules taught explicitly in the early years of formal instruction, for example, the sequence of tenses in conditional sentences. They are also extremely severe on obvious interference errors from L1 (Hughes / Lascaratou 1982; Davies 1983).

     There is another more fundamental objection to error analysis as a tool for describing transitional competence. At best, error analysis can only provide negative evidence concerning certain aspects of the language that have not been acquired by a learner at a particular time. If learners do not produce any passive verb forms, for example, error analysis cannot say whether they have mastered the passive or not. Learners who are low risk-takers and who work with a restricted code, who avoid structures they are unsure of and do not venture into areas where they feel uncertain, may have relatively few errors. These errors, however, will only very inadequately document the language deficits of these particular learners. It would, therefore, seem preferable, not only to study learners’ errors, but to attempt to describe their language as a whole so as to fully comprehend their “transitional competence”.

Unit 3

Conclusion

     An interlanguage is a type of speech or writing developed by people during the process of learning a new language, when the learner is starting to gain proficiency in the new, or “target,” language but has not mastered it. It is a distorted form of the target language that contains errors caused by inappropriately using aspects of the learner's native language while trying to speak the target language, incorrectly applying the target language's grammar or pronunciation rules or trying to express concepts in the target language by using more basic words the learner already knows. This is normal during the process of learning a new language. Every interlanguage is specific to the person speaking it and evolves as he or she continues to learn the target language.

     Interlanguage is usually thought of as characteristic only of adult second-language learners (but see ‘Revised Interlanguage Hypothesis’ below), that is, learners who have passed puberty and  thus cannot be expected to be able to employ the language acquisition device (LAD) – that innate language learning structure that was instrumental in their acquisition of their native language. Children acquiring second languages are thought to have the ability to re-engage the LAD and thus to avoid the error pattern and ultimate fossilization that characterize the interlanguages of adult second-language learners.

     Central to the notion of interlanguage is the phenomenon of fossilization – that process in which the learner’s interlanguage stops developing, apparently permanently. Second-language learners who begin their study of the second language after puberty do not succeed in developing a linguistic system that approaches that developed by children acquiring that language natively. This observation led Selinker to hypothesize that adults use a latent psychological structure (instead of a LAD) to acquire second languages. The five psycholinguistic processes of this latent psychological structure that shape interlanguage were hypothesized (Selinker, 1972) to be (a) native language transfer, (b) overgeneralization of target language rules, (c) transfer of training, (d) strategies of communication, and (e) strategies of learning. We can study these five psychological structure in error analysis.

     Language learning is actually process of tria and error, in which a learner form a hypothesis in which they can abort it or adjust it. Therefore error analysis study how to examine learner’s errors in a longitudinal way in order to state the individual learner’s hypothesis and locate the progress he is making.

References       

Tarone. 2006. Interlanguage. London: Elsevier

Lenon. 2008. Contrastive analysis, Error analysis, Interlanguage. ……..: Gramley

The Important Of Motivation for Learning Second Language

UNIT 1

INTRODUCTION

     Human beings are created by their natural language skills, but are the second language is also one of human’s natural ability? Certainly not, as a second language, third, fourth, and so on which is not  spoken and used everyday, then everyone needs to learn and go through several processes to be mastered it. The process required times of course; some person takes a long time, but not a few who only need a short time. And to go through the process, I believe that humans need motivation to stay afloat in a process.

     Why I think there must be some sort of motivation to learn a second language? Because most people learn at least one language, and often children from a bilingual home learn two languages, apparently with ease. Moreover, these people speak the language, they understand the language, and often they both read and write it, so why should motivation be important? Because that generally language is an integral part of growing up (which provides motivation in its own right), and is necessary to communicate and participate in ones environment. Often, this is not the case for second languages, especially those learned in school. There are many advantages for knowing other languages but they are not absolutely necessary, and as a consequence, motivation (as well as ability) can play an important role in learning a second language. And there are many things that can affect this motivation.

    Motivation has been widely accepted by both teachers and researchers as one of the key factors that influence the rate and success of second/foreign language learning. Motivation provides the primary impetus to initiate learning the second language and later the driving force to sustain the long and often tedious learning process; indeed, all the other factors involved in second language acquisition presuppose motivation to some extent. Without sufficient motivation, even individuals with the most remarkable abilities cannot accomplish long-term goals, and neither are appropriate curricula and good teaching enough on their own to ensure student achievement. On the other hand, high motivation can make up for considerable deficiencies bohinone's language aptitude and learning conditions.

     As we know that motivation its self is divided into two, namely intrinsic and extrinsic. Then how the two forms of motivation are able to help in learning a second language? I hope this paper can tell the importance of motivation in second language acquisition and to demonstrate that it is more complex than merely wanting to learn the language.

On this paper I want to focus on 2 points, they are:

1. How motivations are able to help in learning a second language?

2. What is the different between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation?

 

UNIT 2

Discussion

2.2 The Important Of Motivation In Learning Second Language

      These points are central to understanding by a student general level of  motivation to learn a second language as well as the specific motivation that exists in any language class or other language learning situation. Motivation is a very complex phenomenon with many facets. In fact, in 1981, Kleinginna and Kleinginna presented 102 statements about the construct. It really isn’t possible to give a simple definition of motivation, though one can list many characteristics of the motivated individual. For example, the motivated individual is goal directed, expends effort, is persistent, is attentive, has desires (wants), exhibits positive affect is aroused, has expectancies, demonstrates self-confidence (self-efficacy), and has reasons (motives).

     As we can see some of these characteristics are cognitive in nature, some are affective, and some are behavioural. Motivation to learn a second language is not a simple construct. It

cannot be measured by one scale; perhaps the whole range of motivation cannot be assessed by even three or four scales. It definitely cannot be assessed by merely asking individuals to give reasons for why they think learning a language is important to them.

     When considering motivation and second language learning or acquisition, it is possible to consider two types of motivational constructs. Our research has always contended that there are in essence two types of motivation that should be considered when referring to second language acquisition, and I am not referring here to the integrative-instrumental dichotomy (or even the intrinsic-extrinsic one) that is often discussed in the research literature. I refer instead to the distinction between language learning motivation and classroom learning motivation.

    By language learning motivation, this type of motivation is considered in the socio-educational model of second language acquisition (Gardner, 1985), the social context model (Clément, 1980), the Self determination model (Noels, & Clément, 1996), the Willingness to Communicate model (MacIntyre, Clément, Dörnyei, & Noels,1998), and the extended motivational framework (Dörnyei, 1994) to name a few. It is a general form of motivation relevant in any second language-learning context. It is not a trait, as some individuals contend, but it is a general characteristic of the individual that applies to any opportunity to learn the language. It is relatively stable, because of its presumed antecedents, but it is unable to change under certain 3 conditions. The various models referred to above all agree that it as an attribute with significant implications for the individual; they differ in terms of its antecedents and/or correlates, as well as in how it might be assessed.

     The second class of motivation is classroom learning motivation, specifically the language classroom. This is the type of motivation emphasized by Heckhausen and Kuhl (1985); it is the type characterized by Dörnyeis tripartite pre-actional, actional and post-actional motivation, and is common to educational psychology in general. It is also represented in the

socio-educational model of second language acquisition, though it is considered an integral part of motivation in general (Gardner, 1985). It refers to the motivation in the classroom situation, or in any specific situation. The focus is on the individuals perception of the task at hand, and is largely state oriented. Obviously, it will be influenced by a host of factors associated with the language class. Thus, it is clear that the teacher, the class atmosphere, the course content, materials and facilities, as well as personal characteristics of the student (such as studiousness, etc.,) will have an influence on the individual classroom learning motivation. In the socio educational model, we contend that it will also be influenced by the general language learning motivation referred to above. Of course, in a very real sense, one cannot distinguish between the two types of motivation. They operate on the individual at any given time, but it is meaningful to consider that both of them are operative.

     Just as it is difficult to propose a simple definition of motivation, it is also difficult to provide a simple definition of what it means to learn a second language. In his seminal research on bilingual development, W. E. Lambert (1955; 1956a,b,c) identified what he referred to as two clusters in the process of becoming bilingual, the Vocabulary cluster and the Cultural cluster. In his research, he contrasted the language behavior of three groups of individuals in his study conducted in the USA. One group was comprised of 14 Undergraduates majoring in French, another consisted of 14 graduate students majoring in French, and the third was a group of 14 native French speaking individuals who had lived for at least 7 years in the USA and who used English on a daily basis.

