The Effect of L1 Persian on the Acquisition of English L2 Orthographic System on the Shared Grounds

Document Type: Research Paper

Authors

1 Yazd University

2 Yazd University

Abstract

This paper elaborates on Persian and English orthographic shared aspects to study the effects of L1 Persian on learning English as a foreign language. While there are some examples of letter and sound mismatches in the orthographic system of both languages, those of English are more complex than Persian. In order to see the effect of the mismatch between orthography and transcription, 40 Persian EFL learners were divided into two proficiency groups i.e., advanced and elementary, and their performance was examined on comprehension and production tasks. The learners’ production skills were checked via a list of 76 pseudo words requiring the learners to read them while their voices were recorded. After one week time interval, a comprehension test consisted of 34 items was administered, requiring the learners to listen and choose among the orthographic forms presented to them. It was hypothesized that being educated in L1 Persian comprising semi-opaque orthography system, the learners would tackle the English opaque graphemes better on the mismatches. However, it was observed that both elementary and advanced groups had difficulty learning English orthography system, showing almost no positive effect from L1. Only in rare cases more proficient learners performed better due to more schooling education in English. 

Keywords

References

Crystal, D. (1985). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, (2nd ed.), updated. Oxford: Blackwell.

Cossu, G., Shankweiler, D., Liberman, I. Y., Tola, G., & Katz, L., (1988). Awarness of phonological segments and reading ability in Italian children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 9, 1_16.

Frost, R. (1994). Prelexical and postlexical strategies in reading: Evidence from a deep and a shallow orthography. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 1-16.

Goswami, U., Gombert, J., & Barrera, L. F. (1998). Children’s orthographic representations and linguistic transparency: Nonsense word reading in English, French, and Spanish. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 19-52.

Handschuh, J. & Alma Simounet de Geigel. (1995). Improving oral   communication. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.

Katz, L., & Frost, R. (1992). Reading in different orthographies: The orthographic depth hypothesis. In R. Frost & L. Katz (Eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology, and meaning (pp. 67-84). Advances in psychology, Elsevier, North-Holland.

Ladefoged, P. (1971). Preliminaries to linguistic phonetics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Ladefoged, P. (1975). A Course in phonetics. New York: Harcourt Brace        Jovanovich.

Roach, P. (Ed) (1992). Computing in linguistics and phonology, Academic Press.

Roach, P. (1992). Introducing phonetics, Penguin.

Roca, I. (1994). Generative phonology. London: Routledge.

Roca, I. and Wyn Johnson. (1999). A Course in Phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.

Wang, M., & Geva, E. (2003). Spelling performance of Chinese children using English as a second language: Lexical and visual-orthographic processes. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 1-25.

Wimmer, H., Mayringer, H., & Landerl, K., (2000). The double-deficit hypothesis and difficulties in learning to read a regular orthography. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92 (4), 668-680.

Yarmohammadi, L. (1985) Daramadi bar avashenasi. Tehran: Markaz Nashr Daneshgahi.

 

منابع فارسی

حق شناس، علی محمد. (1356). آواشناسی. تهران: انتشارات آگاه.

ثمره، یدالله .(1364). آواشناسی فارسی: آواها و ساخت آوایی هجا. تهران: مرکز نشر دانشگاهی.

وحید یان کامیار، تقی. (1379). نوای گفتار در زبان فارسی. مشهد: انتشارات دانشگاه فردوسی.

Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies

Volume 6, Issue 1
Winter 2014
Pages 35-58

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics