Stage-Like Development of Morpho-Syntactic Structure of Do-S-V (O) in Iranian EFL Learners’ Writing and Speaking: A Mixed-Methods Analysis
محورهای موضوعی : آموزش زبان انگلیسی
1 - Department of English, Malayer Branch, Islamic Azad University, Malayer, Iran
کلید واژه: do-s-v(o), foreign language learning, morpho-syntactic structures, processability theory, stage-like development ,
چکیده مقاله :
Processability Theory (PT) is a theory of second language acquisition (SLA) developed to explain developmental sequences in SLA as well as some other phenomena. Within the framework of Processability Theory (PT) and through analyzing the written performance of Iranian EFL learners, the present research focused on the acquisition of the morpho-syntactic structures of “do- s- v (o)” across five proficiency levels, from elementary to advance and compared it with the stage-like development model of morpho-syntactic structures proposed by Pienemann (2005a). The study followed a mixed method design and the data were collected from 350 participants in five different proficiency levels from elementary, pre-intermediate, intermediate, upper-intermediate and advanced; furthermore, 45 pre-intermediate to advanced students were interviewed. The participants were asked to provide samples of their written performance on different tasks such as introduction task, habitual action task, and story retelling task, picture description task, composition, and communication task; furthermore, they were interviewed on the same topics. The data in this research were analyzed both qualitatively to identify and classify the type and order of the morpho-syntactic structures in the written and oral data, and quantitatively through inferential statistics. The results of Kruskal-Wallis test revealed that “do-subject- verb was concordant with Pienemann’s (2005a) model. This finding implies that PT is valid for Iranian EFL learners, considerably. The findings of this research can be of benefit for language teachers, learners, and syllabus designers.
Processability Theory (PT) is a theory of second language acquisition (SLA) developed to explain developmental sequences in SLA as well as some other phenomena. Within the framework of Processability Theory (PT) and through analyzing the written performance of Iranian EFL learners, the present research focused on the acquisition of the morpho-syntactic structures of “do- s- v (o)” across five proficiency levels, from elementary to advance and compared it with the stage-like development model of morpho-syntactic structures proposed by Pienemann (2005a). The study followed a mixed method design and the data were collected from 350 participants in five different proficiency levels from elementary, pre-intermediate, intermediate, upper-intermediate and advanced; furthermore, 45 pre-intermediate to advanced students were interviewed. The participants were asked to provide samples of their written performance on different tasks such as introduction task, habitual action task, and story retelling task, picture description task, composition, and communication task; furthermore, they were interviewed on the same topics. The data in this research were analyzed both qualitatively to identify and classify the type and order of the morpho-syntactic structures in the written and oral data, and quantitatively through inferential statistics. The results of Kruskal-Wallis test revealed that “do-subject- verb was concordant with Pienemann’s (2005a) model. This finding implies that PT is valid for Iranian EFL learners, considerably. The findings of this research can be of benefit for language teachers, learners, and syllabus designers.
Bailey, N., Madden, C., & Krashen, S. (1974). Is there a “natural sequence” in adult second language learning? Language Learning, 21(2), 235-243.
Baten, K. (2011). Processability theory and German case acquisition. Language Learning, 61(2), 455-505.
Bettoni, C., Di Biase, B., & Nuzzo, E. (2009). Postverbal subject in Italian L2 – a Processability Theory approach. In: D. Keatinge & J.U. Keßler (Eds.), Research in second language acquisition: Empirical evidence across languages (pp. 153-173). Newcastle upon Tyne.
Bonilla, C.L. (2014). From number agreement to the subjunctive: Evidence for processability theory in L2 Spanish. Second Language Research, 31(1), 1-22. doi: 10.1177/0267658314537291
Bresnan, J. (2001). Lexical-functional syntax. Blackwell.
Brown, R. (1973). A first language: The first stages. George Allen & Unwin Ltd.
Buyl, A., & Housen, A. (2015). Developmental stages in receptive grammar acquisition: A processability theory account. Second language Research, 31(4), 523-550. doi:10.1177/026765831558590
Charters, H., Dao, L., & Jansen, L. (2011). Reassessing the applicability of processing theory: The case of nominal plural. Second Language Research, 27(4), 509-533. doi: 10.117710267658311405923
Clahsen, H., Meisel, J., & Pienemann, M. (1981). On determining developmental stages in natural second language acquisition. Studies in second language acquisition, 3(2), 109-135. doi:10.1017/S0272263100004137
Di Biase, B., Hardini, I., Kawaguchi, S., & Reid, C. (2019). Phrasal before lexical? Plural marking in EFL learners in Indonesia [Conference presentation]. The 2019 Processability Approaches to Language Acquisition, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland.
Doman, E. (2012). Further evidence for the developmental stages of language learning and processability. US-China Education Review, 2(9), 813-825.
Doughty, C. (2003). Instructed SLA: Constraints, compensation, and enhancement. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition: Blackwell handbooks in linguistics (pp. 256-310). Blackwell.
Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1973). Should we teach children syntax? Language Learning, 23(2), 245-58. doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1973.tb00659.x
Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1974). Natural sequence in child language acquisition. TESOL quarterly, 8(2), 129-36. doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1974.tb00234.x
Dyson, B. (2009). Processability theory and the role of morphology in English as a second language development: A longitudinal study. Second Language Research, 25(3), 355-376. doi:10.1177/0267658309104578
Eguchi, A., & Sugiura, M. (2015). Applicability of processability theory to Japanese adolescent EFL learners: A case study of early L2 syntactic and morphological development. System, 52, 115–126. doi:10.1016/j.system.2015.05.005a
Ellis, R. (2008). Investigating grammatical difficulty in second language learning: Implications for second language acquisition research and language testing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18(1), 4-22. doi:10.1111/j.1473-4192.2008.00184.x
Fabri, R. (2008). Lexical functional grammar. In J.U. Keßler (Ed.), Processability approaches to second language development and second language learning (pp. 31-66). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Glahn, E., & Håkansson, G., Hammarberg, B., Holmen, A., Hvenekilde, A., & Lund, K. (2001). Processability in Scandinavian second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23(3), 389-416.
Håkansson, G. (2001). Tense morphology and verb-second in Swedish L1 children, L2 children, and children with SLI. bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4(1), 85-99.
Håkansson, G. (2013). Processability theory. Explaining developmental sequences. In M. Garcia Mayo, M. Junkal Gutierrez Mangado & M. Martinez Adrian (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 111-129). John Benjamins.
Håkansson, G., & Norby, C. (2007). Processability theory applied to written and oral Swedish. In F. Mansouri (Ed.), second language acquisition research theory-construction and testing (pp. 81-94). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Hawkins, R. (2001). Second language syntax: A generative introduction. Blackwell.
Husseinali, G. T.A. (2006). Processability and development of syntax and agreement in the interlanguage of learners of Arabic as a foreign language [Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas]. https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/items/c250f466-0a6c-4594-bd49-131821591576
Jansen, L. (2008), Acquisition of German word order in tutored learners: A cross-sectional study in a wider theoretical context. Language Learning, 58(1), 185-231. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00438.x
Kaplan, R.M., & Bresnan, J. (1982). Lexical-Functional grammar: a formal system for grammatical representation. In J. Bresnan (Ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations (pp. 173-281). MIT Press.
Kawaguchi, S. (2005). Argument structure and syntactic development in Japanese as a second language. In M. Pienemann (Eds.), Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory (pp. 253-299). John Benjamins.
Kawaguchi, S. (2009). Acquiring causative constructions in Japanese as a second language. Japanese Studies, 29(2), 273-291.
Kessler, J. (Ed.) (2008). Processability approaches to second language development and second language learning. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Mansouri, F. (2005). Agreement morphology in Arabic as a second language. In M. Pienemann (Eds.), Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory (pp. 117-155). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Michimoto, Y, (2015a). Morphology and syntax acquisition by Japanese EFL writers: A study of their developmental course based on Processability Theory. Nidaba, Linguistic Society of West Japan, 43, 70-78.
Michimoto, Y, (2015b). Research into syntactic development: A study using implicational scaling. Research Reports of Ube National College of Technology, 60, 33-40.
Mohammadkhani, A., Eslamdoost, S., & Gholamreza’i, S. (2011). An investigation of the role of instruction in second language production: A case of third person singular –s. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 910 – 916.
