Volume 07 Issue 08 August 2024
Messouab Imad
Hassan II Institute of Agronomy and Veterinary Medicine, Rabat, Morocco
DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v7-i08-01Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT
This Arabic as a Foreign Language (AFL) is considered a parsimonious field in applied linguistics. Therefore, this article tries to highlight how language transfer influences American students in their Arabic learning process. Additionally, this work attempts to explore whether Arabic foreign learners rely on their pre-existing knowledge to learn Arabic and determine the role of transfer regarding language universals. The study employs a quantitative methodology based on a Grammaticality Judgment Task (GJT) to achieve its objective. According to the study's results, L2 Arabic learners initially transfer their L1 setting to L2. In other words, Universal Grammar (UG) exists, but learners only have indirect access to it via their L1. By studying and investigating the influence of language transfer on learning outcomes, experts' and educators’ interventions can be tailored to more effectively assist foreign students in overcoming errors connected to their first language and improving their proficiency in learning Arabic language.
KEYWORDS:Arabic as a foreign language (AFL), Arabic SLA, language transfer, universal grammar (UG), errors.
REFERENCES1) Alamry, A. (2014). The acquisition of gender agreement in adult learners of Arabic (Doctoral dissertation). Carleton University, Canada.
2) Alhawary, M. T. (Ed.). (2018). Routledge handbook of Arabic second language acquisition. New York, Routledge.
3) Bond, K., Gabriele, A., Fiorentino, R., and Banon, J. A. (2011). Individual differences and the role of the L1 in L2 processing: An ERP investigation. Proceedings of the 11th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference GASLA, (17-29).
4) Clahsen, H., & Muysken, P. (1986). The availability of universal grammar to adult and child learners-a study of the acquisition of German word order. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin (Utrecht), 2(2), 93-119.
5) Clahsen, H. and U. Hong. (1995). Agreement and null subjects in German L2 development: New evidence from reaction-time experiments. Second Language Research (11), 57–87.
6) Epstein, S. D., Flynn, S., & Martohardjono, G. (1996). Second language acquisition: Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19 (4), 677-714.
7) Eubank, L. (1994). On the transfer of parametric values in L2 development. Language Acquisition, 3(3), 183-208
8) Eubank, L. (1996). Negation in early German-English interlanguage: More valueless features in the L2 initial state. Second Language Research, 12(1), 73-106.
9) Hakansson, G. (2001). Against full transfer-evidence from Swedish learners of German. Working papers-Lund University Department of Linguistics, 48(4),67-86.
10) Hawkins, R. and Y.H. C. Chan. (1997). The partial availability of Universal Grammar in second language acquisition:The failed functional features hypothesis. Second Language Research 13, 187–226.
11) Lakshmanan, U., & Selinker, L. (2001). Analyzing interlanguage: How do we know what learners know? Second Language Research, 17(4), 393-420.
12) Lee-Ellis, S. (2009). The development and validation of a Korean C-Test using Rasch analysis. Language Testing, 26(2), 245–274
13) Meisel, J. (1997). The acquisition of the syntax of negation in French and German: Contrasting first and second language acquisition. Second Language Research 13, 227–63.
14) Messouab, I. (2021). Language transfer: The case of Arabic as a foreign language. International Uni-Scientific Research Journal, 26-30. doai202107172139
15) Platzack, C. (1996). The initial hypothesis of syntax: A Minimalist perspective on language acquisition and attrition. In Clahsen. H, Generative perspectives on language acquisition (pp. 369-414). Essex University.John Benjamins Publishing Company.
16) Schachter, J. (1989). Testing a proposed universal. Linguistic Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition. 73–88. https://doi.org/10. 1017/cbo9781139524544.007
17) Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. (1994). Word order and nominative case in nonnative language acquisition: A longitudinal study of (L1 Turkish) German interlanguage. Language Acquisition Sudies in Generative Grammar, 31(4), 71-89.
18) Schwartz, B.D. & Sprouse, R. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12(1), 40–72.
19) Slabakova, R. (2000). L1 transfer revisited: The L2 acquisition of telicity marking in English by Spanish and Bulgarian native speakers. Linguistics, 38, 739-770.
20) Smith, N. V., & Tsimpli, I. M. (1995). The mind of a savant: Language learning and modularity. Blackwell Publishing.
21) Tsimpli, I. M., & Roussou, A. (1991). Parameter-resetting in L2. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 3, 149.
22) Vainikka, A., & Young-Scholten, M. (1994). Direct access to X’-theory: Evidence from Korean and Turkish adults learning German. Language Acquisition Studies in Generative Grammar, 31(4), 71-89.
23) Vainikka, A., & Young-Scholten, M. (1996). The early stages in adult L2 syntax: Additional evidence from Romance speakers. Second Language Research, 12(2), 140-176.
24) White, L. (1989). Universal grammar and second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
25) White, L. (2003). Second language acquisition and universal grammar. Cambridge University Press.
26) Winke, P., & Aquil, R. (2006). Issues in developing standardized tests of Arabic language proficiency. In K. Wahba, Z. Taha, & E. L (Eds.), Handbook for Arabic language teaching professionals in the 21st century (pp. 221–235). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc