رابطه بین تحمل ابهام و صحت دستوری گفتار کار-مدار زبان آموزان ایرانی
Subject Areas : آموزش زبان انگلیسیفرید خوش لحن حسینی 1 , زهره سیفوری 2
1 - Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran
2 - Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran
Keywords: صحت دستوری, تحمل ابهام, تفاوتهای فردی, گفتار کار-مدار,
Abstract :
اخیرا تفاوتهای فردی گوناگون از جمله تحمل ابهام به دلیل تاثیری که بر فرآیند و دستاوردهای آموزش و از آن طریق بر جنبه های متفاوت سیستم زبان میانه از جمله صحت دستوری آن دارند مورد توجه قرار گرفته اند. هدف تحقیق حاضر بررسی میزان رابطه معنادار بین تحمل ابهام زبان آموزان ایرانی و صحت دستوری گفتار کار-مدار آنان بوده است. برای دستیابی به این هدف، نمونه تصادفی شامل 60 زبان آموز ایران مشغول به تحصیل در آموزشگاه زبان انگلیسی پکاه از جامعه آماری 150 نفری انتخاب شد. میزان تحمل ابهام آزمودنی ها با استفاده از پرسشنامه تحمل ابهام در زبان دوم (الی، 1994) و صحت دستوری گفتار آنان با استفاده از یک کار توصیف تصویری مورد سنجش قرار گرفت. تحلیل همبستگی داده های تحقیق نشان داد که زبان آموزان گفتاری ناصحیح تولید نمودند که به میزان متوسط و معنادار با میزان تحمل ابهام آنان همبستگی داشت. نتایج ضرورت شناسایی تحمل ابهام زبان آموزان را مورد تاکید قرار می دهد و کاربردهای آموزشی این سنجش را به بحث می گذارد.
References
Ashouri, A. F., & Fotovatnia, Z. (2010). The effect of individual differences on learners’ translation belief in efl learning. English Language Teaching, 3(4), 228-236.
Ba, H. B. (2012). A study of the correlation between processing strategies and tolerance of ambiguity in listening comprehension of college English. Journal of Yangtze Normal University, 28(4), 104-109.
Budner, S. (1962). Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of Personality, 30, 29-50.
Bu, L. N. (2007). The influence of ambiguity tolerance on Chinese college students during their English learning. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Xi’an Electronics and Technology University, China.
Beebe, L. M. (1983). Risk-taking and the language learner. In H. W. Seliger, & M. H. Long (Eds.), Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition. (pp. 39-65). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Brunswick, F. (1948). Intolerance of ambiguity as an emotional and perceptual personality variable. Journal of Personality, 18, 108-123. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1949. tb01236.x
Chapelle, C. (1983). The relationship between ambiguity tolerance and success in acquiring English as a second language in adult learners. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois, United States of America.
Chen. W. C. (2004). A Study of the correlation between English majors’ scores of TEM4 and tolerance of ambiguity. CELEA Journal, 27(1), 3-6.
Deppa, S. (2012) Task-based oral communication teaching. English for Specific Purposes World, 35, 12, 1682-3257.
Dolati, I., & Mikaili, P. (2011). Opinion related to the main reasons on Iranian students’ difficulties in spoken English proficiency. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Science. 5(11), 218-224.Retrieved March 23, 2012, from http://www.ajbasweb.com.
Dornyei, Z. (2001). Questionnaires in second language research: construction, administration, and processing. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ely, C.M. (1995). Tolerance of ambiguity and the teaching of ESL. In Reid, J.M.(ed.). Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp. 85-95). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Ely, C. M. (1989). Tolerance of ambiguities and language learning strategies. Foreign Language Annals, 22(5), 437-445.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Erten, I. H., & Topkaya, E. Z. (2009). Understanding tolerance of ambiguity of EFL learners in reading classes at tertiary level. Novitas-Royal, 3(1), 29-44.
Ehrman, M. E. (1993). Ego boundaries revisited: Toward a model of personality and learning. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Strategic interaction and language acquisition: Theory, practice, and research (pp. 330-362). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Ehrman, M. (1999). Ego boundaries and tolerance of ambiguity in second language learning. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in language learning (pp. 68-86). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ehrman, M., & Oxford, R. (1990). Adult language learning styles and strategies in an intensive training setting. The Modern Language Journal, 74(3), 311-327.
El-Koumy, A. S. A. (2000). Differences in FL reading comprehension among high-, middle-, and low-ambiguity tolerance students. Paper presented at the National Symposium On English Language Teaching In Egypt, Ain Shams University, Egypt (ED 45534). Abstract retrieved from http://www.conference.org/abstracts_2000.htm.
Furnham, A., & Ribchester, T. (1995). Tolerance of ambiguity: A review of the concept, its measurement and applications. Current Psychology, 14, 179-199.
Ghoorchaei, B., & Kassaian, Z. (2009). The relationship between risk-taking, fluency, and accuracy in the English speech of Iranian EFL students. The Iranian EFL Journal, 3, 111-136.
Ghonsooly B., & Hoseinpour A. (2010). The effect of concept mapping on EFL speaking fluency. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 87-115.
