<strong>Introduction</strong>

The term “interlanguage” was first introduced by the American linguist L. Selinker in 1972. It refers to the system of internal language created by a student at a certain time or to the interconnected language system built by him during a certain educational process. Based on pragmatic goals, the individual gradually forms his own language structure and builds his own learning track. The language system of interlanguage is relatively independent and includes elements and units of both native and non-native languages in its structure. According to many researchers [12, p. 263; 9, p. 209; 10, p. 64; 8, p. 8] interlanguage is the “only way” to learn a second language. From the point of view of cognitive linguistics, such an intermediate system in the process of learning a native language is formed as a result of insufficient awareness of the language material and generates non-standard actions that lead to interferents of various kinds. Intermediate competence is an immature, imperfect form, but it is a “living”, not a “dead” language, starting with the native language and gradually approaching the studied one. Thus, it has the essence of natural language, its own system and communicative-limited scope of use. The American scholar C. Adjemian, identified three main components [1]: a) permeability – in the process of developing a second language, new language units are able to either penetrate the student's interlanguage system or linger. Therefore, the interlanguage is not a certain closed system, but an open entity capable of constantly “absorbing” new knowledge. With the delay in the penetration of units and their elements is associated with such a phenomenon as ossification. b) ossification – on the one hand, the phenomenon in the interlanguage, when such a level of ownership is reached, which is far from perfect. On the other hand, students, having reached the level of partial competence of some specific forms of language, after achieving some success in communication, enter into a state of “stagnation”, “petrification” or “ossification”. After N.N. Rogoznaya, we will use the term “ossification” as the most successful and precisely reflecting the state of this phase of the interlanguage. This feature was first noticed by L. Selinker [9], and then received further development in other works [6, p. 8; 5, p. 68; 13, p. 191]. L. Selinker believed that only 5% of students can reach the same level as native speakers. In modern conditions of unprecedented demand for foreign languages, the threshold of proficiency of native speakers of coordinate bilingualism has increased to 7% - 8%. (most often, the accent problem is seen only at the super-segment level.) c) relapse (reduction, significant slowdown in the growth of language competence or stop) – this means that the interlanguage is gradually moving to the normative level of the target language, but this process is not direct; and has its “repetitions” and “bends” in the form of a large number of diachronic cycles. This fact says that some of the issues that are fixed earlier, tend to appear again (Rogoznaya N.N. characterizes this phase as a “rollback of knowledge”).

<strong>Material and Methods</strong>

It is noticed that interlanguage can exist in three states [6, p. 10]: 1) dynamic bilingualism, characterized by purification from surrogate impurities (the most common phenomenon in classroom practice); 2) ossification, operation without changing when you reach a certain level; 3) dying because of lack of its demand. Based on these characteristics of the interlanguage, its features can be summarized as follows: 1. The independence of interlanguage is that this intermediate language system differs from the native and studied languages. It cannot be considered as “a simple mixture” that occurs in the process of learning a foreign language, under the influence of strong interference from the native language and the student. Interlanguage builds its unique language rules that do not exist either in the native (L₁) nor in the studied (L₂) language. 2. The interlanguage stages are not fixed. This is a dynamic process that progressively approaches the normative form of the language being studied as the student's level of learning deepens. During the learning process, students constantly adjust their language behavior. By adapting their language behavior to the habits of use on the L₂, the individual is freed from mistakes, moving in the right direction. From the point of view of speech errors, the interlanguage can be divided into four stages: the first stage is unregulated mistakes. At this stage the student only vaguely realizes that the target language has a different structure, but does not understand its structure. Errors of such a level N.N. Rogoznaya qualifies as infra-mistakes, i.e. deviations that are “beyond the threshold of understanding” at this stage from the point of view of psycholinguistics [8, p. 40]. During this period an interlanguage system is formed and the interference field is represented by a large number of interferents. These errors are usually irregular and inconsistent. At this point they cannot be fully explained and corrected. The second phase is heuristic (phase of sudden insight). At this stage, the understanding of a non-native language gradually becomes consistent and more conscious. The individual begins to master the studied language structure and carry out internal analysis, internalization (the process of mastering external structures, as a result of which they become internal regulators) of the studied rules. Despite the fact that students master certain rules, they, due to lack of practice, violate them. The errors of this stage cannot be explained and corrected completely due to the instability of the new system, which is characterized by the phenomenon of knowledge rollback (return to the pre-or intermediate stage). The third stage is formation of structural and systemic relations of a non-native language. Language use at this stage most often refers to the problems of consistency/inconsistency of language units L₂, i.e. grammatical and syntactic inconsistency. Although some of the internalized rules of the target language are incomplete, they represent a kind of connection close to the system of the target language. The obvious feature of this stage is that the individual can correct most of his mistakes himself. The fourth stage is language stability. During this period of language acquisition interferents are relatively small, in general, the system of non-native language is mastered. Language use is more fluent, there is no problem with the semantic component of lexical expressions. The language system of an individual tends to be stable, and mistakes are more often caused by negligence or forgetting a previously known rule. This stage can be characterized as a stage of competencies “grinding”. 3. The dynamics of interlanguage is in constant improvement. In the process of mastering a foreign language speech, the interlanguage is constantly decreasing. Although errors often occur in the interlanguage because the new language rules have powerful extensibility capabilities, it is in constant dynamic processes. Thus, the interlanguage is improved taking into account the efforts of the individual, competence-based innovations and directly depends on the needs of communication. Moving from simple to complex, from low to higher, it gradually “leaves” L₁, approaching L₂. 4. Systematic interlanguage affects the internal organization and consistency of each stage. It is responsible for formation of the correct system in phonology, vocabulary, grammar, syntax creating its own system, which is clearly structured on the basis of positive (transposition) and negative (interference) language material. For example, M. Egorova examines the impact of linguistic and cultural interference on the success of a dialogue discourse [4]. 5. Objective law of interlanguage is a mandatory formation of an intermediate linguistic system regardless of languages that come into contact. Interlanguage is one of the natural forms of language existence, because it has all necessary common characteristics and functions of the human language. In the development of interlanguage eliminates existing errors, but there is a possibility of new ones. It, as children's language, forms a laws system, freeing itself from those elements that have moved from the level of awareness to the level of the subconscious, i.e. automatism.

