Matching Items (3)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

153172-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
ABSTRACT

The absence of the consonant sound /p/ in Libyan Arabic leads Libyan speakers of English to pronounce /p/ as /b/. This study examines how Libyan Arabic speakers distinguish the English /p/ and /b/ in their production of L2 English. The study also examines the effect of the production contexts

ABSTRACT

The absence of the consonant sound /p/ in Libyan Arabic leads Libyan speakers of English to pronounce /p/ as /b/. This study examines how Libyan Arabic speakers distinguish the English /p/ and /b/ in their production of L2 English. The study also examines the effect of the production contexts and the learning environment on two groups of Libyan Arabic speakers' attainment of the English /p/ in the USA and Libya. The study collected voice recordings of word-initial /p/ and /b/ in isolated-words, minimal pairs, and sentences in English from both Libyan Arabic speakers and American English speakers. The study also collected Libyan Arabic stop consonants /b/, /t/, /d/, /k/, and /g/ from the Libyan participants. The voice recording data were collected using the WhatsApp mobile application from all participants and the Libyan Arabic participants were also asked to fill an online survey. Using voice onset time (VOT) as a measurement tool, this study measured the English and Libyan Arabic data through Praat software. The findings show that most Libyan Arabic participants distinguish between /p/ and /b/, but they did not have as high VOT averages as the American participants' /p/. It also reveals that the production context, especially in minimal pairs and sentence contexts, has an effect on their participants' production. However, the learning environment does not have an effect on the Libyan participants' pronunciation of /p/ in this study.
ContributorsGarib, Ali A. A (Author) / Pruitt, Kathryn (Thesis advisor) / Renaud, Claire (Committee member) / González López, Verónica (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
137130-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This thesis compares significant linguistic features of English and Bahasa Indonesia (BI) and examines possible effects of language transfer for Indonesians who speak English as a second language (L2). The thesis first presents a description of BI: 1) phonology (vowels, consonants, stress and intonation), 2) word order (SVO and other

This thesis compares significant linguistic features of English and Bahasa Indonesia (BI) and examines possible effects of language transfer for Indonesians who speak English as a second language (L2). The thesis first presents a description of BI: 1) phonology (vowels, consonants, stress and intonation), 2) word order (SVO and other alternatives, relativization, nominalization, topicalization, questions), 3) the noun phrase (derivation of nouns, modifiers in noun phrases, demonstratives, plurals, personal pronouns), and 4) the verbal system (derivation of verbs, agreement, copulas, passive voice, negation, tense, adverbs, modals/auxiliaries). For the IRB-approved research study, the researcher interviewed ten Indonesians from diverse linguistic, cultural, and educational backgrounds about their experiences learning English and asked them to tell a story in order to elicit use of the past tense. The research sought to determine which errors Indonesian L2 speakers of English often make and which of these errors can be attributed to language transfer. Also, the study examined whether participants seem to be aware of their errors and what pedagogical implications may arise from these findings. Interviews were transcribed, then errors were coded and analyzed to see if the errors that Indonesians often make while speaking English correspond with the main differences between English and BI. The most common error was verb tense. After that, the next most common errors were articles; plurals; prepositions; other verbs; omission of "be" verbs; adjectives; omission of subjects; subject/verb agreement; and languages
ationalities. The thesis also discusses participants' perceptions of differences between BI and English and perceptions of difficulties when learning English, and how these perceptions correspond with their performance in English. While it seems that many of the errors that Indonesian L2 speakers of English are due to language transfer, others are not. Virtually no research has been carried out on language transfer from BI to English, so there is much future research that can be conducted on Indonesians learning English. Language transfer is just one of the relevant topics in the field.
ContributorsTappendorf, Rebecca Christine (Author) / Renaud, Claire (Thesis director) / Suwarno, Peter (Committee member) / Van Gelderen, Elly (Committee member) / School of Music (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Humanities, Arts, and Cultural Studies (Contributor) / Department of English (Contributor)
Created2014-05
155522-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Scholars have long debated whether Old and Middle English (ME) are different diachronic stages of one language, or whether they are two closely related languages that have different historical roots. A general assumption is that Middle and Modern English descend from Old English (OE), similar to the way Middle and

Scholars have long debated whether Old and Middle English (ME) are different diachronic stages of one language, or whether they are two closely related languages that have different historical roots. A general assumption is that Middle and Modern English descend from Old English (OE), similar to the way Middle and Modern German descend from Old High German. Traditional scholarship places English into the West-Germanic language subgroup (which includes Old English, and continental Germanic languages) Historically, criteria used by linguists to establish genealogy of languages involve sound change from parent to daughter languages and the sharing of core vocabulary. Until recently, consideration of the influence of contact-induced change, except in the lexical domain, has been minimized, favoring generative language-internal factors. While it is generally accepted that internal motivation shapes the outcome of language change, contact may provide the catalyst for the change. The syntax of ME emerged with linguistic variation that distanced it from its Germanic relatives. In order to understand how the grammar of ME evolved and differs from its West-Germanic cousins, the syntax and morphosyntactic properties of ME, evident in The Orrmulum, an early ME work written in the Danelaw region of England, are analyzed in comparison to Old English (OE), Old Norse (ON), and Celtic, and in relation to formal grammaticalization theory, social factors and historical events. An analysis of the grammar in The Orrmulum supports current research regarding Scandinavian influence on the syntax of OE and ME, because there is extensive historic evidence regarding effects of language tangency of the relevant cultures; the properties of a grammatical lexicon influence retention of syntactic patterns, despite additions/changes in lexical categories; and The Orrmulum is a revealing source of the transition of OE to ME regional dialect variations.
ContributorsHornung, Annette (Author) / Gelderen, Elly van (Thesis advisor) / Bjork, Robert (Committee member) / Renaud, Claire (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017