1. INTRODUCTION

This article is devoted to the study of the problem of interference of the native language in learning a foreign language (particularly English) which is faced by any teacher of foreign languages. Interference in linguistics denotes the consequences of the influence of one language (i.e. the “mother tongue”) on another (the language studied) (King, 2000). Language interference in English is denoted by several terms: language transfer / L1 interference / linguistic interference / cross linguistic influence (Cenoz et al., 2001). As indicated in the sociolinguistic dictionary, the term interference can be interpreted in both broad and narrow senses:

1. 1. 1) (Broad meaning) Interaction of language systems under conditions of bilingualism; expressed in deviations from the norms of either of the languages that occur in the speech of bilingual individuals (Vafina et al., 2017).

   2) (Narrow meaning) Deviations from the norm of the second language under the influence of the native language in written and oral bilingual speech (ССТ – Dictionary of sociolinguistic terms).

Interference manifests itself as a foreign accent in the speech of the person who speaks two languages (Hornberger, 2011). This phenomenon can manifest itself both in oral and written speech (Song, 2012).The importance of studying language interference increases in connection with the practical demand for foreign language knowledge in the context of the realities of the contemporary development of world science, culture, and technology. Currently, many people in their daily lives increasingly use more than one language to communicate; relying on several languages has almost become the norm in the modern world (Muller, 2014; Pavlova & Gerasimov, 2017). More often than not the subject of language study is English, since the choice of a foreign language is primarily influenced by socio-economic factors that play a dominant role throughout human lives. Knowledge of English, it is widely believed, is useful in life, and mastery of the language will result in increased socio-economic mobility (Myers- Scotton, 2002). To define the concept of “interference,” let us first of all turn to the definition given in the Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary: “Interference (from Latin "inter"- among themselves, mutually and "ferio"- I touch, I hit). This definition directly relates to the observed phenomena of interactions of language systems under the conditions of bilingualism. Interference can emerge either in contact with other languages or in the individual development of a non-native language; it is expressed in the deviation from the norm and the system of the second language under the influence of the native one … “(Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary, 2017: 658). The linguistic literature (Weinreich and Martinet, 1997; Cenozet al., 2001) identify the following different types of interferences:

1. 1. 1. Phonetic;

   2. Semantic;

   3. Lexical;

   4. Grammatical;

   5. Orthographic;

   6. Stylistic;

   7. Linguistic and culture oriented;

   8. Socio-cultural (Weinreich and Martinet, 1979).

In the framework of this scientific work we will focus only on morphological interference.

The present work is devoted to the question of comparing the morphological features of the parts of speech in the English, Tuvan and Russian languages as well as diagnosing the morphological difficulties of mastering the grammatical side of English speech under the conditions of Tuvan-Russian bilingualism. The problem of finding ways to solve morphological difficulties in the study of the (second) foreign language remains one of the leading problems in the methodology of teaching foreign languages. At the same time, researchers repeatedly have established the dependence of the learning of a foreign language on the degree of kinship between a native language (L1) and a foreign language (L2). If the languages L1 and L2 are closely related languages, then the percentage of mistakes made by students is minimal with the acquisition of a closely related language; in this case a question of positive linguistic interference (Shatz, 2017; Kail et al., 2010). However, these interferences can play a role not only in closely related languages, but for more distantly related languages as well. There are languages that are not related to the category of the so called closely related languages, but in which there are similar categories (for example, the availability of the article in German and French). When comparing languages that are not related and do not have similar categories, the question of negative interference inevitably arises (Toth, 2007). The presence of large morphological differences in the English and Russian languages, and even more so between the English and Tuvan languages, shows a rather negative interference of the native language for these language learners. The following are examples of the negative interference caused by the native (Tuvan) language while learning English: the categories of number (plural noun), the article (complete absence of the article in the Tuvan language), case (no cases in English), a mismatch structure of the language, etc.

