Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite
Year 2018, Volume: 14 Issue: 4, 301 - 315, 15.12.2018

Abstract

References

  • Abrams, M. and Harpham, G. (2005). A Glossary of Literary Terms. Boston, MA: Thomson, Wadsworth.
  • Al Ghazali, F. (2006). First Language Acquisition Vs. Second Language Learning: What Is the Difference?
  • Birmingham: The University of Birmingham.
  • Allwright, R. (1987) ‘Concluding comments on second language acquisition in context’: in Ellis, R. (ed.) Second
  • Language Acquisition in context. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, Prentice Hall. (P. 209-212).
  • Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3:
  • -101.
  • Charmaz, C. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. London:
  • Sage.
  • Chomsky, N. (1981) Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
  • Crooks D. L. (2001). The importance of symbolic interaction in grounded theory research on women’s health.
  • Health Care for Women International, 22, 11-27.
  • Dale, P., Harlaar, N., Haworth, C., and Plomin, R. (2010). Two by Two: A Twin Study of Second-Language
  • Acquisition. Psychological Science, 21/5, 635-640.
  • Dey, I. (1999). Grounding grounded theory: Guidelines for qualitative inquiry. San Diego: Academic Press.
  • Donato, R. and Mccormick, D. (194). A sociocultural perspective on language learning strategies: The role of
  • Mediation. The Modern Language Journal. 78/iv, 453-464.
  • Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and Researching Motivation. Harlow: Longman.
  • Ehrman, M. E. (1996) Understanding Second Language Learning Difficulties. California: SAGE Publications.
  • Ellis, R. (1997) Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: OUP.
  • Gardner, R. C., Tremblay, P. F., and Masgoret, A.-M. (1997). Towards a full model of second language learning:
  • an empirical investigation. Modern Language Journal. 81, 344-62.
  • Gass, S. (2002). An interactionist perspective on second language acquisition. In R. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford
  • handbook of Applied Linguistics, (pp. 170-181). Oxford: OUP.
  • Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research.
  • New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
  • Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). Language-based learning disabilities. In P. Robinson (ed.), Individual Differences and
  • Instructed Language Learning. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 95-113.
  • Halliday, M. A. K. (1986) Learning how to mean: Explorations in the development of language. London,
  • Edward Arnold.
  • Ingram, D. (1989) First Language Acquisition: Method, Description and Explanation. Cambridge: CUP.
  • Jones, M. and Alony, I. (2011). Guiding the use of grounded theory in doctoral studies: An example from the
  • Australian film industry. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, V. (6), 95-114.
  • Krashen, S. D. (1985) The Input Hypothesis. London, Longman.
  • Lemetyinen, H. (2012). Language Acquisition. Retrieved on March 18th, 2017 from
  • www.simplypsychology.org/language.html
  • Lightbown, P. M. and Spada, N. (2001) ‘Factors affecting second language learning’: In Candlin, C. N. and
  • Mercer, N. (eds.) English language teaching in its social context. London, Routledge.
  • Miyake, A. and Friedman, D. (1998). Individual differences in second language proficiency: working memory as
  • language aptitude. In A. Healy and L. Bourne (eds), Foreign Language Learning: Psycholinguistic Studies on Training and Retention. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Oxford, R. L. (1999) ‘Anxiety and the language learner: new insights’: In Arnold, J. (ed.), Affect in Language
  • Learning. Cambridge, CUP. (P. 58-67).
  • Ozfidan, B., Machtmes, K., and Demir, H. (2014). Socio-cultural factors in second language learning: A case
  • study of adventurous adult language learners. European Journal of Educational Research. 3/4, 185-191.
  • Paradis, J. (2011). Individual differences in child English second language acquisition. Linguistic Approaches to
  • Bilingualism (1/3), 213-237.
  • Rathold, N. (2012). Social factors in second language acquisition. Retrieved on 19/03/2017 From
  • https://omjaeducation.wordpress.com/2012/02/20/social-factors-in-second-language-acquisition/
  • Rowley, J. (2002). Using case studies in research. Management Research News. V/25, 16-27
  • Sawyer, M. and Ranta, L. (2001). Aptitude, individual differences, and instructional design. In P. Robinson (ed.),
  • Cognition and Second Language Acquisition. New York: CUP, 319-53.
  • Skehan, P. (1991). Individual differences in second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition.
  • , 275-98.
  • Skinner, B.F. (1957). Verbal Behaviour. Acton, MA: Copley Publishing Group.
  • Stevens, G. and Ishizawa, H. (2007). Variation among Siblings in the Use of a Non-English Language. Journal
  • of Family Issues. 28/8, 1008-1025.
  • Swain, M. (1985). Communicative Competence: Some Roles of Comprehensible Input and Comprehensible
  • Output in its Development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House
  • Van Dijk, A. (2006). Ideology and discourse analysis. Journal of Political Ideologies, 11/2, 115-140.
  • Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Massachusetts:
  • Harvard University Press.
  • Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Understanding the linguistic variation in English as a lingua franca among Arab siblings

Year 2018, Volume: 14 Issue: 4, 301 - 315, 15.12.2018

Abstract






















































Please fill up the following information accurately. (Please
use Times New Roman, 12 pt.


