Exploring the Acquisition of English Modal Auxiliary Verbs by Persian EFL Learners Considering Full Transfer/Full Access Theory | ||
| پژوهشهای زبانشناختی در زبانهای خارجی | ||
| Article 10, Volume 7, Issue 2, February 2018, Pages 527-554 PDF (307.26 K) | ||
| Document Type: research article | ||
| DOI: 10.22059/jflr.2017.234782.347 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Ali Mohammad Fazilatfar* 1; Mahjoob Sedghi2 | ||
| 1English Dept. Faculty of Foreign Languages, Yazd University, Yazd, IRAN | ||
| 2English Dept. Javad Elmi Karbordi Uni Lecturer | ||
| Abstract | ||
| The current study was carried out to investigate the acquisition of English modal auxiliary verbs by adult Persian EFL learners. In order to fulfill the intended objectives, 34 intermediate and 33 advanced participants studying English at a language institute were chosen. The selected L2 learners were assessed both on their production (translation task) and perception (forced choice elicitation task) of the intended modal verbs including can, may, must, should, have to, will, and would. The data analysis revealed that they suffered inability in the production of simple and perfective forms of dynamic modal auxiliary would, due to the lack of such constructions in their L1. Persian EFL learners faced some ambiguities identifying the appropriate deontic auxiliary verb due to the lack of such a distinction in L1. Even, the functional roles of modal auxiliary verb may, which were not accessible in their L1 could cause problems. These findings rejects the principles of full transfer/ full access theory. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Modal Verbs; Deontic Verbs; Possibility Verbs; Verbs of Desire; Full Transfer Theory / Full Access | ||
| References | ||
|
مشکاتالدینی، م. (1366). دستور زبان فارسی بر پایة نظریه گشتاری. مشهد: انتشارات دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد. میرعمادی، ع. (1376). نحو زبان فارسی. تهران: سازمان مطالعه و تدوین کتب علوم انسانی دانشگاهها (سمت). Baleghizadeh, S. & Mozaheb M. A, (2011). A Profile of an Effective EFL Grammar Teacher. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(2): 364-369. Bhela, B. (1999). Native language interference in learning a second language: Exploratory case studies of native language interference with target language usage. International Education Journal, 1(1): 22-31. Corder, S. (1967). A role for the mother tongue. In S. Gass & L. Selinker (eds.) Language transfer in language learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing Company, 18-31. Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1974). Natural sequences in child second language acquisition. Language Learning, 24: 37-53. Ellis, N., & Sagarra, N. (2010).The bounds of adult language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32: 553-580. Faerch, C. and Kasper, G. (1987). Perspective on Language Transfer. Applied Linguistics, 8 (2): 111- 136. Flynn, S. (1996). Acquisition of pronoun anaphora: Resetting the parameter. In B. Lust (ed.) Studies in the acquisition of anaphora: Defining the parameters. Dordrecht: Reidel. Flynn, S. & Martohardjono, G. (1996). Mapping from the initial state to the final state: the separation of universal principles and language-specific principles. In B. Lust, M. Suner and J. Whitman (eds.), Syntactic theory and first language acquisition: crosslinguistic perspectives. Vol. 1: Heads, projections and learnability (pp. 319-335). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Gass, S. and Selinker, L. (2001). Second Language Acquisition: An introductory course. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Karim, K., & Nassaji, H. (2013). First language transfer in second language writing: An examination of current research. Iranian Journals of Language Teaching Research, 1(1): 117-134. Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across Cultures: Applied Linguistics for language teachers. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan. Lord, G. (2008). Second language acquisition and first language phonological modification. Proceedings of the hispanic linguistics symposium. ed. Joyece Bruhn de garavito and E. Valenzuela,184-193.Somerville,MA:Cascadilla proceedings project. Montrul, S. (2000). Transitivity Alternations in L2 Acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22: 229-273. Nemati, M., & Taghizade, M. (2006). Exploring similarities and differences between L1 and L2. IRJABS, 4(9): 247-2483. Odlin, T. (1989). Language Transfer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Oller, J. W. & Ziahosseiny, S. (1970). The contrastive analysis hypothesis and spelling errors. Language Leaning, 20: 183-189. Özçelik, Ö. (2015). L2 Acquisition of Scope: Testing the Full Transfer Full Access Hypothesis. In Susie Jones (ed.), Proceedings of the 2008 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association. Schwartz, B. D. & Sprouse, R. (1994). Word order and nominative case in nonnative language acquisition: a longitudinal study of (L1 Turkish) German interlanguage. In T. Hoekstra and B. D. Schwartz (eds.),Language acquisition studies in generative grammar (pp. 317-368). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Schwartz, B. D. and Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 Cognitive States and the Full Transfer/Full Access Model.Second Language research, 12: 40-72. Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics,10(3): 209-231. Siegel, J. (2003). Substrate Influence in Creoles and the Role of Transfer in Second Language Acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25: 185-209. Sweet, H. (1899, 1964). The Practical Study of Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press. White, L. (1989). Universal grammar and second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. White, L. (2000). Second language acquisition: From initial to final State, in: J. Archibald (Ed.) Second Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory, 130-155. | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 715 PDF Download: 690 |
||