<strong>Results and Discussion</strong>

All of the above leads to the idea of finding out the causes of the interlanguage, therefore, in this regard, they should be considered. Let's stop on the main causes: 1) negative impact of the native language. In the process of learning a foreign language, because the individual is not familiar with the grammatical rules and the normative use of units of the studied language, he consciously or unconsciously, based on the primary linguistic system of the native language, uses units L₁ to express the semantics of L₂, i.e. all its basic potential. Basic knowledge of L₁ is mainly reflected in such levels as phonetics, vocabulary and grammar. For example, Chinese students pronounce the word “<em>rabota</em>” as [<em>labota</em>], due to the absence of the phoneme in their native language, they replace the Russian phoneme with Chinese . Another example is that Chinese students read Russians closed syllables unconsciously adding a vowel after a consonant, aligning syllabic duration; for example<em>, </em><em>mnogo</em><em> (</em><em>m</em><em>un</em><em>o</em><em>go</em><em>), film (</em><em>film</em><em>a</em>), etc. This is because the Chinese language has syllabic principle, when a consonant exists only with a vowel. In the field of vocabulary under the influence of L₁, for example, in the phrase: “how to properly and beautifully <strong>paint</strong> make-up on a face” there is a mixture of lexemes to <em>paint</em> and <em>apply</em>. In the field of grammar, we can give the following example: “Today we have the exam the Russian language” such a grammaferent is due to the fact that in the Chinese language nouns have no morphological indicators of gender, number and case, so this error occurs under the influence of L₁: <em>“</em><em>Moya</em><em> </em><em>dedushka</em><em>”</em> is good at playing football. “Moy dedushka”......football.…… My sister went to <em>“</em><em>teatre</em><em>”</em>…… “teatr”…… We met <em>“5 </em><em>god</em><em>”</em> ago. …... “5 let”…… 2) limited competence of the interlanguage. It is characterized by the fact that students with limited knowledge in the L₂, “invent” their own rules and create special forms that are absent in the L₁ and L₂. Such units, which are not present in the languages being contacted, become potential elements of the interlanguage. For example, “the cat sat in <em>“</em><em>ugle</em><em>”</em> of the room” – in the corner. The reason for such an interference is that in the Russian language the formation of the prepositional case of the noun <em>“</em><em>ugol</em><em>”</em> is possible only with the end – “u”, due to unformed competence at the moment, students do not know about this rule. Often students are unable to convey the meaning of a word, so they tend to use non – specific synonyms or approximate expressions that do not convey the exact meaning, for example, “an apple is one of the most popular fruits in the world, and its <em>skin</em> is a rich source of vitamins”. The word <em>peel</em> is replaced by the word <em>skin</em>. 3) influence of foreign culture. In connection with cultural differences between countries, students are often confused with the culture of the target language, their national culture, and the perceptual result is affected by the accuracy of thoughts expressed by an addresser. For example, in China, the address: “Grandmother Zhang”, “Grandfather Wang”, “Uncle Li”, “Aunt Zhao” can be used according to etiquette in an official setting, and in Russian it is not welcome. Addressing to someone, for example, “uncle Andrew”, “grandmother Tanya” in public life violates the principle of interaction, causes dissatisfaction and leads to bad communication. Or, for example, in China, if a student, meeting with a teacher, wants to express his respect, he habitually addresses by an etiquette formula: surname + “teacher”, Hello! And in Russian, the word “teacher” as well as “driver”, “cook” is just a noun that only names a certain profession, but does not act as an address, not to mention a respectful etiquette. It can be seen that the influence of factors of foreign culture is one of the main reasons for the formation of such inconsistencies and leads to the formation of cultural order interferents. As M. Egorova notes, as a result of linguistic and cultural interference under the influence of certain factors, communication can be both successful and unsuccessful [3]. 4) emotional state of a student. Many studies have proven that emotional state of a student directly affects the outcome of learning [2, p. 119; 14, p. 3]. Positive emotions can create a psychological mood that promotes learning, and negative emotions have a bad effect on the productive development of educational potential. Scientists have noticed that people who study a foreign language and are in a state of anxiety, lack self-confidence, activity in learning. They have a fear of making a mistake and unwillingness to make new language attempts necessary to master the language. If students feel this emotional state, they need to be helped by making positive adjustments to their mental activities. Such adjustments will reduce the likelihood that the interlanguage will enter the stage of ossification. 5) motivation of students – can be divided into two levels: external and internal [14; 15]: a) the level of external motivation is usually directly related to the future of the person, it comes from the target areas, for example, to get a diploma, a good job, a high salary or other external material well-being. Having set such a final goal of learning, the individual loses the learning initiative, activity. After the exam is passed or intermediate goal is achieved, there is a psychological loss of interest in learning, there is a situation easily prone to ossification; b) the level of internal motivation is related to the interest in learning and long-term knowledge. Students show great enthusiasm and interest in the language, trying to realize all their opportunities associated with the mastering of a foreign language. Therefore, such students are able to learn a foreign language faster than people who are guided by external motivation. In such people the dynamic processes are in an active state, which helps to level down the system of interlanguage, to develop a dynamic state, aimed at the formation of a full-fledged linguistic system L₂. One of the major stages of the existence of the interlanguage is the process of ossification. It is associated with a negative psychological component – lack of motivation. Let’s consider how ossification occurs in interlanguage and what the strategy to overcome it is. The purpose of the students mastering L₂, ultimately is to accurately and fluently use the target language. However, the facts show that a lot of time and effort is spent on the study of L₂ and not everyone can successfully achieve a good result. Despite the fact that involvement of a student's own resources plays an important role in the learning process, a significant role belongs to a teacher (tutor).

<strong>Implication</strong>

In order for a teacher to prevent the occurrence of ossification in the student's interlanguage, he should take the following measures: <em>First</em>, a teacher must have a correct and complete understanding of the individual interlanguage of a student, as the process of its formation and appearance is an inevitable step in the study of L₂. The teacher should distinguish between the types of errors and on this basis, to implement different approaches and methods in teaching, paying attention to such important features as: infra-error – this error means a lack of understanding of the language rules of the L₂, the lack of mastering of the learned units of the language. Students do not notice and cannot correct their mistakes, the teacher should inform them about the correct use of language units in order to form a foreign language competence; permissible errors of different linguistic layers (interferents) – are due to the fact that the teacher must point to the error, but it is necessary to allow the student to analyze it and correct it himself, to realize its appearance. Teacher's correction of students' mistakes significantly contributes to the process of mastering the second language. <em>Second</em>, encourage students to communicate as much as possible with the language they are learning (advise to read original literary texts, magazines, newspapers, watch movies, contact with native speakers). <em>Thirdly</em>, it is necessary to get acquainted with the traditions, customs and culture of the studied language, since the differences in the history and general political situation in the countries are not identical. And when students really understand the habits, traditions, customs and culture of the people, they can actively prevent and correct the aspect of interlanguage that is associated with cultural differences. Because of struggling with the processes and reasons for the emergence of interference their number reduces, efficiency increases and misunderstanding is avoided in the process of studying L₂. Each student would like to make the most of his/her native language in the study of a foreign language, to build a bridge, parallel, bilingual model between them, so it is important to pay attention to the role of interlanguage in the learning process and the formation of secondary linguistic competence.