Often, context alone will determine what force is assigned to an utterance,” Thomas, 1983: 99.
The cross-cultural understanding holds an important part in avoiding the sociopragmatic failure. Amaya 2008: 14 mentions that this failureerror has its
origin in ‘pragmatic transfer’. Amaya has this statement based on Kasper’s statement, “…..pragmatic transfer in interlanguage pragmatics shall refer to the
influence exerted by learners’ pragmatic knowledge of languages and cultures other than L2 on their comprehension, production and learning of L2 pragmatic
information” 1992: 207.
5. Language Transfer
In second language acquisition field, the term of language transfer is often used. The working definition of “transfer” proposed by Odlin 1989: 27 is as
follows: “Transfer is the influence resulting from similarities and differences between the target language and any other language that has been previously and
perhaps imperfectly acquired”. L 1 transfer, according to Ellis 2008: 969, occurs when the ‘influence’ results from the learner’s mother tongue and there are
two types of transfer, namely: borrowing transfer and substratum transfer. What is meant by borrowing transfer is when the L2 influences the L1, while when the L1
influences the L2 it is called substratum transfer. According to the behaviorist theories of language learning Ellis, 2008:
349, the main impediment to learning is interference from prior knowledge. That is why there are what so called positive transfer and negative transfer. The
similarities between the L1 and the target language can facilitate the L2
acquisition and this is the positive transfer. The differences can cause errors and avoidance, this is the negative transfer.
Although Oldin 2004 comments that “the problems relating to crosslinguistic influence are so varied and so complex that it does not exist any
really detailed theory of language transfer” p.475, Ellis 2008: 397 tries to identify some of the key elements that a cognitive theory of transfer will need to
incorporate. The key elements are: 1
Transfer occurs in both communication and in learning. In this part, Ellis emphasizes that a theory of language transfer needs to
explain transfer in both L2 communication and transfer in L1 learning and the relationship between them. Ellis quoted Ringbom’s claim on the relationship
between transfer in communication and learning as follows: Transfer in communication is motivated by the learner’s desire to
comprehend or produce messages, but it may also have an effect on the process of hypothesis construction and testing, which many scholars see as
central to interlanguage development. In other words, transfer in communication may lead to transfer in learning. Ringbom, 1992: 106
Using Ringbom’s claim, Ellis takes a conclusion that transfer in production can also contribute significantly to interlanguage development.
2 Transfer arises as a result of both differences and similarities between the target language and the L1.
Based on Kleinmann 1978’s and Major and Kim 1996’s studies, Ellis draws the second key element that transfer arises as a result of both differences
and similarities between the target language and the L1. This conclusion is also strengthened by Ringbom 2007 who states:” transfer can take place as a result of
both difference between and similarities with the target language and that it is similarity that is the more important.”
3 Transfer works in conjunction with other factors. It is already clear that transfer always works in conjunction with other
factors. 4 Transfer is both a conscious and subconscious process.
Although some studies done by Krashen 1983, Schachter 1983, and Mohle and Raupach 1989 have different position on how deep transfer play role
in ‘acquisition’ a subconscious process and in ‘learning’ a conscious process, but basically it is mentioned that transfer is both a conscious and subconscious
process. 5 Transfer is both conceptual and linguistic.
The two issues arise for a theory of L2 acquisition that incorporates transfer. 6 Transfer is ultimately a subjective phenomenon.
This key element is strengthened by the studies done by Lado 1957 and Odlin 2003.
The most important conclusion in the study of transfer is that no theory of L2 use or acquisition can be complete without an account of L1 transfer Ellis,
2008: 402. Meaning to say, L1 transfer holds a significant role in the L2 acquisition.
