SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Yedi Aralık Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi / 2024 / Cilt: 3 Sayı: 2

Mistakes in Learning Arabic as a Second Language: Linguistic Analysis and Correction Strategies

İkinci Dil Olarak Arapça Öğrenmede Hatalar: Dilbilimsel Analiz ve Düzeltme Stratejileri

Ahmed Mahmoud Zakaria Tawfık(HARRAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-5900-2949
Pages
150–166
Publication Date
2024-12-27
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The third chapter discusses correction strategies, such as feedback and interactive learning, and effective learning techniques

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This research seeks to analyze these errors, determine their causes, and propose strategies to overcome these challenges, contributing to the development of educational programs.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study is guided by the hypothesis that the influence of the mother tongue significantly impacts the common errors among learners, leading to difficulties in pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The third chapter discusses correction strategies, such as feedback and interactive learning, and effective learning techniques
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Arap Dili ve Belâgatı · Uygulamalı Dilbilim · İkinci Dil

Abstract

This research seeks to analyze these errors, determine their causes, and propose strategies to overcome these challenges, contributing to the development of educational programs. The study is guided by the hypothesis that the influence of the mother tongue significantly impacts the common errors among learners, leading to difficulties in pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary. Additionally, the research posits that both direct and indirect feedback provide noticeable improvements in correcting errors and reinforcing the understanding of language rules. The research addresses key questions, including the identification of common errors in pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and spelling made by Arabic learners, the effect of the mother tongue on these errors, and the most effective correction strategies for improving learners' performance. The methodology of the study is based on an analytical approach that integrates theory and practice. This involves collecting examples from previous studies and common errors, analyzing the data using second language teaching theories, and examining the impact of the mother tongue on Arabic learning. The study will also propose correction strategies. The structure of the research includes an introduction, followed by the first chapter, which introduces the main theories in second language learning and analyzes their impact on Arabic teaching. The second chapter focuses on the analysis of common errors in Arabic learning, including pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and spelling, along with an exploration of the causes of these errors. The third chapter discusses correction strategies, such as feedback and interactive learning, and effective learning techniques

Özet

Arapça öğrenme hatalarının incelenmesinin önemi, öğrenme sürecini daha etkili ve verimli hale getirme ihtiyacından kaynaklanmaktadır. Öğrenenler tarafından yapılan hatalar, karşılaştıkları zorlukları göstermekte ve dilin onlar için karmaşıklığını yansıtmaktadır. Bu araştırma, bu hataları analiz etmeyi, nedenlerini belirlemeyi ve bu zorlukların üstesinden gelmek için stratejiler önermeyi amaçlamakta, bu da eğitim programlarının geliştirilmesine katkıda bulunmaktadır. Araştırma Hipotezleri: Ana Dil Etkisi: Ana dilin etkisi, öğrenenler arasında yaygın hatalar üzerinde önemli bir etkiye sahiptir ve bu durum telaffuz, dil bilgisi ve kelime bilgisi konusunda zorluklara yol açmaktadır. Geri Bildirim: Doğrudan ve dolaylı geri bildirim, hataların düzeltilmesinde ve kuralların anlaşılmasının pekiştirilmesinde gözle görülür bir iyileşme sağlar. Araştırma Soruları: Arapça öğrenenlerin telaffuz, dil bilgisi, kelime bilgisi ve yazımda yaptıkları yaygın hatalar nelerdir? Ana dilin etkisi, öğrenenlerin yaptığı hataları nasıl etkiler? Öğrenenlerin performansını iyileştirmek için en etkili düzeltme stratejileri nelerdir? Araştırma Yöntemi: Araştırma, teori ve pratiği birleştiren analitik bir yönteme dayanmaktadır. Yöntem, önceki çalışmalardan ve yaygın hatalardan örnekler toplayarak, bu verileri ikinci dil öğretim teorileri kullanarak analiz etmeyi içerir. Ana dilin Arapça öğrenimi üzerindeki etkisi analiz edilecek ve düzeltme stratejileri önerilecektir. Araştırma Yapısı: Giriş: Birinci Bölüm: İkinci dil öğreniminde ana teorilere giriş ve bu teorilerin Arapça öğretimi üzerindeki etkisinin analizi. İkinci Bölüm: Telaffuz, dil bilgisi, kelime bilgisi ve yazım dahil olmak üzere Arapça öğreniminde yaygın hataların analizi ve bu hataların nedenlerinin analizi. Üçüncü Bölüm: Geri bildirim ve etkileşimli öğrenme gibi düzeltme stratejileri ve etkili öğrenme. Sonuç: Arapça öğretiminin iyileştirilmesi için ana bulguların ve önerilerin sunumu

🔖

Cite This Article

Tawfık, A. M. Z. (2024). Mistakes in Learning Arabic as a Second Language: Linguistic Analysis and Correction Strategies. Yedi Aralık Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 2, 150–166. https://ajindex.com/articles/1624157

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (56)