2. METODOLOGY

This research was carried using a method of analyzing theoretical research on the methodology of teaching foreign languages in order to study the phenomenon of interference in the process of teaching a foreign language (Gasanova, 2012).While writing this research work, a comparative analysis of the morphological systems of the English, Tuvan and Russian languages was also used to overcome interlingual interference, allowing researchers to identify similarities and differences in the morphological systems of the compared languages (Shatz, 2017). Observational methods (observation and generalization) included: observation of the practice of teaching English; generalization of the best practices of teachers and researchers own experiences teaching English, as well as conversations with teachers of foreign languages.

3. RESULTS

Comparative analysis of morphological systems of English, Tuvan and Russian revealed the following features:

3.1. Noun

The category of number in the languages being compared is represented by two numbers - the singular and the plural. In all the comparable languages the plural is formed by suffixes.

Difficulties for Tuvan students arise with the use of the suffix -e (s) in the plural form, which is caused by the negative influence of the native language in which the cardinal numeral is followed by the noun in the singular.

The next category - the article category (the articles: “a, an, the” in English are the constant companions of nouns) can cause considerable difficulties for Tuvan students, as in the Russian and Tuvan languages, the article is missing. However, it should be noted that in the Tuvan language, uncertainty / certainty is expressed morphologically, i.e. by adding various affixes, for example:

The absence of the article category in the intermediate language (Russian) does not contribute to a better understanding of the nature of this linguistic phenomenon by Tuvan students. Modern methods of calculating mistakes in L2's written papers prove a significant increase in mistakes in cases where a linguistic phenomenon is absent in the comparable languages. For example, native speakers of the Japanese language, in which there is no indefinite article, or the Russian language, where there are no forms of a definite or indefinite article, admit the greatest number of mistakes, in contrast to the speakers of other languages where some or other forms of the article are present. A typical mistake is 'I bought a car'. At the same time the researchers also note that Japanese and Russians also make mistakes in the plural category, but the level of these mistakes is much lower than the level of mistakes in the use of articles - 'I bought two cars'. Thus, practitioners teaching Tuvan students learning English should pay more attention to ensuring students are understanding the nature of the article and mastering the practical skills of its usage. The category of case is one of the morphological signs of the noun. In English this category is represented by two cases - the general and the genitive (possessive), in comparison with the Russian language, in which there are 6 cases, and Tuvan, in which there are 7 cases: basic, genitive, dative, accusative, local, initial and directional. The first 4 cases coincide with their basic values, and the remaining cases are the following:

Local case (турарының) – answers the following questions – Where?башкыда, бажыңда, аргада (уучителя, дома, влесу);

1. - Initial case (үнериниң) – From where? From whom? ачамдан, садыгдан, суурдан (ототца, измагазина, издеревни);

   - Directional case (углаарының) – To whom? To where? Where? эжимче, эжикче, шииже (кдругу, к двери, наспектакль).

Significant difficulties can be connected with the use of the apostrophe that English nouns have, as in Tuvan there is no apostrophe. A typical example of a mistake a student might make would be: „My dad‟s boat is white‟. The meanings of cases in the English language (in comparison with Tuvan and Russian) are transmitted through prepositions, which are absent in the Tuvan language. Apparently, the appearance of a large number of cases in the Tuvan language is associated with this connection. The meaning of the prepositions of the English and Russian languages is in many cases, transmitted by affixes and postpositions.

In the list only 4 prepositions are given, from which linguistic training usually begins. But even these simple prepositions can cause difficulties for Tuvan students.

Firstly, the preposition at can be expressed in different cases by different grammatical means: at school –школада (case affix), at the window –соңгачанында (the functional word).

Secondly, the English preposition is the bearer of both semantics and grammar, for example, in the phrase on the table the preposition on can mean настол or настоле depending on the context, and in the Tuvan language, in the first case, it will correspond to the meaning столкырында and, in the second case, – столкырынче (столда).

Thirdly, there is the polysemy of the English prepositions themselves, whereas in the Tuvan language, one meaning is strictly fixed for each postposition, affix and the functional word.

Fourthly, there is the unusual placement of the preposition before the word in English and Russian, while in the native language the postposition, the official word, the case affix is always at the end of the managed word.

The above mentioned difficulties can cause interference and language errors that interfere with communication in English, such as:

1. • Omission of the preposition;

   • Substitution of one preposition for another one;

   • Positioning the preposition after the noun;

   • The assignment of a preposition not to the next, but to the previous noun (when translating).

As was said before, the concept of prepositions is alien to Tuvan students, but the fact that they are somewhat familiar to them from Russian, make it easier to understand English. Even a fluent command of Russian, and therefore an excellent ability to use prepositions in Russian, cannot facilitate the practical use of it in English because of the multivalued logic of English prepositions, and the discrepancy of the semantic spheres of English and Russian prepositions. Consequently, the mastery of a foreign language is achieved not by a strong ability to use Russian prepositions, but by the fact that students understand the role of prepositions in Russian and the skill of performing a grammatical operation of it before a noun, facilitating the conduct of a similar operation in English speech, by transferring the skill.

3.2. Numeral

Cardinal numerals in English and Russian require a plural noun after themselves. Cardinal numerals govern singular cases (the nominative case) in Tuvan. This ability of Tuvan language is the cause of the appearance of mistakes – the omission of the ending of nouns after the cardinal numerals. Tuvan students may also have difficulties in the use of cardinal numerals, in numerals from 11-19 because of the inconsistency of the formation of numerals. For example, eleven – in English, онбир – in Tuvan, одиннадцать – in Russian. Other cardinal and ordinal numerals in English do not represent special typological difficulties, so we will not consider them.

3.3. Pronouns

Particularly significant features are the differences between the personal 3rd person singular pronouns. In English and Russian 3rd person singular pronouns differ in the genus he (он) – denotation of the male person, she (она) – of the female person, it (он, она, оно) – of the objects and phenomena, while in Tuvan one pronoun – ол is used with any person, subject or phenomenon, regardless of whether it refers to the category of inanimate objects or animate beings, regardless of their gender distribution. Thus, one 3rd person singular pronoun in Tuvan language can correspond to three different pronouns in English and Russian, which can present significant difficulties for Tuvan students.

3.4. Verbs

Students have significant difficulties in learning the tense- aspect forms of English verb based on their knowledge of Russian. They understand how they are formed, and the rules of use, but do not feel these tense-aspect forms. This is due to the fact that there is no such detail of the tense meaning of the verb in Russian, which we observe in English (Dorzhu, 2015). The difficulty of learning English verbS is that the first-, second- and third-person singular verbs in the Present Tense have their own special endings in Russian. In Tuvan the verb conjugation differs from Russian, and also from English grammar. Therefore, the presence of endings -s, - es in third-person singular verb (Present Simple), -ed (Past Simple) for regular verbs, -ing for the Present Participle formation can be cause of mistakes. A special difficulty can be represented by the change the vowel or the whole word when irregular verbs are conjugated – this phenomenon absolutely alien for Tuvan grammar, where, as it is known, the root never changes and the whole system of conjugation is formed by "gluing" affixes. Only a special system of exercises can overcome difficulties, and develop skills for recognizing English irregular verbs in speech and eliminate typical mistakes like read-readed, speak-speaked. Category of tense. As it is known, there are 4 tense-aspect forms of the Present (Present Indefinite, Present Progressive, Present Perfect, Present Perfect Progressive), 4 tense-aspect forms of the Past (Past Indefinite, Past Progressive, Past Perfect, Past Perfect Progressive) and 4 tense-aspect forms of the Future Tense in English. There are also some forms of three tenses, of which the imperfective aspect verbs have all three tense forms, and the perfective aspect verbs have only the Past and the Future tense forms in modern Russian. The verb in Tuvan language has a complex system of tenses:

Past Tense Forms

1. - The Past Categorical Tense, for example, номчудум (I have read);

   - The Past Indefinite Tense with the ending -кан, for example, номчаанмен (I read);

   - The Past Proving Tense with the ending -п-тыр, for example, номчуп-тур (it turns out, he has read);

   - The Past Rhetorical Tense with the ending -чык, for example, номчужукменчоп (in fact, I read);

   - The Past-Present Tense with the ending -пышаан, for example, номчувушаанмен (I have been reading).

