which sought to link languages ​​historically, developmentally and structurally within «family» relationships.linguists attempt to find out similarities & differences in both related & non- related languages. Contrastive analysis grew as the result of the practical demands of a language-teaching methodology, where it was empirically shown that the errors which are made by foreign language students can be often traced back to the differences in structure between the target language & the language of the learner. This naturally implies the necessity of a detailed comparison of the structure of a native & a target language. This procedure has been named contrastive analysis.proceed from the assumption that the categories, elements on the semantic as well as on the syntactic & other levels are valid for both languages. p align="justify">
1.2 The place and role of contrastive analysis in linguistics
analysis is a linguistic branch whose main aim is to help the analyst to ascertain in which aspects the two languages ​​are alike and in which they differ. It includes two main processes - description and comparison set up in four basic steps: a) assembling the data, b) formulating the description, c) supplementing the data as required, and d) formulating the contrasts.grew as the result of the practical demands of language teaching methodology where it was empirically shown that the errors which are made recurrently by foreign language students can be often traced back to the differences in structure between the target language and the language of the learner. This naturally implies the necessity of a detailed comparison of the structure of a native and a target language which has been named contrastive analysis.should be borne in mind that though objective reality exists outside human beings and irrespective of the language they speak every language classifies reality in its own way by means of vocabulary units.
The central theoretical issue and the ultimate goal of contrastive studies is the question of establishing similarities and differences and, consequently, their quantification. Chesterman (1998), in addressing this issue, makes a useful distinction between similarity-as-trigger , defining it as В«the notion of a particular relation existing between entities in the world, a relation that impinges upon human perception, from matter to mind В»and similarity-as-attribution , which goes in the opposite direction, from mind to matter. It is essentially a subjective, cognitive process that perceives two entities as being similar. Similarity judgements, in turn, В«are (...) ways of organizing and clarifying one s mental representations of the worldВ». They are also bound to be relative, variable and culture dependent. ...
