دانشگاه الزهرا

  اخبار و اعلانات

 آمار

تعداد نشریات25
تعداد شماره‌ها932
تعداد مقالات7,666
تعداد مشاهده مقاله12,512,660
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله8,895,444
Khezri, Fatemeh, Jabbari, Ali Akbar, Fazilatfar, Ali Mohammad, Jamshidi, Fatemeh. (1401). Persian and Arabic Language Students’ L3 Acquisition of English Plural Marking: Language of Instruction Matters for Cross-Linguistic Influence. جلوه هنر, 6(3), 65-85. doi: 10.22051/lghor.2021.35159.1448
Fatemeh Khezri; Ali Akbar Jabbari; Ali Mohammad Fazilatfar; Fatemeh Jamshidi. "Persian and Arabic Language Students’ L3 Acquisition of English Plural Marking: Language of Instruction Matters for Cross-Linguistic Influence". جلوه هنر, 6, 3, 1401, 65-85. doi: 10.22051/lghor.2021.35159.1448
Khezri, Fatemeh, Jabbari, Ali Akbar, Fazilatfar, Ali Mohammad, Jamshidi, Fatemeh. (1401). 'Persian and Arabic Language Students’ L3 Acquisition of English Plural Marking: Language of Instruction Matters for Cross-Linguistic Influence', جلوه هنر, 6(3), pp. 65-85. doi: 10.22051/lghor.2021.35159.1448
Khezri, Fatemeh, Jabbari, Ali Akbar, Fazilatfar, Ali Mohammad, Jamshidi, Fatemeh. Persian and Arabic Language Students’ L3 Acquisition of English Plural Marking: Language of Instruction Matters for Cross-Linguistic Influence. جلوه هنر, 1401; 6(3): 65-85. doi: 10.22051/lghor.2021.35159.1448

Persian and Arabic Language Students’ L3 Acquisition of English Plural Marking: Language of Instruction Matters for Cross-Linguistic Influence

Journal of Language Horizons
مقاله 4، دوره 6، شماره 3 - شماره پیاپی 13، اسفند 2022، صفحه 65-85    اصل مقاله (776.94 K)
نوع مقاله: Research article
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22051/lghor.2021.35159.1448
نویسندگان
Fatemeh Khezri1؛ Ali Akbar Jabbari* 2؛ Ali Mohammad Fazilatfar3؛ Fatemeh Jamshidi4
1Instructor, Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Language and Literature, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
2Associate Professor, Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Language and Literature, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
3Professor, Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Language and Literature, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
4Instructor, Department of Arabic Language and Literature, Faculty of Language and Literature, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
چکیده
This study aims at comparing the effects of order of acquisition (L1 vs. L2) and language of contact instruction on third language acquisition (L3), exploring whether the context of acquisition affects learners’ knowledge of the L3. To this end, four groups of L3 English learners were selected: The first and the second groups had Persian as their first language (L1) and Arabic as their second language (L2). The participants of the first group were students of Persian Language and Literature, while the participants of the second group were students of Arabic Language and Literature. The third and fourth groups had Arabic as their first language and Persian as their second language. The participants of the third group were students of Persian Language and Literature, while the participants of the fourth group were students of Arabic Language and Literature. The knowledge of English plural marking was elicited via a grammaticality judgment correction task and a picture description task, aimed at examining how these groups learn number agreement between the noun and its adjective modifier in English as their L3. Results revealed that Persian and Arabic A groups (those with Persian as their language of instruction) outperformed the other groups in both tasks, suggesting that they transferred plural marking facilitatively from Persian.
کلیدواژه‌ها
transfer؛ multilingualism؛ third language acquisition؛ language of contact instruction؛ cross-liguistic influence
عنوان مقاله [English]
فراگیری نشانه‌گذاری جمع انگلیسی در زبان سومِ دانشجویان زبان عربی و فارسی: زبان آموزش برای تأثیر بینازبانی اهمیت دارد
نویسندگان [English]
فاطمه خضری1؛ علی اکبر جباری2؛ علی محمد فضیلت فر3؛ فاطمه جمشیدی4
1مدرس، بخش زبان و ادبیات انگلیسی، دانشکده زبان و ادبیات، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران
2دانشیار، بخش زبان و ادبیات انگلیسی، دانشکده زبان و ادبیات، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران
3استاد، بخش زبان و ادبیات انگلیسی، دانشکده زبان و ادبیات، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران
4مدرس ، بخش زبان و ادبیات عرب ، دانشکده زبان و ادبیات، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران
چکیده [English]
این مطالعه بر آن است تا به مقایسه اثرات ترتیب فراگیری (زبان اول در مقایسه با زبان دوم) و زبانِ رشتة تحصیلی بر فراگیری زبان سوم بپردازد، برای کشف اینکه آیا بافت فراگیری بر دانش زبان‌آموزان از زبان سوم تأثیر می‌گذارد. به این منظور، چهار گروه از فراگیران زبان انگلیسی به عنوان زبان سوم انتخاب شدند. گروه‌(های) اول و دوم زبان اولشان فارسی و زبان دومشان عربی بود. شرکت‌کنندگان گروه نخست دانشجویان زبان و ادبیات فارسی بودند، در حالی‌که شرکت‌کنندگان گروه دوم دانشجویان زبان و ادبیات عرب بودند. گروه‌های سوم و چهارم، زبان اولشان عربی و زبان دومشان فارسی بود. شرکت‌کنندگان گروه سوم، دانشجویان زبان و ادبیات فارسی بودند، در حالی‌که شرکت‌کنندگان گروه چهارم دانشجویان زبان و ادبیات عرب بودند. دانش نشانه‌گذاری جمع انگلیسی از طریق تکلیف تصحیح قضاوت گرامری و تکلیف توصیف تصویر بررسی شد، با هدف بررسی اینکه چگونه این گروه‌ها مطابقت شمار بین اسم و توصیفگرهایش را در انگلیسی به عنوان زبان سومشان فرا می‌گیرند. نتایج نشان داد که گروه‌های فارسی و عربی الف (افرادی با فارسی به عنوان زبان آموزشی‌شان) نسبت به گروه‌های دیگر در هر دو تکلیف بهتر عمل کردند، این امر حاکی از آن است که آن‌ها نشانة جمع را به سهولت از فارسی منتقل کرده‌اند.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
انتقال, چندزبانگی, فراگیری زبان سوم, آموزش تماس زبانی, تأثیر بینازبانی
مراجع
  1. Anderson, J. A. E., Mak, L., Keyvani Chahi, A., & Bialystok, E. (2017). The language and social background questionnaire: Assessing degree of bilingualism in a diverse population. Behavior Research Methods, 50(1), 250-263. https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13428-017-0867-9
  2. Bardel, C., & Falk, Y. (2007).  The role of the second language in third language acquisition: The case of Germanic syntax. Second Language Research, 23(4), 459-84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658307080557
  3. Berkes, E., & Flynn, S. (2011). Enhanced L3…Ln Acquisition and its implications for languageteaching. In M. Kersic & T. Gulan (Eds.), Cross-linguistic influences in multilingual language acquisition (pp.1-22). Springer.
  4. Cabrelli Amaro, J., Amaro, J. F., & Rothman, J. (2015). The relationship between L3 transfer and structural similarity across development: Raising across an experiencer in Brazilian Portuguese. In Peukert, H., (Ed.), Transfer effects in multilingual language development (pp. 21-52). Benjamins.
  5. De Angelis, G. (2007). Third or additional language acquisition. Multilingual Matters.
  6. Falk ,Y., & Bardel, C. (2011). Object pronouns in German L3 syntax: Evidence for the L2 status factor. Second Language Research, 27, 59-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658310386647
  7. Fallah, N., & Jabbari, A. A. (2016). L3 acquisition of English attributive adjectives. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 8(2), 193-216. https://benjamins.com/catalog/lab.16003.fal
  8. Fallah, N., Jabbari, A. A., & Fazilatfar, A. M. (2016). Source(s) of syntactic CLI: The case of L3 acquisition of English possessives by Mazanderani-Persian bilinguals. Second LanguageResearch, 32(2), 225-245. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658315618009
  9. Flynn, S., Foley, C., & Vinnitskaya, I. (2004). The cumulative-enhancement model for language acquisition: Comparing adults’ and children’s patterns of development in first, second and third language acquisition of relative clauses. The International Journal of Multilingualism, 1(1), 3-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790710408668175
  10. Garcia-Mayo, M. P. (2012).Cognitive approaches to L3 acquisition. International Journal of English Language Studies, 12(1), 129-146. https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes.12.1.140421
  11. Geranpayeh, A. (2003).A quick review of the English oxford placement test. Research Notes, 12(3), 8-10. 
  12. Giancaspro, D., Halloran, B., & Iverson, M. (2015). Examining L3 transfer: The acquisition of differential object marking in L3 Brazilian Portuguese. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(2),191-207.
  13. Håkansson, G., Pienemann, M., & Sayheli S. (2002). Transfer and typological proximity in the context of second language processing. Second Language Research, 18(3), 250-273. https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658302sr206oa
  14. Hammarberg, B. (2001). Roles of L1 and L2 in L3 production and acquisition. In J. Cenoz, B. Hufeisen, & B. Jessner (Eds.), Cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition: Psycholinguistic perspectives (pp. 21-44). Multilingual Matters.
  15. Hermas, A. (2010). Language acquisition as computational resetting: Verb movement in L3  initial state. International Journal of Multilingualism, 7(4) 343-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2010.487941
  16. Hermas, A. (2014a). Multilingual transfer: L1 morphosyntax in L3 English. International Journal of Language Studies, 8(2), 1-24. http://www.ijls.net/pages/volume/vol8no2.html
  17. Hermas, A. (2014b). Restrictive relatives in L3 English: L1 transfer and ultimate attainment convergence. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 34(3),361-87. https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2014.898227
  18. Husseinali, Gh. (2016). Arabic L2 Interlanguage: Syntactic sequence, agreement, and variation. Routledge.
  19. Lloyd-Smith, A., Gyllstad, H., & Kupisch, T. (2016). Transfer into L3 English. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 7(2), 131-162. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.15013.llo
  20. Na Ranong, S., & Leung, Y-KI. (2009). Null-objects in L1 Thai-L2 English-L3 Chinese: An empiricist take on a theoretical problem. In Y-KI. Leung (Ed.), Third language acquisition and Universal Grammar (pp. 162-191). Multilingual Matters.
  21. Paradis, M. (2004). A neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism. John Benjamins.
  22. Paradis, M. (2007). L1 attrition features predicted by a neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism. In B. Kopke, M. S. Schmid, M. Keijzer, & S. Dostert (Eds.), Language attrition: Theoreticalperspectives (pp. 121-134). John Benjamins.
  23. Puig-Mayenco, E., Gonalez Alonso, J., & Rothman, J. (2020). A systematic review of transfer studies in third language acquisition. Second Language Research, 36(1), 31-64. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658318809147
  24. Rothman, J. (2010). On the typological economy of syntactic transfer: Word order and relative clause high/low attachment preference in L3 Brazilian Portuguese. International Review of  Applied Linguistics in Teaching (IRAL), 48(2-3), 245-73.
  25. Rothman, J. (2011). L3 syntactic transfer selectivity and typological determinacy: The Typological Primacy Model. Second Language Research, 27(1), 107-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658310386439
  26. Rothman, J. (2013). Cognitive economy, non-redundancy and typological primacy in L3 acquisition: Evidence from initial stages of L3 Romance. In S. Baauw, F. Dirjkoningen, & M. Pinto (Eds.), Romance languages and linguistic theory (pp. 217-247). Benjamins.
  27. Rothman, J. (2015). Linguistic and cognitive motivations for the Typological Primacy Model (TPM) of third language (L3) transfer: Timing of acquisition and proficiency considered. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(02), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1017/S136672891300059X
  28. Rothman, J., & Cabrelli Amaro, J. (2010). What variables condition syntactic transfer: A look at the L3 initial state. Second Language Research, 26(02), 189-218. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658309349410
  29. Sterling, R. (1904). A grammar of Arabic language. Taylor & Francis.
  30. Williams, S., & Hammarberg, B. (1998). Language switches in L3 production: Implications for a polyglot speaking model. Applied Linguistics, 19(3), 295-333. https://doi.org/10.1093/APPLIN%2F19.3.295
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 422
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 259


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب