Gender-Based Investigation of the Syntactic Development of Iranian EFL Learners: A Focus on Processabilty Theory

Document Type: Research Paper

Authors

Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz

Abstract

Pienemann (1998, 2015) put forward Processability Theory to enlighten why language learners follow definite developmental paths. The aim of the present study was to run a comparative investigation into the difficulty order of different grammatical structures for male and female Iranian EFL learners predicted by Processability Theory. 185 Iranian university students took part in this study. They received a Demographic Questionnaire and a Validated Researcher-Made Grammar Test designed based on the stages of Processability Theory. Item Response Theory (IRT) Rasch Modeling was used to analyze the collected data. Results pertained to the research questions revealed that the stages predicted by Processability Theory do not account for the Iranian male/female EFL learners. Another major finding emerged from the data was that the difficulty level of different grammatical structures presented by Pienneman in PT doesn’t match the difficulty order obtained in this study by male/female EFL respondents. All things considered, results of the study provided a reliable counterevidence for the assumptions of the theory.

Keywords


Alhawary, M. T. (1999). Testing processability and effectiveness of computer-assisted language instruction: A longitudinal study of Arabic as a second/foreign language. Georgetown University: United States -District of Columbia.

Alhawary, M. T. (2009).Speech processing prerequisites or L1 transfer? Evidence from English and French L2 learners of Arabic. Foreign Language Annals, 42(2), 367-390.

Bleses, D., Vach, W., Slott, M., Wehberg, S., Thomsen, P., Madsen, T. O., & Basbøll, H. (2008). The Danish communicative developmental inventories: Validity and main developmental trends. Journal of Child Language, 35(3), 651-669.

Bohnacker, C. (2006). When Swedes begin to learn German: From V2 to V2. Second Language Research, 22, 443–486.

Bonilla, C.L. (2012). Testing processability theory in l2 Spanish: Can readiness or markedness predict development? (Doctoral dissertation). The University of Pittsburgh, PA. Retrieved from http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/11611/

Buyl, A., & Housen, A. (2015). Developmental stages in receptive grammar acquisition: A processability theory account. Second Language Research, 31, 523-550.

Charters, H., Dao, L., & Jansen, L. (2011).Reassessing the applicability of processability theory: The case of nominal plural. Second Language Research, 27, 509-533.

Cuza, A., & Perez-Tattam, R. (2016). Grammatical gender selection and phrasal word order in child heritage Spanish: A feature re-assembly approach. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition19(1), 50-68.

Dao, L. (2007). Foreign language acquisition: Processes and constraints (Doctoral dissertation). Australian National University, Australia. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/openview/7551fab52c56f006b258d6fa96545b8f/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y

Di Biase, B., & Kawaguchi, S. (2002). Exploring the typological plausibility of processability theory: Language development in Italian second language and Japanese second language. Second Language Research, 18, 274–302.

Dyson, B. (2009). Processability Theory and the role of morphology in English as a second language development: A longitudinal study. Second Language Research, 25(3), 355-376.

Dyson, B., M. (2016). Variation, individual differences and second language processing a processability theory study. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 6(4), 341–395.

Eguchi, A., & Sugiura, M. (2015) Applicability of processability theory to Japanese adolescent EFL learners: A case study of early L2 syntactic and morphological development. System, 52, 115-126.

Fenson, L., Marchman, V. A., Thal, D. J., Dale, P. S., Reznick, J. S., & Bates, E. (2007). MacArthur-Bates communicative development inventories: Users guide and technical manual. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

Fetter, R. (1996). A Test of Pienemann and Johnston’s Tentative Developmental Stages in ESL Development. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED391374.

Gao, X. D. (2005). Noun phrase morphemes and topic development in L2 mandarin Chinese: A processability perspective (Doctoral Dissertation). Victoria University of Wellington, USA. Retrieved from https://www.schweitzer-online.de/buch/Gao/NOUN-PHRASE-ORPHEMES-TOPIC-DEVELOPMENT-L2-MANDARIN-CHINESE/9783838319605/A19117432/

Glahn, E., Hakansson, G., Hammarberg, B., Holmen, A., Hvenekilde, A., `& Lund, K. (2001). Processability in Scandinavian second language acquisition, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 389-416.

Hakansson, G., Pienemann, M., & Sayehli, S. (2002). Transfer and typological proximity in the context of second language processing. Second Language Research, 18(3), 250-273.

Iwasaki, J. (2003). The acquisition of verbal morpho-syntax in JSL by a child learner. Proceeding of 13th Biennial Conference of the JSAA, Brisbane, July 2-4.

Itani-Adams, Y. (2003).From word to phrase in Japanese-English bilingual first language acquisition. Proceeding of The MARCS seminar, 15th September at University of Western Sydney.

Jansen, L. (2008). Acquisition of German word order in tutored learners: A cross-sectional study in a wider theoretical context. Language Learning, 58(1), 185-231.

