Interlanguage¶
Interlanguage treats a language learner's evolving production as evidence of a patterned system of its own, not merely target-language errors.
Core Idea¶
Interlanguage is the evolving system inferred from a learner's use of an additional language. Recurring forms can show a patterned organization distinct from both prior languages and a target variety. The system may vary across tasks and time; it need not be perfectly uniform or permanently fossilized.[ref-e14efc0223af][ref-8d40ce516b6c]
Scope of Application¶
Two original observations execute the inference. In Selinker's author-collected French-immersion study, one child used three reported variants for “I like” within two minutes. The searchable text verifies J'ai aime and J'aime but truncates the third form after Je; its full spelling is not verified here. The two legible variants already show real variability of one intended construction but do not determine its selecting rule. In Tarone's original six-adult English picture-description study, roughly one fifth of attempted syllables per participant had structural deviations; Korean and Cantonese learners favored consonant deletion among repairs, whereas Portuguese learners favored vowel insertion. That group-level distribution is stronger evidence for patterned production than one isolated pronunciation. Neither small sample proves an inevitable prior-language cause or permanent fossilization.[ref-f97b065eea49][ref-85209ce0622a]
Clarity¶
The question is not merely whether a form differs from a target norm, but what pattern of learner use it belongs to. An isolated slip cannot by itself establish a rule, a transfer source or permanent fossilization.
Manages Complexity¶
The construct groups changing sounds, grammar, vocabulary and usage into a testable account of developing organization. It still requires attention to task, register, history and variation rather than forcing one invariant grammar.[^ref-8d40ce516b6c]
Abstract Reasoning¶
Collect repeated samples, propose a pattern, and test it across contexts and time. Compare with prior repertoires and target varieties while keeping alternative explanations open. Describe a persistent form as stable only within the observations available, not as inevitably permanent.[^ref-e14efc0223af]
Knowledge Transfer¶
The inference transfers across additional languages and learning settings, but no fixed developmental path or universal fossilization rule transfers with it. Second-language acquisition is the wider process; interlanguage is the learner-system construct studied within it.
[^ref-e14efc0223af]: Elaine Tarone, “Interlanguage,” specialist reference account. [^ref-8d40ce516b6c]: Towell, Hawkins and Bazergui, “Systematic and Nonsystematic Variability in Advanced Language Learning”, original longitudinal-study abstract. [^ref-f97b065eea49]: Selinker, Papers in Interlanguage, 1988 revised original collection, Systematicity/Variability chapter p.46. [^ref-85209ce0622a]: Tarone, “Some Influences on Interlanguage Phonology”, original 1976 picture-description study, Results and Tables A–B.
Neighborhood in Abstraction Space¶
Interlanguage sits in a sparse region of the domain-specific corpus (92nd percentile for distinctiveness): few abstractions share its structure, so a faithful description tends to retrieve it precisely.
Family — Unclustered & Miscellaneous (2551 abstractions)
Nearest neighbors
- Second-language acquisition — 0.83
- Processability theory — 0.80
- Diglossia — 0.79
- Generative Linguistics — 0.79
- Natural approach — 0.78
Computed from structural-signature embeddings · 2026-10-08