Speech Processing Prerequisites or L1 Transfer? Evidence From English and French L2 Learners of Arabic

Alhawary, Mohammad T.

doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.2009.01025.x

Cited by 36 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 19 publications

(21 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Alhawary (, ) found that many of the English‐speaking learners of Arabic examined in his study acquired subject–verb agreement before noun–adjective agreement, which is the opposite of the order predicted by PT. Similarly, Alhawary () argued that two structures predicted to emerge in stage 4, verbal agreement and demonstrative–predicate agreement, did not emerge together in learners of Arabic. Moreover, there were differences in performance between English‐ and French‐speaking learners on demonstrative‐predicate agreement, which cannot be accounted for by PT.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…PT has received robust support from studies investigating speakers of a variety of target languages, including English (Pienemann, ; Sakai, ; Spinner, ), Japanese (Di Biase & Kawaguchi, ; Kawaguchi, , ), Swedish and other Scandinavian languages (Glahn et al., ; Håkansson & Norrby, ), Italian (Di Biase & Kawaguchi, ), German (Baten, ), and Arabic (Mansouri, ) (but see Dyson, , and Alhawary, , for counterarguments).…”

Section: Background To the Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Language Production and Reception: A Processability Theory Study

Spinner

2013

Language Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pienemann's Processability Theory (PT) predicts an order of emergence of morphosyntactic elements in second language (L2) production data. This research investigates whether the same order of emergence can be detected in L2 reception data, specifically, data from a timed audio grammaticality judgment task (GJT). The results from three related studies are reported. Overall, evidence from two groups of learners of English as an L2 who took an audio GJT does not demonstrate the order of emergence predicted by PT. However, results from a production task followed the predicted order. These findings suggest that the processing routines in PT are operative during production only, raising questions about PT and the interconnectedness of the productive and receptive systems.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Background To the Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Language Production and Reception: A Processability Theory Study

Spinner

2013

Language Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To further address the role of L1 effects in L2 morphosyntactic development, Alhawary () expanded the 2003 and 2005 studies in two important respects. First, a further comparison was made between the longitudinal data on subject‐verb agreement and demonstrative‐predicate gender agreement: haadha (this.ms) ṭaalib‐(un) (student.ms‐(nom)) [This is a male student] and haadhihi (this.fs) ṭaaliba ‐ (t‐un) (student.fs‐(nom)) [This is a female student].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

The link between morphosyntactic accuracy and textbook presentation: The morphosyntax of subject‐verb agreement in Arabic

Azaz

2018

Foreign Language Annals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The acquisition of morphosyntax presents challenges for learners of all second/foreign languages. This cross‐sectional study investigated English‐speaking learners’ morphosyntactic accuracy in the symmetrical subject‐verb agreement type (in subject‐initial sentences) and in the asymmetrical subject‐verb agreement type (in verb‐initial sentences) in Arabic. In addition, it examined the extent to which their accuracy rates were reflected in implicit exposure to and explicit presentation of those structures. The results of a prompted production task showed that first‐, second‐, and third‐year learners exhibited low morphosyntactic accuracy rates only in the asymmetrical type. In addition, the production of Group 2 (second‐year) and Group 3 (third‐year) was patterned after that of Group 1 (first‐year) in the symmetrical type but exhibited greater variation in the asymmetrical type. Implications for explicit textbook presentation and instruction of morphosyntactic intricacies are discussed.

show abstract

“…Therefore, it is important to know how the composition of the language processor looks and how the language processor processes the L2. In this way, one can predict the development of second-language skills of learners concerning language production and comprehension (Pienemann 1998a(Pienemann , b, 2005a(Pienemann , b, c, 2006(Pienemann , 2007Jordan 2004;VanPatten and Williams 2007;Alhawary 2009;Riyanto 2010).…”

Section: Processability Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Dutch-Indonesian interlanguage Psycholinguistic study on syntax

Riyanto¹

2012

Wacana

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article focuses on the psycholinguistic study of the syntactic aspects of Dutch-Indonesian interlanguage. The study is based on the interlanguage syntax observed in an oral test given to thirty Indonesian learners of Dutch as a second language, whose purpose is to test the processability theory of Pienemann (2005aPienemann ( , b, c, 2007. The results of the study provide evidence for the validity of Pienemann's theory. Learners who have acquired sentences with the highest level of processing will also already have acquired sentences with a lower level of processing. The results from learners with a high level of Dutch proficiency verify the processability theory with more certainty than the results of learners with a lower proficiency. Learners tend to rely on meaning if they are not confident of their grammatical proficiency. Interlanguage is the result of the immediate need to encode in the mind concepts and ideas into the form of linguistic items, within a fraction of a millisecond, whilst the supporting means are limited, and whilst learners already have acquired a first language and possibly another language as well.keywords Interlanguage, processability theory, exchange of grammatical information, Dutch/Indonesian. SUGENG RIYANTO is staff at the Faculty of Humanities, Padjadjaran University and teacher at the Dutch Language Center, Erasmus Taalcentrum Jakarta. Sugeng Riyanto may be contacted at: sugeng.riyanto@unpad.ac.id. 155SUGENG RIYANTO, Dutch-Indonesian Interlanguage

show abstract

Speech Processing Prerequisites or L1 Transfer? Evidence From English and French L2 Learners of Arabic

Cited by 36 publications

References 19 publications

Language Production and Reception: A Processability Theory Study

Language Production and Reception: A Processability Theory Study

The link between morphosyntactic accuracy and textbook presentation: The morphosyntax of subject‐verb agreement in Arabic

Dutch-Indonesian interlanguage Psycholinguistic study on syntax

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About