Kawaguchi, S. (2000). Acquisition of Japanese verbal morphology: Applying processability theory to Japanese. Studia Linguistica, 54(2), 238–248.

Kawaguchi, S. (2005a). Argument structure and syntactic development in Japanese as a second language. In M., Pienemann (Ed.), Cross-linguistic aspects of Processability Theory (pp. 253-298). Benjamins: Amsterdam, New York.

Kawaguchi, S. (2005b). L1 transfer in Japanese L2 in learners of typologically distant languages. The Proceedings of CAESS Research Conference 2005, October 7th - 9that the University of Western Sydney.

Kempen, G., & Hoenkamp, E. (1987).An incremental procedural grammar for sentence formulation. Cognitive Science, 11, 201-258.

Khansir, A. A., & Zaab, M. (2015). The impact of process ability theory on the speaking abilities of Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research6(2), 343-349.

Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking from intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Mackey, A. (1995). Stepping up the Pace: Input, interaction and interlanguage development: An empirical study of questions in ESL (Doctoral dissertation). University of Sydney, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.worldcat.org/title/stepping-up-the-pace-input-interaction-and-interlanguage-development-an-empirical-study-of-questions-in-esl/oclc/50571729

Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 557-587.

Mahdavi, P. (2007). Passionate uprisings: Young people, sexuality and politics in post‐revolutionary Iran. Culture, health & sexuality9(5), 445-457.

Mansouri, F. (1997). From emergence to acquisition: Developmental issues in Arabic interlanguage morphology. The Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 20 (1), 83-104.

Mansouri, F. (2002). Exploring the interface between syntax and morphology in second language development. In B. Di Biase (Ed.) Developing a second language: Acquisition, processing and pedagogy of Arabic, Chinese, English, Italian, Japanese, Swedish (pp. 59-72). Melbourne: Language Australia.

Nishitani, A. (2012). A hierarchy of grammatical difficulty for Japanese EFL learners: Multiple-Choice items and processability theory (Doctoral dissertation). Temple University, Philadelphia, USA. Retrieved from http://digital.library.temple.edu/cdm/ref/collection/p245801coll10/id/176422

Ozdemir, B. (2004).Language development in Turkish-German bilingual children

and the implications for English as a third language (Master’s thesis). University of Paderborn, Germany.

Pienemann, M. (1998a). Developmental dynamics in L1 and L2 acquisition: Processability theory and generative entrenchment. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 1-20.

Pienemann, M. (1998b). Language processing and second language development: Processability theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Pienemann, M. (1998c). A focus on processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 36-38.

Pienemann, M. (Ed.) (2005). Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Pienemann, M. (2015). An outline of processability theory and its relationship to other approaches to SLA. Language Learning, 65(1), 123–151.

Pienemann, M., & Hakansson, G. (1999). A unified approach towards the developmental of Swedish as L2: A processability account. SSLA, 21, 383-420.

Pienemann, M., & Hakansson, G. (2007). Full transfer vs. developmentally moderated transfer: A reply to Bohnacker. Second Language Research, 23, 485-493.

Pienemann, M., & Johnston, 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 Centre.

Pienemann, M., Johnston, M., & Brindley, G. (1988). Constructing an acquisition-based procedure for second language assessment. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 10 (2), 217–243.

Reid, J., M. (1995). Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom. New York: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Senecal, A. (2011).Processing the L2 comprehension process: Testing process ability theory’s predictions in an ERP study of adult learners of L2 Swedish (Master’s thesis). Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University. Retrieved from https://www.lunduniversity.lu.se/lup/publication/2439371

Silva, M. L. (2002). Syntax Development: The Relevance of Realistic Methods. Aportesmetodológicos, Interdisciplinaria, 27 (2), 277-296.

Simonsen, H. G., Kristoffersen, K. E., Bleses, D., Wehberg, S., & Jørgensen, R. N. (2014). The Norwegian communicative development inventories: Reliability, main developmental trends and gender differences. First Language34(1), 3-23.

Spinner, P. (2013). Language production and reception: A processability theory study. Language Learning, 63, 704–39.

Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, Ma. & London: Harvard University Press.

Taylor, R. (2004). Developmental hierarchy for L2 Spanish: A PT perspective. Paper presented at the Fourth International Symposium on Processability, Second Language Acquisition and Bilingualism, University of Sassari, April.

Wang, X. (2011). Grammatical development among Chinese L2 learners: From a processability account (Doctoral dissertation). Newcastle University, United Kingdom). Retrieved from

Yamaguchi, Y. (2013). Child second language learning: A study of English as a second language acquisition. Sydney: Lambert.

Zhang, Y. Y. (2001).Second language acquisition of Chinese grammatical morphemes: A processability perspective (Doctoral dissertation). Australian National University, Australia. Retrieved from https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/handle/1885/9804

Zhang, Y. Y. (2008). Adverb-placement and wh-questions in the L2 Chinese of English speakers: Is transfer a structural property or a processing constraint?. In J. Kessler (Ed.), Processability approaches to second language development and second language learning (pp.215-247). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.