Science and education scientific publishing center virtualconferences. Press international conference science and

3. Understanding errors in the terms of accuracy, fluency and appropriacy 
The main reasons of errors appearance in the learners’ speech are 1) distinct elements in any 
contacted languages, and 2) not effective strategies used by a teacher for teaching a language items 
and training of their usage. Taking account the distinct features of the contacted language systems 
and conducting observation and analysis of learners errors the teachers should identify the specificity 
of learners’ interlanguage or approximation system in the contexts of interdependences of accuracy 
and fluency (Chambers,1997), and appropriacy and fluency (Makhkamova & Kusanova, 2019). Such
interdependences can be reflected in the formula “accuracy <-> fluency <->appropriacy”. First, let’s
deal with these terms: 
– accuracy is usually considered as “error-free speech” (Housen & Kuiken, 2012. p.45), or
“ability to avoid error in performance”(Ellis, 2009. p. 5);
– fluency means the ability to talk in coherent, reasoned and semantically dense sentence (Fillmore, 
1997; Muller, 2014; Ellis, 2009). 
– appropriacy refers to the context as accurate or appropriate using the linguistic items towards 
a context, adequacy of repertoire in relation to task and topics, or a necessary skill to discourse 
interpretation and production (Makhkamova & Kusanova, 2020).
At the same time it is impossible to achieve high level of accuracy in language-out environment, 
for example, RP in teaching pronunciation. The main requirement to learners’ pronunciation in the 
form of Lingua Franco is to be phonetically intelligible and accurate enough to be understandable. 
We cannot expect absolute phonetic accuracy and grammar literacy because of many reasons, that’s 
why we should go only to approximate correctness. On the grammar level learners can achieve only 
a relative literacy, because under the approximation principle not all language norm deviations are 
considered as errors. For example: substitution of definite article into indefinite, using preposition in 
instead of at can’t be considered as rough errors. In turn, pragmatic errors related to appropriacy are 
considered more serious than language ones. But on this level there will be also permissible errors. 
For example, using can instead of could to be more polite, or using must that has connotation of 
dictation (it is acceptable in the Uzbek linguoculture), or addressing as “Teacher”, or some false 
cognates as pretension, actual.
Attitude to fluency the teachers should be tolerant to speed of speech, illogical transition of ideas, 
etc. Herewith teachers should realize fluency dependence on accuracy and appropriacy. 
Therefore, teachers should use strategies of observation and analysis of errors, or learners’ 
interlanguage in the language classes. According to scholars views (Lightbown & Spada, 1993; 
James 1990, Corder, 2008), specific language usage by learners can be analysed during speech 
perception and comprehension, production and assessment of the language performance in all types 
of speech activities. The permissible errors in the linguistic and cultural aspects should be defined via 
comparison of qualitative indicators all components of communicative competence in accordance 
with the curriculum requirements or criteria of evaluation related to accuracy, adequacy and fluency.
Thus, within the approximation principle the observation and analysis of quality of learners 
speech proposes errors identification and typologization to reveal among them 1) impeded to
misunderstanding and 2) not impeded to comprehension of learners speech.

---

100