Use of plural in spoken English in an EFL context

Year 2017, , 139 - 153, 25.09.2017

Yusuf Şen Mesut Kuleli

https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.460981

Cited By: 1

Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine students’ use of plural in speaking in an EFL context. To this end,
48 students’ speaking exams, which were recorded during the oral exams in 2014-2015 academic year,
were transcribed by the researchers and the students’ use of plural was analyzed. It is important to note
that not all the input was obtained from only one exam, but rather a progressive use of plural in English
was analyzed with the data obtained from three different exams. As a result of the analysis, it was found
that while students can use the plural appropriately with high-frequency words, they were found to use
the singular form of an item in contexts where the plural form would be more appropriate. Considering
the issue from a progressive perspective, it was found that this tendency did not persist in the long-run.
While students from the ELT department were found to use plural appropriately, early level students
were found to use plural “s” inappropriately. It was concluded that students’ L1 (Turkish) and
overgeneralization of rules in L2 might interfere with their use of plural in the early level, but the effect
of L1 diminishes in the upper levels. 

Keywords

Spoken English, plural in English, EFL context, L1 interference

References

• Aijmer, K., & Altenberg, B. (2014). English corpus linguistics. New York: Routledge.
• Bailey, N., Madden, C., & Krashen, S. D. (1974). Is there a “natural sequence” in adult second language learning?. Language learning, 24(2), 235-243.
• Başöz, T., & Aydın, S. (2011). An analysis of the grammatical mistakes made by advanced EFL writers. E-Journal of New World Sciences Academy, 6(2), 296-306.
• Berko, J. (1958). The child's learning of English morphology. Word, 14(2-3), 150-177.
• Bhela, B. (1999). Native language interference in learning a second language: Exploratory case studies of native language interference with target language usage. International Education Journal, 1(1), 22-31.
• Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Leech, G. (2002). Longman student grammar of spoken and written English. Essex: Pearson.
• Brown, R. (1973). A first language: the early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• De Villiers, J. G., & De Villiers, P. A. (1973). A cross-sectional study of the acquisition of grammatical morphemes in child speech. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2(3), 267- 278.
• DeCapua, A. (2008). Grammar for teachers: A guide to American English for native and Non- native speakers. New York: Springer Science & Business Media.
• Demir, T. (2006). Türk dilbilgisi. Ankara: Kurmay.
• Eker, S. (2003). Çağdaş Türk dili. Ankara: Grafiker.
• Ellis, R. (1997). SLA research and language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Housen, A., & Kuiken, F. (2009). Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30, 461-473.
• Jia, G. (2003). The acquisition of the English plural morpheme by native Mandarin Chinese- speaking children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46(6), 1297-1311.
• Jing, L., Tindall, E., & Nisbet, D. (2006). Chinese learners and English plural forms. Linguistics, 1, 127-147.
• Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures; applied linguistics for language teachers. With a foreword by Charles C. Fries. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan press.
• Luk, Z. P. S., & Shirai, Y. (2009). Is the acquisition order of grammatical morphemes impervious to L1 knowledge? Evidence from the acquisition of plural‐s, articles, and possessive’s. Language Learning, 59(4), 721-754.
• Marcus, G.F. (1995). The acquisition of the English past tense in children and multilayered connectionist networks. Cognition, 56(3), 271-279.
• Mauranen, A. (2012). Exploring ELF: Academic English shaped by non-native speakers. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Nemati, M., & Taghizade, M. (2006). Exploring similarities and differences between L1 and L2. IRJABS, 4(9), 2477-2483.
• Palermo, D.S., & Eberhart, V.L. (1968). On the learning of morphological rules: An experimental analogy. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 7(2), 337-344.
• Pallotti, G. (2010). Doing interlanguage analysis in school contexts. In I. Bartning, M. Martin, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Communicative proficiency and linguistic development: Intersections between SLA and language testing research, (pp.159-190). Essex: Eurosla.
• Peyman, H. (2014). Iranian EFL learners’ problems in using English singular and plural nouns. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 6(2), 224-244.
• Scott, M. S., & Tucker, G. R. (1974). Error analysis and English‐Language strategies of Arab students. Language learning, 24(1), 69-97.
• Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10(1-4), 209-232.
• Su Feng, L. (2012). The acquisition of plurals in English writings by Hong Kong students. (Unpublished master’s thesis). The University of Edinburg, Edinburg, England.
• Swan, M. (1995). Practical English usage. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Tarone, E. (2012). Interlanguage. The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. 747-752.
• Taylor, B. P. (1975). The use of overgeneralization and transfer learning strategies by elementary and intermediate students of ESL. Language learning, 25(1), 73-107.
• Ting, S. H., Mahadhir, M., & Chang, S. L. (2010). Grammatical errors in spoken English of university students in oral communication course. GEMA: Online Journal of Language Studies, 10(1), 53-70.