Understanding the linguistic variation in English as a lingua franca among Arab siblings



This study investigated the various linguistic, psychological, and sociocultural variables that explain the variation in English as a Lingua Franca among Arab siblings. The variables are not predetermined but extracted from the participants’ contributions and data in a grounded theory research. The siblings participated in this study (N=15) are university undergraduates, who are educated in the UAE schools. Results showed that the existence of the Language Acquisition Device (LAD) is not evidence that siblings progress in language acquisition at the same rate. The discourse analysis showed noticeable variation between siblings in the same and/or other groups. Sibling pairs proved to have variation in their linguistic levels exhibiting dissimilar levels of accuracy, fluency, L1 interference, spontaneity, and automaticity of speech. Some of these siblings have equal opportunities for improving their English; however, the analysis showed other affective variables influencing the development of language skills among them. The thematic analysis signalled three variables namely exposure to quality input and interaction opportunities, provision of quality education, and autonomy and independent activities. Eight of the fifteen participants attributed their deficiency in English to the inefficiency of the education system that did not facilitate sufficient exposure to linguistic input. Autonomy and independence proved to be effectual in creating the variation among siblings as well. This study sheds light on the significance of contextual factors in influencing proficiency levels among EFL learners in the UAE. The implications and recommendations of research findings are discussed.



Information about Author(s)*



Author 1



Author
(Last name, First name)



 Al Ghazali, Fawzi

Affiliated
institution (University)



 ALHOSN University

Country



 United Arab Emirates

Email
address



 fawzi_alghazali@yahoo.com

Department
& Rank



 Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences

Corresponding author (Yes/No)


Write only one corresponding author.



 Yes



Author 2



Author
(Last name, First name)



 



Affiliated
institution (University)



 



Country



 



Email
address



 



Department
& Rank



 



Corresponding
author (Yes/No)



 



Author 3



Author
(Last name, First name)



 



Affiliated
institution (University)



 



Country



 



Email
address



 



Department
& Rank



 



Corresponding
author (Yes/No)



 



Author 4



Author
(Last name, First name)



 



Affiliated
institution (University)



 



Country



 



Email
address



 



Department
& Rank



 



Corresponding
author (Yes/No)



 



 


References

  • Abrams, M. and Harpham, G. (2005). A Glossary of Literary Terms. Boston, MA: Thomson, Wadsworth.
  • Al Ghazali, F. (2006). First Language Acquisition Vs. Second Language Learning: What Is the Difference?
  • Birmingham: The University of Birmingham.
  • Allwright, R. (1987) ‘Concluding comments on second language acquisition in context’: in Ellis, R. (ed.) Second
  • Language Acquisition in context. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, Prentice Hall. (P. 209-212).
  • Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3:
  • -101.
  • Charmaz, C. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. London:
  • Sage.
  • Chomsky, N. (1981) Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
  • Crooks D. L. (2001). The importance of symbolic interaction in grounded theory research on women’s health.
  • Health Care for Women International, 22, 11-27.
  • Dale, P., Harlaar, N., Haworth, C., and Plomin, R. (2010). Two by Two: A Twin Study of Second-Language
  • Acquisition. Psychological Science, 21/5, 635-640.
  • Dey, I. (1999). Grounding grounded theory: Guidelines for qualitative inquiry. San Diego: Academic Press.
  • Donato, R. and Mccormick, D. (194). A sociocultural perspective on language learning strategies: The role of
  • Mediation. The Modern Language Journal. 78/iv, 453-464.
  • Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and Researching Motivation. Harlow: Longman.
  • Ehrman, M. E. (1996) Understanding Second Language Learning Difficulties. California: SAGE Publications.
  • Ellis, R. (1997) Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: OUP.
  • Gardner, R. C., Tremblay, P. F., and Masgoret, A.-M. (1997). Towards a full model of second language learning:
  • an empirical investigation. Modern Language Journal. 81, 344-62.
  • Gass, S. (2002). An interactionist perspective on second language acquisition. In R. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford
  • handbook of Applied Linguistics, (pp. 170-181). Oxford: OUP.
  • Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research.
  • New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
  • Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). Language-based learning disabilities. In P. Robinson (ed.), Individual Differences and
  • Instructed Language Learning. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 95-113.
  • Halliday, M. A. K. (1986) Learning how to mean: Explorations in the development of language. London,
  • Edward Arnold.
  • Ingram, D. (1989) First Language Acquisition: Method, Description and Explanation. Cambridge: CUP.
  • Jones, M. and Alony, I. (2011). Guiding the use of grounded theory in doctoral studies: An example from the
  • Australian film industry. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, V. (6), 95-114.
  • Krashen, S. D. (1985) The Input Hypothesis. London, Longman.
  • Lemetyinen, H. (2012). Language Acquisition. Retrieved on March 18th, 2017 from
  • www.simplypsychology.org/language.html
  • Lightbown, P. M. and Spada, N. (2001) ‘Factors affecting second language learning’: In Candlin, C. N. and
  • Mercer, N. (eds.) English language teaching in its social context. London, Routledge.
  • Miyake, A. and Friedman, D. (1998). Individual differences in second language proficiency: working memory as
  • language aptitude. In A. Healy and L. Bourne (eds), Foreign Language Learning: Psycholinguistic Studies on Training and Retention. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Oxford, R. L. (1999) ‘Anxiety and the language learner: new insights’: In Arnold, J. (ed.), Affect in Language
  • Learning. Cambridge, CUP. (P. 58-67).
  • Ozfidan, B., Machtmes, K., and Demir, H. (2014). Socio-cultural factors in second language learning: A case
  • study of adventurous adult language learners. European Journal of Educational Research. 3/4, 185-191.
  • Paradis, J. (2011). Individual differences in child English second language acquisition. Linguistic Approaches to
  • Bilingualism (1/3), 213-237.
  • Rathold, N. (2012). Social factors in second language acquisition. Retrieved on 19/03/2017 From
  • https://omjaeducation.wordpress.com/2012/02/20/social-factors-in-second-language-acquisition/
  • Rowley, J. (2002). Using case studies in research. Management Research News. V/25, 16-27
  • Sawyer, M. and Ranta, L. (2001). Aptitude, individual differences, and instructional design. In P. Robinson (ed.),
  • Cognition and Second Language Acquisition. New York: CUP, 319-53.
  • Skehan, P. (1991). Individual differences in second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition.
  • , 275-98.
  • Skinner, B.F. (1957). Verbal Behaviour. Acton, MA: Copley Publishing Group.
  • Stevens, G. and Ishizawa, H. (2007). Variation among Siblings in the Use of a Non-English Language. Journal
  • of Family Issues. 28/8, 1008-1025.
  • Swain, M. (1985). Communicative Competence: Some Roles of Comprehensible Input and Comprehensible
  • Output in its Development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House
  • Van Dijk, A. (2006). Ideology and discourse analysis. Journal of Political Ideologies, 11/2, 115-140.
  • Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Massachusetts:
  • Harvard University Press.
  • Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
There are 62 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Fawzi Al Ghazali This is me

Publication Date December 15, 2018
Published in Issue Year 2018 Volume: 14 Issue: 4

Cite

APA Al Ghazali, F. (2018). Understanding the linguistic variation in English as a lingua franca among Arab siblings. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 14(4), 301-315.
AMA Al Ghazali F. Understanding the linguistic variation in English as a lingua franca among Arab siblings. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies. December 2018;14(4):301-315.
Chicago Al Ghazali, Fawzi. “Understanding the Linguistic Variation in English As a Lingua Franca Among Arab Siblings”. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies 14, no. 4 (December 2018): 301-15.
EndNote Al Ghazali F (December 1, 2018) Understanding the linguistic variation in English as a lingua franca among Arab siblings. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies 14 4 301–315.
IEEE F. Al Ghazali, “Understanding the linguistic variation in English as a lingua franca among Arab siblings”, Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 301–315, 2018.
ISNAD Al Ghazali, Fawzi. “Understanding the Linguistic Variation in English As a Lingua Franca Among Arab Siblings”. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies 14/4 (December 2018), 301-315.
JAMA Al Ghazali F. Understanding the linguistic variation in English as a lingua franca among Arab siblings. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies. 2018;14:301–315.
MLA Al Ghazali, Fawzi. “Understanding the Linguistic Variation in English As a Lingua Franca Among Arab Siblings”. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, vol. 14, no. 4, 2018, pp. 301-15.
Vancouver Al Ghazali F. Understanding the linguistic variation in English as a lingua franca among Arab siblings. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies. 2018;14(4):301-15.