Interlanguage in German III: Fix Every Error or Focus?
A German III teacher collects 28 first-draft emails of 80–100 words about weekend plans. A tally shows 20 students write 'Am Samstag ich gehe…' instead of 'Am Samstag gehe ich…'; 17 write 'Ich freue mich, dass ich kann kommen' instead of '…dass ich kommen kann'; 14 write 'mit mein Freund' instead of 'mit meinem Freund'; and 11 write 'weil ich bin müde' instead of 'weil ich müde bin.' The teacher has one 50-minute class before the graded writing assessment and a department rule to give corrective feedback on all errors. Four students are heritage speakers who speak German at home but have had little formal grammar instruction. The teacher wonders whether to correct every error, teach a mini-lesson on verb placement, or focus on meaning.
1. Analyze the four error patterns. What do they suggest about the learners' interlanguage and about prioritizing instruction? Distinguish developmental patterns from transfer and from case-marking issues.
Read the worked answer
The patterns are not all the same kind of error. 'Am Samstag ich gehe' reflects transfer from English SVO and failure to apply German's verb-second constraint after a fronted adverbial. 'dass ich kann kommen' and 'weil ich bin müde' show that learners have the main-clause pattern but have not yet acquired verb-final order in subordinate clauses; this is a developmental syntax issue, not a random mistake. 'mit mein Freund' is a case-marking error after a dative preposition; English has no morphological case, so the learner defaults to a bare or nominative form. The teacher should prioritize by frequency, comprehensibility, and teachability: verb-second after fronted elements and verb-final after 'dass/weil' are high-frequency and central to German syntax; prepositional case can be taught lexically in chunks ('mit meinem Freund,' 'mit meiner Schwester'). Heritage speakers may produce fluent but unanalyzed forms, so a short diagnostic should separate what they can explain from what they can do. Correcting every error would overwhelm students and obscure the priorities.
2. Design the 50-minute lesson and a feedback plan for the graded email. Explain how you would avoid overwhelming students and how you would treat heritage speakers.
Read the worked answer
A 50-minute lesson should focus on two targets, not all four. Ten minutes: students compare correct and incorrect pairs ('Am Samstag gehe ich' vs. 'Am Samstag ich gehe'; 'dass ich kommen kann' vs. 'dass ich kann kommen') and articulate the pattern. Fifteen minutes: input flood with sentences about weekend plans; students mark verbs and clause boundaries. Fifteen minutes: structured output-students rewrite four sentences, then write two new ones about their own plans. Ten minutes: self-edit with a checklist limited to the two targets. For feedback on the graded email, the teacher should use focused correction codes for the target structures plus one or two meaning-focused comments; grammar should be a separate, smaller score from content and task completion. Heritage speakers can receive a more complex prompt and peer-editing role, but they should still be assessed on the same targeted structures. The rationale is that focused feedback is more usable than comprehensive correction, and the lesson models the exact structures the assessment will measure.