Present Tense Forms

1. - The Present Concrete Tense, for example, номчуптурмен (I am reading (now);

   - The Present Zaglaznoye (Sight unseen / Behind someone‟s back) Tense, for example, алгыра-дыр (Someone has cried).

Future Tense Forms

1. - The Future-Present Tense, for example, номчуурмен (I shall read);

   - The Future Expected Tense, for example, төнгелек (not yet over, but that's over).

Due to the limited scope of our research, we will briefly analyze only those English verb tenses that can cause difficulties for Tuvan students at the elementary stage of learning the language. The Present Indefinite has only one ending -e (s) in the third-person singular form. The negative form is formed analytically – using of the auxiliary verb do / does and the negative particle not. The interrogative form is formed analytically – by permutation of the auxiliary and semantic verbs and changing the intonational contour: Does he read? In Russian, Present Indefinite corresponds to the present time, which expresses the present timeless and present concrete action. Each person form has its particular ending. The negative form is also formed analytically by using the negative particle not in front of the verb. The interrogative form, unlike the English one, is formed only by changing the intonational contour. In Tuvan language, English Present Simple in its meaning corresponds to the Present Tense, when it conjugates, each person form has its ending, for example:

A negative form is formed by adding affixes (for example, - вейн, -бейн, etc.) to the basics: өөренмейнтурармен, өөренмейнтурарсен, etc. The interrogative form is formed by adding the interrogative particle бе.A negative form is formed by adding affixes (for example, вейн, бейн, мейн, etc.) to the basics: өөренмейнтурармен, өөренмейнтурарсен. The interrogative form is formed by adding the interrogative particle бе.On the basis of a brief analysis of Present Indefinite Tense and its correspondences in the Russian and Tuvan languages, the following conclusions can be drawn:

1. 1. 1. There is the Present Indefinite Tense in the compared languages.

   2. Conjugation of verbs in the Present Indefinite Tense can cause the greatest difficulties for Tuvan students.

   3. Difficulties can be associated with the using of the place of the negative particle not in the negative form and using the auxiliary verb do / does in the interrogative form.

Present Continuous Tense in English is formed analytically by the auxiliary verb to be and Participle 1. In Russian, this Tense is formed synthetically. In the Tuvan language, Present Concrete Tense corresponds to the Present Continuous Tense in English, which indicates that the action (state) occurs at the moment of speech.

The difficulties for Tuvan students can be connected with the formation of the given Tense, the place of the auxiliary verb to be, and the formation of the negative and interrogative forms. The Past Indefinite Tense in English is formed synthetically; the regular and irregular verbs are different. The question and negative forms of the Past Indefinite Tense are formed with the help of the auxiliary verb did and the infinitive of the main verb. In the Tuvan and Russian languages, the Past Tense corresponds to the Past Indefinite Tense, which also forms synthetically. A significant difficulty can cause division of verbs in English into regular and irregular versions, which is absent in the Russian and Tuvan languages. Difficulties for Tuvan students will also be represented by negative and interrogative forms of verbs that are connected with the use of the auxiliary verb did and the negative particle not, as well as with the structure of the sentence, due to its discrepancy in the Russian and Tuvan languages. Future Simple in English is formed analytically with the help of the auxiliary verb shall/will. In Russian and Tuvan languages, this time corresponds to the future of time, the meaning of the Future tenses basically coincides. The main difficulty for students will be associated with the use of auxiliary verbs shall

/will. Thus, our comparative analysis of the morphological features of English, Tuvan and Russian languages allows us to create a typology of morphological difficulties for Tuvan students in learning the grammatical aspect of English speech.

4. DISCUSSION

In this article we examined the degree of interfering factors influence in the study of English by Tuvan speakers and the auxiliary role of Russian as an intermediary language. Recently, more and more attention has been paid to the question of studying as much of the vocabulary as possible in the production of written and spoken speech by students learning a foreign language (English). In particular, the text material can cover more than a hundred thousand textual examples that were compiled by tens of thousands of different nationalities of people studying English. Databases like the Education-First Cambridge Open Language Database (EFCAMDAT) are being created, they contain more than half a million text examples, and special statistical methods are being applied to analyze the texts (Shatz, 2017). According to scientists, this approach can give a more complete picture and help to find the right ways to solve methodological problems when mastering foreign languages. At the same time, many teachers recognize that the existing and emerging theories and scientific paradigms of research on this issue have become so diverse and so complex that it is increasingly difficult to gather all the data together and synthesize the available materials. As it is correctly noted, the task of contrast analysis of two languages is the parallel description of the language A (L1 or a native language) and the language B (L2 or a foreign language), finding their similarities and differences, and the most important thing is the ability to predict those possible problems that the speaker of language A will face in the study of language B, and vice versa (Stanley, 2002).

The peculiarity of the linguistic situation in the Republic of Tuva is the presence of multilingualism: children of indigenous nationality, in addition to native Tuvan, master Russian; to them a foreign language. For children from regions bordering with Mongolia, the native languages are Mongolian and Tuvan, respectively, and undertaking the study of a foreign language in school for them would already have the status of L4. And if we take into account that in the modern world where population mobility is increasing, the study of more than two foreign languages is not now an exceptional fact (Cenoz et al., 2001), it can be said that students in Tuva in modern conditions should have the competence of a multilingual person. The steady growth of urbanization and globalization of the world community contributes to the emergence of an increasing number of people with knowledge of several languages. Indeed, one can give an example of the Galician language in Spain: it was found that in 2008, according to the Galician Statistical Institution, 73.52% of Galicians are over 65 and 56.3% of Galicians aged between 50 and 64 years own only their own language. People aged younger than 50 years old, this figure is reduced by 50%. The younger generation of Galicians is equally fluent in both Galician and Spanish. A characteristic feature of the status of the Galician language is that L1 is not the dominant language in the society where they live (Gupton, 2014). In this case, you can trace the same analogy in the relationship between the Tuvan and Russian languages as L1 and L2.Teachers can use not only their own experience or their colleagues‟ experience (Gasanova, 2012) Kellerman, but also scientific works on the subject, to improve the technology of teaching English as a foreign language to Tuvan students, and it will undoubtedly lead to better results.

5. CONCLUSION

As a result of the comparative analysis of the three languages, morphological difficulties have been identified which lead to interlingual interference. With the help of the comparative analysis, the difficulties were identified as: using the ending -e (s) in the plural; indefinite and definite articles; apostrophe, and also with the use of prepositions: blanking of the preposition; substitution of one preposition with another; position of the preposition after the noun; nouns in plural after cardinal numbers; personal and possessive 3rd person singular pronouns. Morphological difficulties in the use of the tense-aspect forms of the verb are also defined. In Present Indefinite - the difficulties connected with the conjugation of the English verb, with the formation of interrogative and negative forms; the difficulties relate to the position of the auxiliary verb to be in Present Progressive, the formation of interrogative and negative forms. In Past Simple, a significant difficulty is represented by the division into regular and irregular verbs, as well as the use of the auxiliary verb did and the negative particle not. In Future Simple, the main difficulty is connected with the use of auxiliary verb shall /will. Theoretical consideration and further study of the technique of overcoming interference in the process of mastering English speech in conditions of multilingualism (Tuva, Russian and English) will allow us to determine the sequence of formation and development of grammatical aspects of oral English speech, to develop a set of exercises to overcome this kind of interference. The set of exercises can be used to create new English textbooks intended for Tuvan students. The results of this study can be directly applied in the practice of teaching English.