     He compared the three groups on a number of measures of French proficiency and French-English bilingualism involving word association and reaction time measures, and found as 4

expected that performance improved from the undergraduates to the graduates to the French

native speakers. On some measures, however, there were no significant differences among the groups; on others there were no significant differences between the undergraduate and graduate students, while on other measures, the graduate students were significantly better than the undergraduates but significantly inferior to the native French speakers. On the basis of these results, he proposed that there was a distinct pattern in the growth of proficiency and bilingual skills due to experience in the other language. He concluded that there were a series of barriers to overcome in the process of language acquisition. He identified one as a vocabulary cluster, by which he meant the elements of the language, not simply individual vocabulary items. This he felt was a relatively easy stage to master. Another, and much more difficult one, he identified as the cultural cluster. He claimed that to overcome this barrier it was necessary for the individual to make the language part of the self. He also hypothesized that there may be other phases an individual must master in the process of learning a language.

2.2 Intrinsic And Extrinsic

     Intrinsic-extrinsic motivation distinction has been discussed in over 800 publications. There have been mainly two types of definitions of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in psychology. First, Kruglanski (1975) introduced endogenous-exogenous attribution, which refers to means-goal categories. That is, endogenous action means an end in itself. For example, persons who have endogenous attribution learn English without special reasons and enjoy it. Their goal is only to learn English. Exogenous action refers to “a means that mediates a further goal, one exogenous to it” Kruglanski, 1975, p. 390）. For example, persons who have exogenous attribution study English for external reasons, such as for careers and entrance examinations. Kruglanski stated that endoge-nous action is linked with intrinsic motivation.

     Second, Heider (1958）introduced perceived locus of causality （PLOC）, referring to actions or outcomes which can be perceived as personally caused or as a result of impersonal causes. Personal causality refers to “instances in which P causes x intentionally”（Heider, 1958, p. 100）. For example, persons who have personal causality do it on their own and their goal is to get an object. Impersonal causality refers to instances in which “P may cause x unintentionally merely because his physical or social being exerts some influence on the environment” （Heider, 1958, p. 100). For example, persons who have impersonal causality do something with unconscious motivations and goals.

     In addition, deCharms (1968/1983) expanded Heider’s concept and proposed origin and pawn. “An Origin is a person whoperceives his behavior as determined by his own choosing; a Pawn is a person who perceives his behavior as determined by external forces beyond his control”（deCharms, 1968/1983, p.273. An origin is intrinsically motivated, whereas a pawn is extrinsically motivated（deCharm, 1968/1983).

     On the basis of these concepts, Deci and Ryan（1985) proposed a self-determination theory. There are different types of extrinsic motivation, some of which are more internalized into the self-concept than others, i.e., more self-determined than others Deci & Ryan, 1985. For example, children who are not initially motivated to perform can be gradually motivated. Ryan, Connell and Deci（1985）stated that there is a shift from extrinsic control to self-regulation under certain conditions: internalization, referring to the process through which organisms transform regulation by external events into regulation by internal events (Ryan et al., 1985 ). Within the field of education, there are four levels of extrinsic motivation: external regulation, interjected regulation, identified regulation, and integrated regulation （Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2002).

     The most autonomous form of extrinsic motivation is integrated regulation. Ryan et al.（1985)stated that “all the various identifications or values that one holds are integrated with one another into a coherent, conflict-free hierarchy, and thus allow for smooth autonomous choice and functioning”（p. 36). Integrated regulation represents full self-determination, which results from the integration of the identification into one’s unified sense of self (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Ryan reported that there was a significant decrease with both age and grade in the degree of extrinsic regulation. Interjected and identified regulations, however, showed little change during grades three through six.

     How different are autonomous extrinsic motivation, such as identified and integrated regulations, and intrinsic motivation? Because identified and integrated regulations are relatively self-determined kinds of extrinsic motivation, they can be considered close to intrinsic motivation（Deci & Ryan, 2002). However, autonomous extrinsic motivation differs from intrinsic motivation. Although learners who have autonomous extrinsic motivation may find activities important for self-selected goals or purposes, learners who have intrinsic motivation might find activities interesting and fun (Deci & Ryan, 2002).

     On the basis of self-determination, Hayamizu（1993）assumes that “two kinds of motivation are located on a continuous dimension not having an absolute border line and that extrinsic motivation may be changed into intrinsic motivation”（p. 86). Hayamizu suggests the construct of a belief of link, which refers to the conviction of the changeability from extrinsic motivation to intrinsic motivation. Hayamizu（1995) also suggests that intrinsic and extrinsic motivations are not dichotomous, but continuous.

UNIT 3

CONCLUSION

     Everyone has to know that in learning a second language it’s important to having motivation. Motivation is a very complex phenomenon with many facets. Actually, it really isn’t possible to give a simple definition of motivation. But let I try to conclude that motivation is the driving force that causes the flux from desire to will in life. There are many cause of motivation, some are cognitive cause, some are affective, and some are behavior cause. And everyone have their own combination causes to create their own motivation.

     Even there are many person have other statement about it, but let we conclude motivation it’s self is divided into two, there are Extrinsic and Intrinsic. Most of motivation in extrinsic are come from outside the person, for example the will to reach some goals. And most of motivation in Intrinsic are come from inside its person.  On the basis of these concepts, Deci and Ryan（1985) proposed a self-determination theory. There are different types of extrinsic motivation, some of which are more internalized into the self-concept than others, i.e., more self-determined than others Deci & Ryan, 1985. For example, children who are not initially motivated to perform can be gradually motivated. Ryan, Connell and Deci（1985）stated that there is a shift from extrinsic control to self-regulation under certain conditions: internalization, referring to the process through which organisms transform regulation by external events into regulation by internal events (Ryan et al., 1985 ). Within the field of education, there are four levels of extrinsic motivation: external regulation, interjected regulation, identified regulation, and integrated regulation （Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2002).

     In conclusion, in the case of orientations, two taxonomies have been important in motivational research: Gardner’s dichotomy of integrative and instrumental orientations and the four types of orientations proposed by Noel et al (2003). In the case of the types of motivation, the most important classifications are Gardner’s integrative and instrumental motivation and Deci and Ryan’s extrinsic and intrinsic motivation.

Suka duka nyelesein PPL 2 yang cuman 2 SKS

     5 hari lagi akhirnya tugas buat bangun puagiiii banget dan pulang ngepres sebelum ngelesin akan segera berakhir. Ya.... selama PPL 2 ini karena sekolahan tempat PPLnya sejam dari rumah, jadi bangun harus super pagi biar bisa berangkat jam 5:45, berangkat pagi sih ngak masalah, yang jadi masalah adalah pulang ngepres ama jam ngursusin. bayangin setiap pulang langsung ketemu wajah anak anak dengan wajah kucel dan bedak yang udah luntur dan non stop sampai jam 8 malam, ngak pernah sempet mandi pula #untung seterong&stok minyak wangi banyak#. 

lanjutan ceritanya nanti ya.....badan dah teriak teriak gegara baru mandi cuman tdi pagi :(

    

     

Carissa

Assalamualaikum warrahmatullahi wabarakatu :) semoga limpahan rahmat dan barokah selalu menyertai kita semua.

In this note you will find everythings about me.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My name is Carissa Stella Alim and this name means "kekasih bintang yang berilmu". kamu bisa panggil caris atau carissa karena yang manggil stella biasanya cuman usth rina and kalau manggil alim entar yang noleh papah. Biasalah, sebagai umat muslim kami biasanya menyisipkan nama ayah dibelakang nama seorang anak untuk menunjukkan nasab anak tersebut.

Walaupun mamah berasal dari kediri dan papah dari jombang tapi aku lahir dan besar di surabaya campur sidoarjo dan hampir tidak pernah berbahasa jawa. Saat kecil aku tumbuh disekeliling mahasiswa, tepatnya di ketintang, hal itu menyebabkan aku secara ngak sadar selalu mendengarkan mahasiswa berbahasa indonesia karena emang bahasa indonesia kan bahasa pemersatu mahasiswa. Sampai sebesar inipun entah mengapa kondisi selalu membuat aku ngomong bahasa indonesia terus.Walhasil, mulutku itu canggung banget ngeluarin kosakata jawa kecuali "monggo". 

Aku ini orang yang ngak seberapa suka ngomong kecuali emang bener-bener penting. Jadi jangan kaget kalau duduk disebelahku trus aq diem aja, itu bukan berarti pertanda aku ngak suka, tapi emang lagi ngak ada topik penting yang bisa diomongin.

