Studies in Literature and Language
The Effect of Comparative FonF Structure on Learning L2 Verb Components
Abstract
This study focuses on the impact of the type of form-focused instruction (FFI) on its efficiency in mastering L2 forms. The hypothesis that FFI, which induces structural and metalinguistic salience on the basis of contrastive analysis of the learner’s L1 and L2, would be particularly effective at facilitating the acquisition of difficult L2 forms was tested in a quasi-experimental study comparing the effectiveness of two types of FFI, one with and one without a contrastive component. The contrastive FFI explicitly drew learners’ attention to the cross-linguistic differences in the tense-aspect systems of their L2 and L1 while the non-contrastive treatment only focused on the tense-aspect system of the L2. The effects of these two types of FFI were assessed by analyzing the learners’ pre-test and post-test performance on two tasks differing in the extent to which they involve the activation of explicit and implicit linguistic knowledge: A grammatical judgment task and a controlled translation task. The subjects of the study comprised of 43 students majoring in English language in the Iranian capital university, Tehran, 22 were selected as for the experimental group and 21 for control group randomly. The results of the study revealed that the quantitative analysis of the Grammatical Judgment Test (GJT) data indicated no significant effect of CFFI due to the novelty of the translatory technique, or the potential individual differences in the learning orientation of the learners. On the contrary, the qualitative analysis indicated differential effects of this type of FFI according to the nature of target form, i.e. CFFI was beneficial in raising the grammatical judgment of Persian Learners of English (PLE) regarding present perfect form but not effective in their judgment of ungrammatical progressive forms. In terms of translation task, the CFFI appeared to be effective in the correct use of the target structures by PLE. This may be mainly due to the fact that Translation Test (TT) needed explicit knowledge which was presented in CFFI and that translation is a contrastive activity in nature.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Afraz, S., & Ghaemi, H. (2012). The effect of focused written corrective feedback of contrastive analysis on efl learners’ acquisition of verb tenses. Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies in The World, 2(4).
Ammar, A., & Lightbown, P. (2005). More about the acquisition of relative clauses by Arab learners of English. In A. Housen & M. Pierrard (Eds.), Investigations in instructed second language acquisition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Ammar, A., Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (2010). Awareness of L1/L2 differences: Does it matter? Language Awareness, 19, 129-146.
Andersen, R. W., & Shirai, Y. (1996). Primacy of aspect in first and second language acquisition: The Pidgin/Creole connection. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook on language acquisition. New York: Academic Press.
Bialystok, E. (1994). Analysis and control in the development of second language proficiency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 157-168.
Comrie, B. (1976). Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
De Graaff, R., & Housen, A. (2009). Investigating the effects and effectiveness of L2 instruction. In M. H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Dörnyei, Z., & Skehan, P. (2003). Individual differences in L2 learning. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp.589-630). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Issues and terminology. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisitions (pp.1-11). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dowty, D. R. (1979). Word meaning and montague grammar: The semantics of verbs and times in generative semantics and in Mantague’s PTQ. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Ellis, N. (1994). Implicit and explicit learning of language. London: Academic Press.
Ellis, N. (2001). Form-focused instruction and second language learning. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Ellis, N. (2002a). Does form-focused instruction affect the acquisition of implicit knowledge? A review of the research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 223-236.
Ellis, N. (2002b). The place of grammar instruction in the second/ foreign language curriculum. In E. Hinkel & S. Fotos (Eds.), New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms (pp.17-34). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ellis, N. (2004). The definition and measurement of explicit knowledge. Language Learning, 54, 227-275.
Ellis, N. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 141-172.
Ellis, R., & Barkhuizen, G. (2005). Analyzing learner language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Han, Z., & Selinker, L. (1999). Error resistance: Towards an empirical pedagogy. Language Teaching Research, 3(3), 248-275.
Harley, B. (1993). Instructional strategies and SLA in early French immersion. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(2), 245-59.
Hasannejad, M. R., Araghi, S. M., & Mirzaei, M. (2014). The efficacy of delineating L2 Sources of grammatical errors with reference to the students’ L1 for increasing Iranian EFL learner’s production and recognition accuracy. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 5(2), 399-405.
Horst, M., White, J., & Bell, P. (2010). First and second language knowledge in the language classroom. International Journal of Bilingualism, 14(3), 331-349.
