نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
استادیار، دانشگاه الزهرا، تهران، ایران
چکیده
پژوهش حاضر به بررسی خطاهای فارسی‌زبانانی که انگلیسی زبان خارجی آنها است در تولید عبارات موصولی زبان انگلیسی پرداخته است. باوجود آنکه در زبان انگلیسی، استفاده از ساخت پرسشی در اغلب عبارات موصولی بدون هسته مجاز نیست، فارسی‌زبانان به‌وفور از این ساختار در جملات انگلیسی خود استفاده میکنند. طی این پژوهش، ریشه‌های احتمالی این خطا شناسایی و تحلیل شدند و نهایتا فرضیه نشانداری تمایزبخش که قدرت بیشتری در توضیح این خطا داشت به‌عنوان چارچوب نظری این پژوهش انتخاب شد. پیکره شفاهی و کتبی این پژوهش طی دو سال از منابع متعدد و از 137 مشارک خانم و آقا به‌دست آمد. داده‌ها از گویه‌هایی که به‌طور طبیعی، نه با هدف این پژوهش، بیان شده بودند جمع‌آوری شد و شامل 126 عبارت موصولی خطادار بود که 85 عبارت (67.46%) بدون هسته معمولی، 25 عبارت (19.84%) هسته‌دار و 16 عبارت (12.69%) بدون هسته آزاد بودند. بررسی دقیق‌تر داده‌ها منجر به شناسایی تمایز نظاممند بین خطاها در دو نوع عبارت موصولی اصلی (بدون هسته در جایگاه فاعل یا مفعول) و دو نوع عبارت موصولی فرعی (بدون هسته در جایگاه فاعل و دارای فعل بودن ) گردید. این وسعت کارکرد عبارات موصولی در زبان انگلیسی نسبت به فارسی، می‌تواند موجب نشانداری این ساختار برای فارسی‌زبانان شود. به نظر می‌رسد این نوع نشانداری که ناظر بر گستره کاربرد جملات پرسشی و خبری در جایگاه عبارات موصولی بدون هسته است بیش از نشانداری از حیث تفاوت در تعداد واژگانی که در فارسی و انگلیسی برای یک کارکرد واحد وجود دارد، می‌تواند علت بروز این نوع خطا را توضیح دهد. پژوهش حاضر، بر ضرورت بررسی زبانشناسانه سایر ابعاد خطاهای نظاممند مشابه، همکاری متخصصان زبانشناسی و آموزش زبان دوم/خارجی در شناسایی و رفع مشکلات یادگیری، و پژوهش‌های بیشتر برای ارایه راه‌حل‌های آموزشی برای چنین مشکلاتی تاکید می‌نماید.
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
References
Abdollahnejad, E., & Marefat, H. (2018). Relative clauses in Persian: A small-scale corpus study. Lingvisticae Investigationes 40(2), 135-149.
Alizadeh, A., & Khaleghizadeh, S. (2015). Using relative clauses of subject-subject and subject-object: Comparison of the writings of Arab-speaking Persian learners in intermediate and advanced level. Journal of Teaching Persian to Speakers of Other Languages, 4(9), 59-78 [In Persian].
Azmude, H., Amuzade, M., & Rezaei, V. (2017). A study of relative clause extraposition in Persian based on discourse grammar. Journal of Language Research, 9(24), 59-85 [In Persian].
Bahrami, K. (2016). Comparison of Persian and German restrictive and nonrestrictive relative clauses. Language Related Researches, 7(2), 19-32 [In Persian].
Bresnan, J. (1973). Headless relatives. In H. V. Riemsdijk (Ed.), Free relatives (pp. 23-46). Oxford: Blackwell.
Bresnan, J., & Grimshaw, J. (1978). The syntax of free relatives in English. Linguistic Inquiry, 9(3), 331-391.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York, NY: Pearson Education.
Bettoni, C., & Di Biase, B. (2015). Processability theory: Theoretical bases and universal schedules. In C. Bettoni, & B. Di Biase, (Eds.), Grammatical development in second languages: Exploring the boundaries of processability theory (pp. 19–80). Amsterdam: Eurosla.
Clahsen, H. (1984). The acquisition of German word order: A test case for cognitive approaches to L2 development. In R. Andersen (Ed.), Second languages: A crosslinguistic perspective (pp. 219-242). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Clark, H. H., & Clark, E. V. (1978). Universals, relativity and language processing. In J. Greenberg, C. A. Ferguson, & E. A. Moravcsik (Eds.), Universals of human language (pp. 225-77). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Comrie, B. (1996). Language universals and linguistic typology: Syntax and morphology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Crystal, D. (1992). An encyclopedic dictionary of language and languages. Oxford: Blackwell.
Dabir-Moghaddam, M. (1999). Theoretical linguistics: Emergence and development of general grammar. Tehran: Sokhan Publication [In Persian].
Eckman, F. R. (1977). Markedness and the contrastive analysis hypothesis. Language Learning, 27(2), 315-330.
Eckman, F. R. (1985). Some theoretical and pedagogical implications of the markedness differential hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 289-307.
Eckman, F. R. (1996). A functional-typological approach to second language acquisition theory. In W. C. Ritchie, & T. K. Bhatia (Eds), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 92-112). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Eckman, F. R., Bell, L., & Nelson, D. (1988). On the generalization of relative clause instruction in the acquisition of English as a second language. Applied Linguistics 9(1), 1-20.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gennari, S. P., & McDonald, M. C. (2007). Semantic indeterminacy in object relative clauses. Journal of Memory and Language, 58(2008), 161-187.
Haegeman, L., & Gueron, J. (1999). English grammar: A generative perspective. Oxford: Blackwell.
Haghbin, F., & Asadi, H. (2015). A role and reference grammar analysis of relative clauses in Farsi. Language Research, 5(2), 21-41 [In Persian].
Hall, M., & Azar, B. (2010). Understanding and using English grammar. New York, NY: Pearson.
Jiang, Z., & Shao, C. (2006). Markedness in universal grammar and second language acquisition. US-China Education Review, 3(8), 41-62.
Kanno, K. (2007). Factors affecting the processing of Japanese relative clauses by L2 learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29, 197-218.
Kasper, G., & Faerch, C. (1987). Perspectives on language transfer. Applied Linguistics, 8(2), 72-94.
Keenan, E. L., & Comrie, B. (1977). Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry, 8(1), 63-99.
Kellerman, E. (1979). Transfer and non-transfer: Where we are now. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2, 37–57.
Khansir, A. A. (2012). Error analysis in second language acquisition. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(5), 1027-1032.
Kuroda, S.-Y. (1968). English relativization and certain related problems. Language, 44(2), 244-266.
Mackey, A. (1995). Stepping up the pace: Input, interaction and interlanguage development: An empirical study of questions in ESL (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Sydney, Australia.
Marefat, H., & Meraji, M. (2006). Parsing preferences in structurally ambiguous relative clauses: L1 vs. L2. The International Journal of Humanities of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 12(1), 111-127.
Miremadi, S. A. (1997). Persian syntax: A G. B-based analysis. Tehran: SAMT Publication.
Mohseni, A., & Samadian, S. (2019). Analysis of cohesion in writing performance of Iranian intermediate EFL learners. Issues in Language Teaching, 8(2), 213-242.
Mowlaei Kuhbanani, H., Alizade, A., & Sharifi, S. (2018). The role of typological features of relative clauses in Persian word order. Journal of Language Research, 10(28), 87-114 [In Persian].
Najafi, A. (1995). Application of ke in spoken Persian. Persian Academy Letter, 1(3), 7-19 [In Persian].
Pienemann, M. (1999). Language processing and second language development: Processability theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Pienemann, M. (2007). Processability Theory. In B. Van Patten, & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 37–154). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Pienemann, M., & Johnstone, M. (1987). Factors influencing the development of language proficiency. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Applying second language acquisition research (pp. 45-141). Adelaide: National Curriculum Resource Center.
Radford, A. (2004). English syntax: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rahmany, R., Marefat, H., & Kidd, E. (2013). Resumptive elements aid comprehension of object relative clauses: Evidence from Persian. Journal of Child Language, 41(4), 1-12.
Riemsdjik, H. V. (2006). Free relatives: A syntactic case study. In M. Everaert, & H. V. Riemsdjik (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to syntax (339-380). Oxford: Blackwell.
Robinson, P. (1998). State of the art: SLA theory and second language syllabus design. Japan Association of Language Teaching Journal, 22(4). Retrieved from: http://www.jalt-publications.org/old_tlt/files/98/apr/robinson.html
Saric, A. (2016). Developmental patterns in the interlanguage research. European Journal of Social Sciences, Education and Research, 3(2). 242-255.
Shahidipour, V., & Tahririan, M. H. (2018). Difficulties facing Iranian EFL senior high school learners and strategies they use to understand English idioms. Issues in Language Teaching, 7(2), 121-146.
Shiamizadeh, Z., Caspers, J., & Schiller, N. (2018). When is a wh-in-situ question identified in standard Persian? Language Cognition and Neuroscience, 33(9), 1168-1183.
Spinner, P., & Jung, S. (2018). Production and comprehension in processability theory: A self-paced reading study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40(2), 295-318.
Tabibzadeh, O. (2012). Persian grammar. Tehran: Markaz [In Persian].
Taghvaipour, M. (2004). An HPSG analysis of Persian relative clauses. In S. Müller (Ed.), Proceedings of the 11th international conference on head-driven phrase structure grammar (pp. 274-293). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Taghvaipour, M. (2005). Persian free relatives. In S. Müller (Ed.), Proceedings of the 12th international conference on head-driven phrase structure grammar (pp. 364–374). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Taghvaipour, M. (2014). Resumption in Persian relative clauses: An HPSG analysis. In P. Monachesi, J. Gerhard, G. Penn, & S. Wintner (Eds.), Proceedings of formal grammar conference (pp. 145-154). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Turnbull-Sailor, C. (2000). Syntactic pattern of wh-embedded clauses (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California, Berkeley.
White, L. (2003). Second language acquisition and universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yang, J. (2018). Linguistic status of markedness and its defining criteria. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 151, 400-406.
)