Turkish tertiary level EFL learners’ recognition of relative clauses

Abstract

This research study investigated Turkish Tertiary Level EFL learners’ recognition level of relative clauses. The study also examined the difficulty level of types of relative clause constructions for Turkish EFL learners and the effect of instruction on the learners’ acquisition of English relative clauses. The data were gathered from two different tests (a pre-test and a post-test) given to 30 philology students studying at the Preparatory School at Hacettepe University. The data obtained from the pretest indicated that the participants needed remedial teaching; therefore, relative clauses were taught to students through six-hour form-focused class instruction. Two weeks later, the post-test was administered to the participants to assess the effectiveness of instruction on students’ identification level of relative clauses. The data collected from the tests were analyzed quantitatively using SPSS. Findings showed that although most of the participants are good at identifying relative clauses, it is noteworthy that their recognition level of relative clauses changed significantly according to the various types of relative clause constructions. In addition, the results showed that the explicit instruction facilitated the acquisition of relative clauses to a great extent. Results of this study may provide English instructors and EFL curriculum designers with relevant information about teaching and learning of English relativization, and emphasizes the necessity of form-focused instruction.

Keywords

• relative clause structures
• Turkish tertiary level EFL learners,
• instruction, form-focused instruction; remedial teaching

References

1. Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher's course (2nd ed.). Singapore: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
2. Chang, Y. (2004). Second language relative clause acquisition: An examination of cross-linguistic influences. National Chung Hsing University.
3. Cheng,Y. (2007). The Effects of Two Teaching Methodologies on the Hierarchyof Difficultyof Restrictive Relative Clauses among Taiwanese Tenth Graders. Linguistics Journal, 3(3), 72-105).
4. Chen, H. C. (2004). Asymmetrical performances of English null subjects and null objects for Chinese college students. Selected Papers from the Thirteenth International Symposium on English Teaching, 138-148.
5. Chiang, T. (1980). Error analysis: A study of errors made in written English by Chinese learners (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
6. Chou, Y. (2006). Acquisition of English relative clauses by Taiwanese EFL college students. MA thesis, National Sun Yet-Sen University.
7. Demirezen, M. (1993). From sentence to paragraph structure. Ankara, Turkey: Adım Publishing.
8. Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

9. Eckman, F., Bell, L., & Nelson, D. (1988). On the generalization of relative clause instruction in the acquisition of English as a second language. Applied Linguistics, 9, 1-20.
10. Erdogan, A. (2005). Use of English relative clauses by Turkish learners: A study of errors. Retrieved January 18, 2009, from http://sunzil.lib.hku/hkjo/view/10/100022.pdf .
11. Flanigan, B. O. (1995). Anaphora and relativization in child second language acquisition. SSLA, 17,331-351.
12. Gass, S. (1979). Language transfer and universal grammatical relations. Language Learning, 29(2), 327-344.
13. Gass, S. (1978). An investigation of syntactic transfer in adult second language learners. In
14. R. C. Scarcella & S. D. Krashen (Eds.), Research in second language acquisition (pp. 132-141). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
15. Gass, S. (1980). An investigation of syntactic transfer in adult second language learners. In R. Scarcella & S. Krashen (Eds.), Research in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
16. Gass, S.M., & Selinker, L. (2001). Second Language Acquisition: An Introductory Course. New Jersey: LawrenceErlbaum Associates.
17. Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition: An introductory course. New York: Taylor & Francis.
18. Hamilton, R. (1994). Is implicational generalization unidirectional and maximal? Evidence
19. from relativization instruction in a second language. Language Learning, 44, 123-157.
20. Han, ZhaoHong. (2004). Fossilization in Adult Second Language Acquisition: Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
21. Hawkins, R. (1989). Do second language learners acquire restrictive relative clauses on thebasis of relational or configurational information? The acquisition of French subject, direct object and genitive restrictive relative clauses by second language learners. Second Language Research, 5, 156-188.
22. Izumi, S. (2003). Processing difficulty in comprehension and production of relative clauses by learners of English as a second language. Language Learning, 53(2), 285-323.
23. Keenan, E. & Comrie, B. (1977). Noun phrase accessibility hierarchy and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 63-99.
24. Krashen, S., & Seliger, H. (1975). The essential contributions of formal instruction in adult second language learning. TESOL Quarterly 9, 173-83
25. Kuno, S. (1974). The position of relative clauses and conjunctions. Linguistic Inquiry, 5, 117-136.
26. Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across culture. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
27. Li, J. (1996). Underproduction does not necessarily mean avoidance:Investigation of underproduction using in Chinese ESL learners. In L.F. Bouton (Ed.). Pragmatics and language learning: Monograph series, 7, 171-187. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
28. Long, M.(1983). Does second language instruction make a difference? A review of the the research. TESOL QUARTERLY 17, 357-82.
29. Maniruzzaman, M. (2008). Avoidance behaviour in EFL Learning: A study of undergraduates. Retrieved May 9, 2009, from www. Articlebase.com.
30. O’Grady, W. (1999). Toward a new nativism. SSLA, 21, 621-633.
31. Pavesi, M. (1986). Markedness, discoursal modes and relative clause formation in a formal and an informal context. SSLA, 8, 38-55.
32. Phoocharoensil,S. (2010). Language Universals and Learning Strategies in L2 Relative Clause Acquisition. The International Journal of Learning,17( 2), 95-107.
33. Roberts, K.W. (2009). The Azar-Hagen grammar series. The bank for understanding and using English grammar (4th ed.). England: Pearson Education Limited
34. Rokni, A., & Rahmani, Z. (2012). An Investigation of the Learnability of Relative Clauses by EFLLearners. World Journal of English Language, 2(3), 29-37 Schachter, J. (1974). An error in error analysis. Language Learning, 24, 205- 214.
35. Selinker, L. (1992). Rediscovering interlanguage. London: Longman.
36. Schumann, J. (1980). The acquisition of English relative clauses by second language
37. learners. In R. C. Scarcella & S. D. Krashen (Eds.), Research in second language acquisition (pp. 118-131). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
38. Swan, M. (2005). Practical English usage (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press
39. Swan,M.,&Walter, C. (2011). Oxford English grammar course advanced. Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.
40. Thomson, A.J. & Martinet, A.V.(2009). A practical English Grammar. Exercise 2(3rd ed.). Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.
41. Xiaoling, J., & Mengduo,O. (2010). Interlingual Factors in Chinese College Students’Acquisition of English relative clauses. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistis, 33(1), 110-126.
42. Zhao, R. (1989). A discourse analysis of relative clauses in Chinese and English: An error in ‘An error in error analysis’. IDEAL, 6, 105-17.