Housen, A., & Pierrard, M. (2005). Investigating instructed second language acquisitions. In A. Housen & M. Pierrard (Eds.), Investigations in Instructed Second Language Acquisition (pp.1-27). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Hulstijn, J., & de Graaff, R. (1994). Under what conditions does explicit knowledge of a second language facilitate the acquisition of implicit knowledge? A research proposal. In J. Hulstijn, & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Consciousness in second Language learning. AILA Review, 11, 97-112.
James, C. (2005). Contrastive analysis and the language learner: A new lease of life? In D. J. Allerton, C. Tshichold, & J. Wieser (Eds.), Linguistics, language learning and language teaching. The International Cooper Series on English Language and Literature (ICSELL) (Vol.10, pp.1-20).
Kupferberg, I. (1999). The cognitive turn of contrastive analysis: Empirical evidence. Language Awareness, 8, 210-222.
Kupferberg, I., & Olshtain, E. (1996). Explicit contrastive instruction facilitates the acquisition of L2 forms. Language Awareness, 5, 149-165.
Lakoff, G. (1965). On the nature of syntactic irregularities (Ph.D. Dissertation). Indiana University.
Laufer, B. (2005). Instructed second language vocabulary learning: The fault in the default hypothesis. In A. Housen & M. Pierrard (Eds.), Investigations in instructed second language acquisition (pp.286-303). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Laufer, B., & Girsai, N. (2008). Form-focused Instruction in second language vocabulary learning: A case for contrastive analysis and translation. Applied Linguistics, 29(4), 694-716.
Manuchehri, P. (1974). Explaining problems of Iranian students by comparing English and Farsi verb forms. TESOl Quarterly, 171-176.
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), 417-528.
Ringbom, H. (1987). The role of the first language in foreign language learning. Philadephia PA: Multilingual Matters.
Robinson, P. (2001). Individual differences, cognitive abilities, aptitude complexes and learning conditions in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 17, 368-392.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.3-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sharwood, S. M. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA: theoretical bases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(2), 165-79.
Sheen, R. (1996). The advantage of exploiting contrastive analysis in teaching and learning a foreign language. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 183-197.
Sheen, R. (2005). Focus on FormS as a means of improving accurate oral production. In A. Housen & M. Pierrard (Eds.), Investigations in Instructed Second Language Acquisition (pp.271-310). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Shirai, Y. (1994). On the overgeneralization of progressive marking on stative verbs: Bioprogram or input? First Language, 14, 67-82.
Smith, C. S. (1983). A theory of aspectual choice. Language, 59, 479-501.
Spada, N. (1997). Form-focused instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching, 30, 73-87.
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (1999). Instruction, first language influence, and developmental readiness in second language acquisition Modern Language Journal, 83, 1-22.
Spada, N., Lightbown, P. M., & White, J. L. (2005). The importance of form/ meaning mappings in explicit form-focussed instruction. In A. Housen & M. Pierrard (Eds.), Current issues in instructed second language learning (pp.199-234). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Vaezi, S., & Mirzaei, M. (2007). The effect of using translation from L1 to L2 as a teaching technique on the improvement of EFL learners’ linguistic accuracy: Focus on form. Retrieved 2011, March 5 from http://www.hltmag.co.uk/sep07/ mart03.htm
Vendler, Z. (1967). Verbs and times. In Z. Vendler (Ed.), Linguistics in Philosophy (pp.79-121). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/10281
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2018 Gholam Reza Parvizi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Share us to: 
Online Submission: http://cscanada.org/index.php/sll/submission/wizard
Please send your manuscripts to sll@cscanada.net，or sll@cscanada.org for consideration. We look forward to receiving your work.
We only use three mailboxes as follows to deal with issues about paper acceptance, payment and submission of electronic versions of our journals to databases: caooc@hotmail.com; sll@cscanada.net; sll@cscanada.org
Articles published in Studies in Literature and Language are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY).
STUDIES IN LITERATURE AND LANGUAGE Editorial Office
Address: 1055 Rue Lucien-L'Allier, Unit #772, Montreal, QC H3G 3C4, Canada.
Telephone: 1-514-558 6138
Website: Http://www.cscanada.net; Http://www.cscanada.org
E-mail: office@cscanada.net; office@cscanada.org; caooc@hotmail.com
Copyright © 2010 Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture 
