##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

منوچهر جعفری گهر افسر روحی مجید قلیچی

چکیده

با الهام از یافته‌های مربوط به نقش عبارت‌ها در رشد زبانی٬ پژوهش حاضر تأثیر آموزش مقابله‌ای بازترکیب عبارت‌ها بر فراگیری ساختارهای دستوری منطبق با مراحل دستوری (نحوی) نظریة پردازش‌پذیری را مورد بررسی قرار داد. به تعبیر دقیق‌تر، هدف این پژوهش بررسی پیش‌بینی فرضیة تعلیم‌پذیری بود مبنی بر اینکه آموزش فقط زمانی مؤثر است که به یک مرحله بالاتر از سطح دانش فعلی زبان‌آموزان مربوط شود. برای این منظور، سه گروه از فراگیران زبان انگلیسی از بین گروه بزرگ‌تری از زبان‌آموزان انتخاب شدند. به یک گروه آموزش مقابله‌ای در رابطه با مفهوم و ساختار عبارت‌های زبان فارسی و انگلیسی داده شد، در حالی‌که گروه دوم همین آموزش را فقط به زبان انگلیسی دریافت کرد و گروه سوم به‌عنوان گروه مقایسه در نظر گرفته شد. نتایج این پژوهش نشان داد که آموزش مخصوصاً از نوع مقابله‌ای آن به‌طور معنی‌داری به فراگیری مراحل دستور زبان ارائه‌شده در نظریة پردازش‌پذیری در تولید شفاهی و نوشتاری کمک کرد و پیش‌بینی فرضیة تعلیم‌پذیری را نقض نمود. تفسیر نظری نتایج در قسمت بحث و بررسی پایانی ارائه می‌شود.

جزئیات مقاله

مراجع
Al Shatter, G. (2011). Processability approach to Arabic L2 teaching and syllabus design. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 34(2), 127–147.
Arnon, I. (2010). Starting big: The role of multi-word phrases in language
as a second language. In M. Pienemann (Ed.), Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory (pp. 253–298). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Available at http://purl.stanford.edu/zs652gt8462
Bannard, C., & Matthews, D. (2008). Stored word sequences in language
Bod, R. (2009). From exemplar to grammar: A probabilistic analogy-based model
Brandt, S., Verhagen, A., Lieven E., & Tomasello, M. (2009). Development of
Bresnan, J. (1982). The mental representation of grammatical relations.
Cambridge: MIT Press.
Carrie, B. (2012). Testing processability theory in L2 Spanish: Can readiness or
Chinese grammatical morphemes. In M. Pienemann (Ed.), Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory (pp. 155–177). Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton.
Combinations. Psychological Science, 19(3), 241–248.
Conference. National Technical University of Athens, Athens. Retrieved from CSLI Publications http://csli-publications.stanford.edu/.
Cook, V. J., & Newson, M. (2007). Chomsky’s Universal Grammar. Blackwell.
Cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics, 27(2), 164–194.
Development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(4), 56–163.
Developmental readiness in second language acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 83(1), 1–22.
Di Biase, B. (2007). A processability approach to the acquisition of Italian as a
Doman, E. (2012). Further evidence for the developmental stages of language
Doughty, C., & Williams, J (Eds.) (1998). Focus on form in classroom second
Ellis, N. (2005). At the interface: dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit
Ellis, N. (2006). Selective attention and transfer phenomena in SLA: contingency,
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford
Empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 557–587.
Farley, A., & McCollam, K. (2004). Learner readiness and L2 production in
Form-meaning mappings in explicit form-focused instruction. In A. Housen & M. Pierrard (Eds.), Investigations in instructed second language acquisition (pp. 199–234). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
French’ learners of English. Language Awareness, 5, 188–195.
From memorized language as a gauge of native-like competence. In F. Meunier & S. Granger (Eds.), Phraseology in language learning and teaching (pp. 123–148). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hypotheses. Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 52–79.
Kawaguchi, S. (2005). Argument structure and syntactic development in Japanese
Kawaguchi, S., & Di Biase, B. (2012). Acquiring procedural skills in L2:
Knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 305–352.
Krashen, S. (1993). The effect of grammar teaching: still peripheral. TESOL
Kupferberg, I., & Olshtain, E. (1996). Explicit contrastive instruction facilitates
Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Languages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 6(2), 186–214.
Learning and processability. US-China Education Review A, 2(9), 813–825.
Learning and use (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Stanford University,
Learning: The effect of familiarity on children's repetition of four-word
Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction and second language development: An
Mandel, D. R., Jusczyk, P. W., & Kemler-Nelson, D. G. (1994). Does sentential
Mansouri, F., & Duffy, L. (2005). The pedagogic effectiveness of developmental
Markedness predict development? (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of Pittsburgh.
Of language learning. Cognitive Science, 33(5), 752–793.
Peters, A. M. (1983). The units of language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge
Pienemann (Ed.), Crosslinguistic aspects of processability theory (pp. 1–60). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Pienemann, M. (1984). Psychological constraints on the teachability of
Pienemann, M. (1989). Is language teachable? Psycholinguistic experiments and
Pienemann, M. (1998). Language processing and second language development:
Pienemann, M. (2005). An introduction to processability theory. In M.
Processability theory and skill acquisition. Studies in Language Sciences, 11, 68–96.
Processability theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Prosody help infants to organize and remember speech information? Cognition, 53(2), 155–180.
Quarterly, 27, 717-725.
Readiness in ESL grammar instruction. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 28(1), 81–99.
Second language: Theory and applications (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), The Australian National University.
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (1999). Instruction, first language influence and
Spada, N., Lightbown, P. M., & White, J. (2006). The importance of
Spanish: Processability theory on trial. Estudios de Linguistica Aplicada, 40, 47–l69.
Syntactic productivity across constructions and items. Talk given at the 33rd Stanford Child Language Research Forum, Berkeley, July 10–12.
The acquisition of difficult L2 forms. Language Awareness, 5, 149 –165.
Thomann, J. (2002). LFG as a pedagogical grammar. Proceedings of the LFG 02
Tomasello, M. (2000). The item based nature of children's early syntactic
Trevise, A. (1996). Contrastive meta-linguistic representations: The case of ‘very
University Press.
University Press.
Wray, A., & Fitzpatrick, T. (2008). Why can’t you just leave it alone? Deviations
Zhang, Y. (2005). Processing and formal Instruction in the L2 acquisition of five
ارجاع به مقاله
جعفری گهرم., روحیا., & قلیچیم. (۱۳۹۶-۰۳-۱۶). تأثیر آموزش مقابله‌ای باز ترکیب عبارت‌ها بر صحت دستوری: از منظر فرضیه تعلیم‌پذیری. مطالعات زبان و ترجمه, 49(4), 77-98. https://doi.org/10.22067/lts.v49i4.52078
نوع مقاله
مقالات علمی پژوهشی