Hakki, I. (2009). Understanding tolerance of ambiguity of EFL learners in reading classes at tertiary level. Novitas-ROYAL, 3(1), 29-44.
Jun-yong, L. (1998). Language learning strategies and tolerance of ambiguity of Korean midshipmen learning English as a foreign language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Ball State University, United States.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practices in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon
Kazamia, V. (1999). How tolerant are Greek EFL learners of foreign language ambiguities. Working Papers in Linguistics, 7, 69-78.
Karbalaei, S., & Maftoon, P. (2012). An analysis of the associations between ambiguity tolerance and efl reading strategy awareness. English Language Teaching Journal, 5(3), 188-196.
Kondo-Brown, K. (2006). Affective variables and Japanese L2 reading ability. Reading in a Foreign Language, 18(1), 55-71.
Khajeh, A. (2002). The relationship between tolerance of ambiguity, gender, level of proficiency and use of second language learning strategies. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Tarbiat Modarres University, Tehran, Iran.
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lai, P. (2009). The Necessity of studying learners’ tolerance of ambiguity in foreign language education. Forum on Chinese Culture, 7, 287-289.
MacIntyre, P. D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 545-562.
McLain, D. L. (1993). The MSTAT-I: A new measure of an individual’s tolerance for ambiguity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 183-18.
Mehnert, U. (1998). The effect of different length of time for planning on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 83-108.
Marzban. A. (2011). An investigation into ambiguity tolerance in Iranian senior EFL undergraduates. English Language Teaching Journal, 5, 76-85.
Nishimo, T. (2007). Beginning to read extensively: A case study with Mako and Fumi. Reading in a Foreign Language, 19(2), 76-105.
Naiman, N., Frohlich, M., Stern, H., & Todesco, A. (1978). The good language learner. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Oxford, R. (1999). Anxiety and the language learner: new insights. In Arnold, J. (Ed.) Affect in language learning (pp. 57-68). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ortega, L. (2015). Syntactic complexity in L2 writing: Progress and expansion. Journal of Second Language Writing, 29, 82-94.
Rouhi, A., & Saeed-Akhtar, A. (2008). Planning time: A mediating technique between fluency and accuracy in task-based teaching. The Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1, 103-133.
Rouhi, A., & Saeed-Akhtar, A. (2008). The effect of higher-order questions on the speaking ability of Iranian EFL learners through using concept mapping strategy: A gender study case. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods, 1(3), 2251-6204.
Rubin, J. (1975). What the ‘good language learner’ can teach us. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 41- 51.
Robinson, P. (1996). Learning simple and complex second language rules under implicit, incidental, rule-search, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 27-67.
Shao, L. (2005). Analysis on the correlation between tolerance of ambiguity and foreign language proficiency. Modern Primary and Secondary Education, 2, 47-48.
Shao, Q., & Yang, M. (2007). Ambiguity tolerance and its enlightenment to second language acquisition. Journal of Panzhihua University, 24(4), 76-79.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-252). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Skehan P., & Foster P. (1996). The influence of planning on performance in task-based learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(3) 299-324.
Seifoori, Z., & Birjandi, P. (2008). The impact of mixed planning on the accuracy of Iranian learners’ oral performance. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(3), 177-203.
Seifoori, Z., & Goudarzi, S. (2012). The effect of oral production on grammatical accuracy and task-based fluency in speech of Iranian EFL learners’. Quarterly Journal of Educational Sciences, 18, 54-66.
Seifoori, Z., & Vahidi, Z. (2012). The impact of fluency strategy training on Iranian EFL learners’ speech under online planning conditions. Language Awareness, 21(1-2), 101-112
Sa’dabadi, N. (2014). The relationship among level of ambiguity tolerance and cloze test performance of Iranian EFL learners across gender. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 6 (4), 337-347.
Sadeghi Beniss, A. R. , & Edalati Bazzaz,V. (2014). The impact of pushed output on accuracy and fluency of Iranian EFL learners’ speaking. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 2(2), 51-72.
Tang, W. S. (2009). The influence of ambiguity tolerance on graded teaching of college English visual-audio-oral class. Science and Technology Information, 19, 548-552.
Viswanathan, M. (1997) Individual differences in need for precision, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, (7), 717-735
Wang, D. Q. (2004). An analysis of tolerance of ambiguity in second language learning. Journal of Northeastern University (Social Science), 6(4), 303-305.
Wennerstrom, A. (2000). The role of intonation in second language fluency. In H. Riggenbach (Ed.). Perspectives on fluency (pp. 102-127). Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.
Yin, Y. (2005). The influence of tolerance of ambiguity on English learning and its enlightenment on English teaching. Foreign Language World, 2, 58-61.
Yuan, F., & Ellis, R. (2003). The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on complexity and accuracy in L2 monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 1-27.
White, C. (1999). Expectations and emergent beliefs of self-instructed language learners. System, 27, 443-457.
Yea-Fen, C. (1995). Language learning strategies used by beginning students of Chinese in a semi-immersion setting. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Indiana University, United States of America.
Yu, Y. (2007). The influence of tolerance of ambiguity on learning strategies of listening comprehension. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Jilin University, China.