Walaupun aku bukan orang yang 100% disiplin, tapi aku tipikal yang sangat suka kedisiplinan dan selalu berusaha untuk disiplin. So, pembatalan janji tiba tiba, ngak tepat janji, ngak tepat waktu, ngak rapi, adalah hal-hal yang paling sering bikin aku ngrundel dalem ati.

Aku tipikal orang yang perfectionist. Semua harus bener-bener beres , tertata, ada antisipasinya, and bener bener yang terbaik yang bisa aku lakuin. kalau ngak gitu ngak bakal aku bilang done or aq maju. Itu hal yang bikin orang orang kadang ngira aku ngak setuju pendapat mereka, padahal sebenenya aku lagi nyari opsi lain yang mungkin lebih baik.Selama masih ada yang bener-bener bagus kenapa berpuas dengan yang bagus, iya ngak???................ kalau sempurna ngak mungkin ada, kesempurnaan kan cuman milik Penguasa Semesta.

Kalau masalah tugas dan tanggung jawab, trust me. Asal ngak digopo-gopoin it will be done on time dengan usaha paling baik yang bisa aku lakuin. Tapi sometimes, kalau emang aq ngak suka tuh tugas sering terjadi aku ngerjainnya the last minutes dengan usaha pas pasan. 

Buatku keluarga tuh segalanya. Tempat paling nyaman untuk kembali, tempat paling demokratis,tempat paling penuh inspirasi, tempat dimana cinta tulus selalu menanti. Dari kecil sampai sebesar ini apapun aku lakuin bareng keluarga, kecuali sekolah. Entah mengapa aku ngak pernah bosen bareng mereka terus, belanja bareng, jalan bareng, nonton bareng, kalau ngak bareng mereka malah rasanya ganjil.

Kalau masalah temen, aku bukan orang yang pilih-pilih temen sih. Yang jelas kalau temenan harus jujur, kalau ada yang ngak disuka ya bilang ngak suka aja, kalau suka ya bilang suka. Jangan sampek ada yang ditutup tutupin. 

Aku ini tipikal manusia yang ngak nyaman terlalu lama diluar rumah. Selain karena aku cewek ya karena di rumah aku bisa ngelakuin apapun yang aku mau. Mau makan, internetan, nonton tv, ngetik, nyetrika, nyuci, cari ide, semua bisa aku lakuin dirumah. Mau dibilang ngak asyik atau ngak gaul terserah. Kan kesuksesan manusia ngak dipengaruhi tingkat keasyikan and kegaulannya tapi dipengaruhi oleh seberapa besar doa dan usahanya untuk meraih semua impiannya.

Kamar atau rumah yang berantakan biasanya bikin semua ide di otak mampet, jadi sebelum aku ngerjain tugas atau pingin nyari ide hal pertama yang aku lakuin bukannya diem nunggu ide atau brosing tapi mberesin kamar and rumah. Oh ya, entah kenapa dari dulu aku itu ngak bisa konsentrasi dalam keadaan bising. So, aku selalu butuh kondisi sepi untuk hafalan, beajar, ngerjain tugas, mbaca. Dan keadaan yang paling mendukung itu tersedia di kamarku.

Kalau masalah asmara................

Aku ngak suka pakek pacaran dulu, soalnya pingginya punya suami bukan pacar. Aku percaya banget sama kata kata mbah "tresno iku jalaran soko kulino" kalau tiap hari ketemu, nyiapin makan buat suami, nyetrikain baju suami pasti lama lama juga cinta. Kalau ditanya pernah suka orang apa ngak, ya pasti pernah, namanya juga normal. Buatku imam idaman tuh ya yang qurrota a'yun. Bisa mbimbing, nguatin, membentengi,  cerdas, karismatik, ah ....pokoknya gitulah.

Mimpiku simple sih tapi susah juga. Aku pingin jadi ibu terbaik buat anak anakku, istri sholehah buat suami, anak berbakti buat ortu, and manusia yang bermanfaat buat umat.

Hobiku tidur, main game ama  baca buku.Biasanya hari minggu adalah hari paling kondusif untuk memuaskan hasrat tidur, main game and baca buku. that's why i love sunday.