REFERENCES

CENOZ, J., HUFEISEN, B., JESSNER, U. 2001. Cross-linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition: Psycholinguistic Perspectives. Multilingual Matters. Vol. 208. Spain.

ССТDictionary of sociolinguistic terms.[Online]Available:http://sociolinguistics.academic.ru/ 232. Data consultation: 12/03/2017

DORZHU, N. 2015. Teaching tense-aspect forms of the present tense of the English verb to students in the direction of preparation "Pedagogical Education" profile "Technical work".Mir nauki, kul'tury, obrazovaniya. Gorno-Altajsk.Vol. 2 No51: 58-61. Russia.

GASANOVA, R. 2012. Technique of overcoming interference in conditions of multilingualism. (on the example of the Avar, Russian and English languages: for the degree of Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences: specialty 13.00.02 Theory and methods of education and teaching)GasanovaRaisatGasanovna; [Mosk. gos. gumanitar. un-t im. M. A. SHolohova], 23. Moskva.Russia.

GUPTON, T. 2014. The Syntax-Information Structure Interface: Clausal Word Order and the Left Periphery in Galician. Walter De Gruyter GmbH.Vol. 29. Berlin (Germany).

HORNBERGER, N.H. 2011. Bilingual Education and Language Maintenance: A Southern Peruvian Quechua Case. Topics. Walter de Gruyter GmbH.Vol. 11. Berlin (Germany).

KAIL, M., COSTA, A., HUB, F. I. 2010. Language Acquisition across Linguistic and Cognitive (Systems Language acquisition & language disorders).On-line grammaticality judgments. A comparative study of French and Portuguese. John Benjaminspublishing.pp.179–204. Netherlands.

KING, R. 2000. The Lexical Basis of Grammatical Borrowing: A Prince Edward Island French case study. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory. John Benjamins Publishing.Netherlands. Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary.2017. [Online] Available: http://slovar.cc/rus/ ingvist/1465836.html. Russia.

Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary.2017. [Online] Available: http://slovar.cc/rus/ ingvist/1465836.html. Russia.

MYERS-SCOTTON, C. 2002. Contact Linguistics: Bilingual Encounters and Grammatical OutcomesOxford linguistics. Oxford University Press. UK.

MULLER, F. 2014. Linguistic interference between L1 dialects and L2: An investigation with 14-15 year old teenagers. GRIN Verlag. Germany.

PAVLOVA, G., &GERASIMOV, A. 2017.Comparative analysis of the content of metals and ecotoxicants in the hair of 7year-old girls, living in different environmental conditions.Astra Salvensis - review of history and culture, No 10: 117-122.

SHATZ, I. 2017. Native Language Influence during Second Language Acquisition: A Large-Scale Learner Corpus Analysis. Proceedings of the Pacific Second Language Research Forum.Japan Second Language Association. 175– 180. Hiroshima, Japan.

SONG, S. 2012. Politeness and Culture in Second Language Acquisition. Springer. Vol. 164 No 1. Germany.

STANLEY, W. 2002. Spanish/English Contrasts: A Course in Spanish Linguistics G - Reference, Information and Interdisciplinary Subjects SeriesSpanish/English Contrasts. Georgetown University Press. United States.

TOTH, G. 2007. Linguistic Interference and First-language Attrition: German and Hungarian in the San Francisco Bay Area.Berkeley insights in linguistics and semiotics. Peter Lang publishing group.Vol. 364. Germany.

VAFINA, A., STRUKOVA, A., and SHTYGASHEVA, O. 2017.Artistic peculiarities of the translation of the novel the adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain into tatar language. Astra Salvensis - review of history and culture, No 10: 313-318. Romania.

WEINREICH, U., MARTINET, A. 1979. Languages in Contact: Findings and Problems Publications., Linguistic Circle of New York. Walter de Gruyter.Vol. 160. Berlin (Germany).