  1. Abutalebi, J., & Green, D. (2007). Bilingual language production: The neurocognition of language representation and control. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 20(3), 242–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2006.10.003
  2. Al-Ani, S. H. (1970). Arabic phonology: An acoustical and physiological investigation. Mouton.
  3. Badawī, S. M., Carter, M. G., & Gully, A. (2010). Modern written Arabic: A comprehensive grammar (reprinted). Routledge.
  4. Benson, P. (2011). Teaching and researching autonomy (2nd ed). Longman. http://www.myilibrary.com?id=311492
  5. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
  6. Bradlow, A. R., Akahane-Yamada, R., Pisoni, D. B., & Tohkura, Y. (1999). Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/and /l/: Long-term retention of learning in perception and production. Perception & Psychophysics, 61(5), 977–985. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206911
  7. Budiman, A. (2017). Behaviorism and Foreign Language Teaching Methodology. ENGLISH FRANCA: Academic Journal of English Language and Education, 1(2), 101. https://doi.org/10.29240/ef.v1i2.171
  8. Carless, D. (2015). Excellence in university assessment: Learning from award-winning practice. Higher Education Research & Development, 35(1), 208-210.
  9. Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. M.I.T. Press. http://hdl.handle.net/2027/heb.08421
  10. Corder, S. P. (1967). The significance of learner’s errors. Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED019903
  11. DeKeyser, R. M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second languageacquisition. Studies in second language acquisition, 22(4), 499–533. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100004022
  12. Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (2005). Second language accent and pronunciation teaching: A Research-Based Approach. TESOL Quarterly, 39(3), 379. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588486
  13. Ellis, N. C. (2006). Selective attention and transfer phenomena in l2 acquisition: Contingency, cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking, and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics, 27(2), 164–194. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml015
  14. Ellis, R. (2006a). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLA Perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 83. https://doi.org/10.2307/40264512
  15. Ellis, R. (2006b). Researching the effects of form-focussed instruction on l2 acquisition. AILA Review, 19, 18–41. https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.19.04ell
  16. Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.5070/L2.V1I1.9054
  17. Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70–120. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312474350
  18. Ferris, D. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80110-6
  19. Flege, J. E. (1995). Second language speech learning: theory, findings, and problems. In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 233–277). York Press.
  20. Flege, J. E., & Bohn, O.-S. (2021). The revised speech learning model (SLM-r). In R. Wayland (Ed.), Second language speech learning (1st ed., pp. 3–83). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108886901.002
  21. Fluckiger, J., Vigil, Y. T., Pasco, R., & Danielson, K. (2010). Formative feedback: Involving students as partners in assessment to enhance learning. College Teaching, 58(4), 136–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2010.484031
  22. Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(3), 299–323. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100015047 Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2006). Input, interaction and output: An Overview. AILA Review, 19(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.19.03gas
  23. Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L. (1992). Language transfer in language learning. John Benjamins Pub. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=385648
  24. Guenther, F. H. (2016). Neural control of speech. The MIT Press. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=2517946
  25. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
  26. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
  27. Han, Z. (2004). Fossilization in adult second language acquisition. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853596889
  28. Hickok, G., & Poeppel, D. (2007). The cortical organization of speech processing. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 8(5), 393–402. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2113
  29. Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom Anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1986.tb05256.x
  30. Huxham, M. (2007). Fast and effective feedback: Are model answers the answer? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(6), 601–611. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930601116946
  31. Iverson, P., Hazan, V., & Bannister, K. (2005). Phonetic training with acoustic cue manipulations: A comparison of methods for teaching English /r/-/l/ to Japanese adults. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 118(5), 3267–3278. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2062307
  32. Jiang, N. (2004). Semantic transfer and its implications for vocabulary teaching in a second language. The Modern Language Journal, 88(3), 416–432. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0026-7902.2004.00238.x
  33. Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin and use (with Chomsky, N.). (1986). Praeger.
  34. Laufer, B. (1997). The lexical plight in second language reading: Words you don’t know, words you think you know, and words you can’t guess. In J. Coady & T. N. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy. Cambridge University Press. http://catdir.loc.gov/catdir/samples/cam034/96003115.html
  35. Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 413–468). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012589042-7/50015-3
  36. Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: negotiation of form incommunicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37–66. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197001034
  37. Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom sla: A Meta-Analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 265–302. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990520
  38. MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1994). The effects of induced anxiety on three stages of cognitive processing in computerized vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100012560
  39. Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction, and second language development: anempirical study of question formation in esl. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(4), 557–587. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199004027
  40. Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811678
  41. Narciss, S. (2008). Feedback strategies for interactive learning tasks. In J. J. G. van Merrienboer, J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 125–144). Lawrence Erlbaum.
  42. Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press. http://catdir.loc.gov/catdir/samples/cam031/2001269892.html
  43. Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.
  44. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090 Odlin, T. (2003). Cross‐linguistic influence. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (1st ed., pp. 436–486). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch15
  45. Pinker, S. (1994). The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates the Gift of Language. William Morrow. https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1037/e412952005-009
  46. Ringbom, H. (1987). The role of the first language in foreign language learning. Multilingual Matters Ltd. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=23420
  47. Ryding, K. C. (2014). Arabic: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge University Press.
  48. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117714
  49. Saiegh-Haddad, E. (2014). The structure of Arabic language and orthography and their impact on reading acquisition. In E. Saiegh-Haddad & R. M. Joshi (Eds.), Handbook of Arabic literacy: Insights and perspectives. Volume 9. Springer. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=753531
  50. Seidel, R. J. (1963). Role of repetition and reinforcement in learning. Psychological Reports, 13(3), 815–822. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1963.13.3.815
  51. Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10(3), 209–231. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.1972.10.1-4.209
  52. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795
  53. Skehan, P. (1996). A Framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 38–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/17.1.38
  54. Storch, N. (2002). Patterns of interaction in esl pair work. Language Learning, 52(1), 119–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00179
  55. White, L. (1989). Universal grammar and second language acquisition (Vol. 1). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.1
  56. White, L. (2003). Second language acquisition and universal grammar (1st ed). Cambridge University Press. Yuan, F. (2003). The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in l2 monologic oral prod.