Philipsson, A. (2007). Interrogative Clauses and Verb Morphology in L2 Swedish: Theoretical Interpretations of Grammatical Development and Effects of Different Elicitation Techniques [Doctoral dissertation, Stockholm University]. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:197193/FULLTEXT01.pdf
Pienemann, M. (1984). Psychological constraints on the teachability of languages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 6(2), 186-214.
Pienemann, M. (1988). Determining the influence of instruction on L2 speech processing. In G., Kasper (ed.), AILA review 5: Classroom research (pp. 40-72). Association internationale de linguistique appliquee.
Pienemann, M. (1998a). Language processing and second language development Processability theory. Studies in Bilingualism, 15(1), xviii, 366. John Benjamins.
Pienemann, M. (1998b). Developmental dynamics in L1 and L2 acquisition: Processability theory and generative entrenchment. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition. 1(1), 1-20.
Pienemann, M. (1998c). Language processing and second language development: Processability theory. John Benjamins.
Pienemann, M. (2005a). Discussing PT. In M. Pienemann (Ed.), Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory (pp. 61-83). John Benjamins.
Pienemann, M. (2005b). An introduction to processability theory. In M. Pienemann (Ed.), Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory (pp.61-85). John Benjamins.
Pienemann, M. (2011). Explaining developmental schedules. In M. Pienemann & J.-U. Keßler (Eds.), Studying processability theory (pp. 50-63). John Benjamins.
Pienemann, M., & Johnston, M. (1985). Towards an explanatory model of language acquisition [Conference presentation]. The Second Language Research Forum, University of California, LA, United States.
Pienemann, M., & Johnston, M. (1987a). A predictive framework of SLA. [Unpublished manuscript].
Pienemann, M., & Johnston, M. (1987b). Factors influencing the development of language proficiency. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Applying second language acquisition research (pp. 45-141). National Curriculum Research Centre, Adult Migrant Education Program.
Pienemann, M., & Kessler, J. (2007). Measuring bilingualism. [Unpublished manuscript].
Plag, I. (2008). Creoles as interlanguage: Syntactic structures. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Language, 2, 1-26.
Rahkonen, M., & Håkansson, G. (2008). Production of written L2 Swedish – processability or input frequencies? In J-U. Kebler (ed.), Processability approaches to second language development and second language learning (pp.135-161). Cambridge Scholars.
Salleh, R.T.A.M. (2017). Bilingual first language acquisition in Malay and English: a morphological and suprasegmental study in the development of plural expressions in a bilingual child [Doctoral dissertation, Western Sydney University]. http://hdl.handle.net/1959.7/uws:46378
Spinner, P. (2013). Language production and reception: A processability theory study. Language Learning, 63(4), 704–39.
Tabatabaee, M.S., Mahmoodi, K., & Bayat, A. (2021). Processability theory: Stage-like development of ‘copula inversion’ and ‘negation’ in Iranian EFL learners’ writing performance. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 9(38), 27-38.
Taki, S., & hamzehian, M. (2016). Crosslinguistic validation of PT: the case of EFL Iranian students’ speaking skill. International journal of foreign language teaching and research, 4(15), 51-62.
Tang, H., & Zhang, Y. (2015). An Investigation of Chinese Students' Acquisition of Oral and Written English through the Measurement of Processability Theory. International Journal of Apllied Linguistics & English Literature, 4(2), 207-211.
Vahdat, S., Shooshtari, Z., & Bordbar, A. (2018). Syntactic development of right-brain and left-brain dominant Iranian EFL learners: Processability theory in perspective. Iranian Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(2), 45-61.
Yamaguchi, Y., & Kawaguchi, S. (2014). Acquisition of English morphology by a Japanese school-aged child: A longitudinal study. Asian EFL Journal, 16(1), 89-119.
Zhang, X., & Lantolf, J.P. (2015). Natural or artificial: Is the route of L2 development teachable? Language Learning, 65(1), 152-180. doi:10.1111/lang.12094
Zhang, Y.Y. (2005). Processing and formal instruction in the L2 acquisition of five Chinese grammatical morphemes. In M., Pienemann (Ed.), Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory (pp. 155-177). John Benjamins.
