Avoidance
Avoidance is a learner strategy in which difficult L2 structures are systematically underproduced or replaced with simpler alternatives. Unlike most interlanguage phenomena, the diagnostic evidence is the absence of a form rather than its incorrect production — making avoidance invisible to traditional error analysis.
Schachter (1974)
Jacqueline Schachter's landmark study — titled "An error in error analysis" — examined the production of English relative clauses by speakers of Persian, Arabic, Chinese, and Japanese. Chinese and Japanese learners produced far fewer relative clauses than Persian and Arabic learners, yet made fewer errors on the ones they did produce. A pure error analysis would have concluded that relative clauses were unproblematic for the East Asian group.
Schachter's insight: the Chinese and Japanese learners were avoiding the structure entirely because their L1 relativisation patterns are structurally distant from English (head-final vs head-initial). The Persian and Arabic learners, whose L1s have closer relative clause structures, attempted more and erred more — but were actually further along in acquisition.
This study rehabilitated contrastive analysis by showing that L1–L2 distance predicts not just errors but also avoidance patterns.
Types of Avoidance
| Type | Description |
|---|---|
| Syntactic avoidance | Avoiding complex structures (relative clauses, passives, conditionals) |
| Lexical avoidance | Using known words instead of attempting new vocabulary |
| Phonological avoidance | Avoiding words containing difficult sounds |
| Topic avoidance | Steering conversation away from areas requiring difficult language |
Causes
- L1–L2 distance: Greater structural difference increases avoidance (Crosslinguistic Influence)
- Perceived difficulty: Learners avoid forms they believe they cannot produce correctly
- Risk aversion: Some learners prefer accuracy over risk-taking, especially in assessed contexts
- Insufficient input: Forms that are infrequent in the input may not be available for production
Detection
Because avoidance produces no errors, it requires comparison:
- Frequency analysis against native speaker or same-level norms
- Comparison across L1 groups (as in Schachter 1974)
- Obligatory context analysis — checking whether the learner uses the form where a native speaker would
- Elicitation tasks that require specific structures
Teaching Implications
- Error counts alone underestimate a learner's difficulties — teachers must also notice what learners are not producing
- Task design can create obligatory contexts that make avoidance impossible (e.g., picture descriptions requiring relative clauses)
- Awareness-raising about avoidance patterns can help learners push beyond their comfort zone
- Pushed output activities force production of avoided forms
References
- Schachter, J. (1974). An error in error analysis. Language Learning, 24(2), 205–214.
- Kleinmann, H.H. (1977). Avoidance behavior in adult second language acquisition. Language Learning, 27(1), 93–107.