SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Eurasian Journal of Educational Research / 2018 / Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 77

Accuracy Order of English Grammatical Morphemes of Saudi EFL Learners

Abuelgasim Sabah Elsaid MOHAMMED
Abdulaziz Bashir SANOSI
Pages
65–80
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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)

Further research that will utilize a bigger size of samples is alsorequired to confirm the generated order.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: This paper investigates the accuracy orderof grammatical morphemes followed by Saudi EFLlearners.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The major aim of the research was to revealthe pattern of grammatical morpheme acquisition ofthe participants, and to compare it against theNatural Order Hypothesis (NOH) as stated byKrashen (1977).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Further research that will utilize a bigger size of samples is alsorequired to confirm the generated order.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Purpose: This paper investigates the accuracy orderof grammatical morphemes followed by Saudi EFLlearners. The major aim of the research was to revealthe pattern of grammatical morpheme acquisition ofthe participants, and to compare it against theNatural Order Hypothesis (NOH) as stated byKrashen (1977). The different factors that affected thegenerated order were also discussed. ResearchMethods: The present research adopted a descriptivequantitative design. Three groups of male and femalestudents (n= 258) participated in the study. Theparticipants were selected randomly from publicschools and university colleges. They responded to agrammar elicitation task designed to test theiraccuracy of using grammatical morphemes. Pica's (1983) TLU method was used to assess the participants' performance. Findings: It wasfound that Saudi EFL learners developed the accuracy of using grammatical morphemes in asimilar sequence regardless of their educational stages. Although this sequence was fixed,there seemed to be a clear effect of the educational stage upon the quality of their usage. Thegenerated accuracy order was found to be different from the NOH. This result suggested thatthe participants' first language (L1) affected the accuracy order of grammatical morphemes.Implications for research and practice: The findings of the study suggested that course booklesson plans should be designed according to the generated order to facilitate grammaticalmorpheme acquisition. Further research that will utilize a bigger size of samples is alsorequired to confirm the generated order.

🔖

Cite This Article

MOHAMMED, A. S. E., SANOSI, A. B. (2022). Accuracy Order of English Grammatical Morphemes of Saudi EFL Learners. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 77, 65–80. https://ajindex.com/articles/507148

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Bailey, N., Madden, C., & Krashen, S. (1974). Is there a “natural sequence” in adult second language learning? Language Learning, 24, 235-243.
  2. Barrot, J. (2010). Accuracy order of selected grammatical morphemes in the monitored written Compositions of Filipino adult language. Philippine ESL Journal, 4, 45 -65. Behajat, F. & Sadighi, F. (2011). The acquisition of English grammatical morpheme: A case of Iranian EFL learners. The Modern Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3(2), 105-123.
  3. Brown, R. (1973). A First language: The early stages. Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press.
  4. Corder, P. (1967). The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 5, 161-171.
  5. Dabove, A. (2014). A study of morpheme acquisition in an EFL corpus of L1 Spanish – L2 English: Some pedagogical implications (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from digibug.ugr.es/./1/AGUSTINA%20DEMARTA%20TFM%20final%20ver sion.pdf de Villiers, J., & de Villiers, P. (1973). A cross-sectional study of the acquisition of grammatical morphemes in child speech. Journal of Psycholinguistics Research, 2, 267-278.
  6. Dornyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied Linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  7. Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1973). Natural sequence in child second language acquisition. Language Learning, 24(1), 37-53.
  8. Ellis, R. (2010). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  9. Ibrahim, A., Nor, M., & Abu, A. (2013). English grammatical morpheme acquisition order of Malay secondary school students. Jurnal Pendidikan Bitara UPSI, Journal of Sultan Idris Education University, 4, 1-22.
  10. Izumi, E. & Isahara, H. (2004). Investigation into language learners’ acquisition order based on an error analysis of a learner corpus. In L. Anthony, S. Fujita, & Y. Harada (Ed.), An interactive workshop on language e-learning (pp. 63-71).
  11. Kharrati, A., Ahmadi, S., Mohammaditabar, M., & Sadighi, F. (2015). The accuracy order of English grammatical morphemes of Iranian EFL learners: An explanation of a universal order. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods, 5(4), 43-51.
  12. Khor, S. (2012). A corpus-based study in morpheme acquisition order of young learners of English. Retrieved from Uppsala University, www.divaportal.org/smash/get/diva2:608517/FULLTEXT01.pdf. Kim, J. (2001). Grammatical morpheme accuracy order in Korean adult learners of English (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertation