AN ANALYSIS OF THE ROLE OF FIRST LANGUAGE IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION A ...

288 Pages·2014·1.87 MB·English

AN ANALYSIS OF THE ROLE OF FIRST LANGUAGE IN SECOND LANGUAGE
ACQUISITION

______________________________________________

A Dissertation
Presented to the
Faculty of
Claremont Graduate School and San Diego State University
____________________________________________________
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor
of
Philosophy in the Graduate School of Education
________________________________________________________
by
Ioana Daciana Ionescu

Fall 2014
© Copyright Ioana Daciana Ionescu, 2014
All rights reserved.
CLAREMONT GRADUATE UNIVERSITY
SAN DIEGO STATE U NIVERSITY

The Undersigned Faculty Committee Approves the
Dissertation of Ioana Daciana Ionescu:
An Analysis of the Role of First Language in Second Language Acquisition

________________________________________
Ph.D. Marva Cappello, Co-Chair
San Diego State University

_________________________________________
Ph.D. Philip Dreyer, Co-chair
Claremont Graduate University

___________________________________________
Ph.D. Albert Ochoa
San Diego State University

__________________________________________________
Ph.D. William Perez
Claremont Graduate University

____________________________________________________
Approval Date
ABSTRACT

An Analysis of the Role of First Language in Second Language Acquisition

by
Ioana D. Ionescu
Claremont Graduate University and San Diego State University: 2014

The impact of first language (L1) on nine prominent second language acquisition (SLA)
theories has garnered broad attention in recent years. One topic of interest is to what extent are
language identity and culture of English second language (ESL) college learners intertwined.
Extensive research has been directed toward understanding the influence of writing
instruction on written discourse whereas far less attention, and hence the focus of this research,
has been allotted to how L1 affects metadiscourse, miscues, and hedging in writing in a second
language. English writing assignments of 141 culturally- and linguistically-diverse ESL college
students enrolled in a “Linguistics Department” composition course at San Diego State
University (SDSU) from 2010-12 were analyzed. This effort was augmented by conducting
written interviews with six Linguistics professors who have taught ESL composition classes.
Findings provided insights into (1) the role of L1 in acquiring written literacy skills in L2
English as perceived through nine SLA theories; (2) the writing capabilities expected of ESL
college students from the perspective of the six linguistic professors; (3) the metadiscourse
variations occurring within steps of two genre types (Summary of a Commentary, Statement of
Purpose); (4) the significant differences among language groups in the use of article and subject-
verb agreement miscues; (5) the connection between linguistic discourse and ethnic culture
employed by ESL students in written assignments through the lens of hedging (e.g. modal
auxiliaries, non-factive reporting and tentative linking verbs), a valued trait in self-expression for
ESL students. Dispersion plots for sixty L1 Spanish students revealed usage patterns.
The study revealed challenges faced by Linguistics professors due to the diversity of the
academic goals, interests, and writing purposes among ESL college students. The findings
suggested various pedagogical implications comprising the Linguistic professors’ advocacy of
their students by using L1 as a bridge for transferring schema to L2, providing specific genre
knowledge and reinforcing the writer and audience connection.
This study contributes to an understanding of SLA and the incremental process in
mastering L2 writing skills as well as the mosaic of the influences of L1 and culture in
developing biliteracy.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research effort would not have been possible without the lifelong support of my
mother and father, and for that, I am eternally grateful. I would also like to thank Ph.D. Robert
S. Nelson (my husband) for his tireless efforts on my behalf and my light of knowledge. In
appreciation of our son Sigurd R. Nelson who reminds me that every day we have to climb a
mountain, to never lose our curiosity and to never halt querying. Hence, I would like to thank the
extended Nelson family for advocating me in my academic endeavor.
I would like to thank all four members of my committee for their continuous guidance in
this research. Furthermore, I wish to thank Dr. Ochoa for being my mentor throughout this entire
journey. I would like to thank my Chair, Dr. Cappello, for sharing her wealth of knowledge and
her guidance in this academic endeavor. I deeply appreciate the collaboration with my colleagues
in this research effort (Robert Courtney, Lisa Davis, Julie Hernandez, Brian Mark, Vickie
Mellos, Tim Mountain, Hector Ortega, Marija Petrovic) and all of the professors who shared
their knowledge with me.

v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………..……………………….……. xv
LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………….………………………….…...xvii
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION………………………….…………………………………………1
1.1. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM……………………..……………….……..1
1.2. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY………………………………….…………………2
1.3. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK…………………………….………………….3
1.4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS……………………………………………………...4
1.5. DEFINITION OF TERMS…………………………………………..……….….5
II. LITERATURE REVIEW……………………………………………………………11
2.1. NINE THEORIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION…………...…11
2.1.1. THE NATURE OF THEORIES…………..…………………………..…12
2.1.2. EARLY THEORIES IN SLA…………………...……………………….14
2.1.3. GENERAL OVERVIEW OF THIS RESARCH EFFORT…...............…16
2.1.4. THEORIES THAT ASSIGN A VITAL ROLE TO L1 IN SLA…...……17
2.1.5. THEORIES THAT DO NOT ATTRIBUTE CRITICAL IMPORTANCE
TO THE L1………………………….………………………………...…34
2.1.6. CONCLUDING REMARKS IN SLA ACROSS NINE
CONTEMPORARY THEORIES…..……………………………………42
2.1.7. THE ROLE OF L1 IN SLA………………………………………..…….47
2.2. GENRE………………………………………………………………...……….50
2.3. CULTURE………………………………………...……………………………53
vi
III. METHODS…………………………………………………..………………………56
3.1 DESIGN……………………………….................................................................56
3.2 RESEARCH CONTEXT…………………………………….…………………..57
3.3 PARTICIPANTS…………………………………………………………...……58
3.3.1. SIX LINGUISTIC PROFESSORS……………………………………..…59
3.3.2. 141 ENGLISH SECOND LANGUAGE STUDENTS……………………59
3.4. DATA SOURCES………………………………………………………………60
3.4.1. SIX LINGUISTIC PROFESSORS WRITTEN INTERVIEWS………..…60
3.4.2. 141 ENGLISH SECOND LANGUAGE STUDENTS’ WRITTEN
DOCUMENTS…………………………………………………………………...62
3.5 ANALYSIS………………………………………………………………………63
3.5.1. SIX LINGUISTIC PROFESSORS WRITTEN INTERVIEWS………..…63
3.5.2. 141 ENGLISH SECOND LANGUAGE STUDENTS WRITTEN
DOCUMENTS…………………………………………………………………...64
3.5.3. METADISCOURSE ANALYSIS MOVES AND STEPS USED IN
SUMMARY OF A COMMENTARY AND STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
(SOP)…………………………………………………………...…….………….64
3.5.4. MISCUES EMPLOYED BY ESL STUDENTS…………………....…….65
3.5.5. AN ANALYSIS OF HEDGING IN 141 ESL STUDENTS’
WRITINGS………………………………………………………………………69
3.6. PSYCHOMETRIC ANALYSIS………………………………………...………70
3.7. LIMITATIONS……………………………………………………………….....72
3.8. SUMMARY……………………………………………………………………..72
vii
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS OF THE WRITTEN INTERVIEW DATA FROM SIX
LINGUISTIC PROFESSORS……………………………………………………………….74
4.1. WRITING CHARACTERISTICS OF AN ESL STUDENT………………...….75
4.2 THEORIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION (SLA)…….….…...…80
4.3 TYPES OF MISCUES THAT ESL STUDENTS IMPLEMENT IN THEIR
WRITINGS……………………………………………..………………………...….87
4.4 GENERAL METADISCOURSE OR GENRE ANALYSIS IN TEACHING
WRITING……………………………………….……………………………...…....91
4.5 AMERICAN CULTURE EMLOYED IN TEACHING ESL CLASSES AND
THE CHALLENGES PROFESSOR ENCOUNTERED IN TEACHING ESL
STUDENTS………………………………………………………………………….93
4.6 SUMMARY OF WRITEN INTREVIEW DATA FROM SIX LINGUISTIC
PROFESSORS…………………………………………………………………...…105
V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS OF METADISCOURSE ANALYSIS MOVES AND
STEPS USED IN SUMMARY OF A COMMENTARY AND STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
(SOP)……………………………………………………………………………….………112
5.1. GENERAL OVERVIEW…………………………………………………...….112
5.1.2. RESEARCHER OVERVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE
COMMENTARY ‘YOU ARE BEING LIED TO ABOUT PIRATES’ BY
JOHANN HARI……………………………………………….……………..…113
5.1.3. GENRE ANALYSIS OF STUDENTS WRITING: A SUMMARY OF A
COMMENTARY ‘YOU ARE BEING LIED TO ABOUT PIRATES’ WRITTEN
BY JOHAN HARI………………………………...……………………………114
viii
5.1.4. CONCLUDING FINDINGS FOR STUDENTS’ SUMMARY OF A
COMMENTARY ‘YOU ARE BEING LIED TO ABOUT PIRATES’ WRITTEN
BY JOHAN HARI……………………………………………………………...124
5.2. METADISCORSE OF MOVES AND STEPS IN THE STATEMENT OF
PURPOSE (SOP)………..…………………………………………….……………125
5.2.1. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE CONTENT………………………..….…126
5.2.2. METADISCOURSE OF MOVES AND STEPS FOUND IN THE
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE (SOP)………………………………………..…128
5.2.3. CONCLUDING FINDINGS IN THE METADISCORSE IN STATEMENT
OF PURPOSE………………………………………………………………..…141
VI. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS OF THE MISCUES EMPLOYED BY ESL COLLEGE
STUDENTS……………………………………………………………………………...…144
6.1. FINDINGS OF ESL COLLEGE STUDENTS’ MISCUES USING
QUALITATIVE METHODS………………………………………………………145
6.1.1. LANGUAGE FEATURE OF ARTICLES……………………………....146
6.1.2. LANGUAGE FEATURE OF VERBS FORMSL (VF) AND VERB
TENSES (VT)……………………………………………………………..……150
6.1.3. LANGUAGE FEATURE OF SUBJECT/VERB AGREEMENT……….159
6.2. THE ROLE OF L1 PERCIEVED THROUGH 9 LINGUISTIC THEORIES AND
MISCUES LENSES………………………………………………………………..163
6.2.1. SUMMARY REGARDING MISCUES (ARTICLES, VERBS AND
SUBJECT VERB AGREEMENT) USING QUALITATIVE METHODS.........169
ix
6.3. FINDINGS OF ESL COLLEGE STUDENT’S MISCUES USING
QUANTITATIVE METHODS…………………….……………………………....170
6.3.1. DEMOGRAPHICS AND DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS……………....171
6.3.2 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS AMONG THREE VARIABLES
(ARTICLES, VERBS AND SUBJECT VERB AGREEMENT)………………173
6.3.3. ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE RESULT (ANOVA) FOR ESL STUDENTS
AMONG DIFFERENT MISCUE VARIABLES (ARTICLES, VERBS AND
SUBJECT VERB AGREEMENT)………………………………………..……173
6.3.4 SUMMARY REGARDING MISCUES (ARTICLES, VERBS AND
SUBJECT VERB AGREEMENT) USING QUANTITATIVE
METHODS…………………………………………………………………..…175
VII. HEDGING IN 141 ACADEMIC WRITING DOCUMENTS FROM 141 ESL
COLLEGE STUDENTS……………………………………………………………………177
7.1. AN ANALYSIS OF HEDGINC IN 141 ESL WRITTEN DOCUMENTS……177
7.2. NON-FACTIVE AND TENTATIVE LINKING VERBS………………….…185
7.3. SELECTED MODALS USED BY ELS COLLEGE STUDENTS WHO’S L1s
WERE GERMAN, SOMALI, VIETNAEMESE, SWEDISH, THAI AND LAO…188
7.4. USAGE OF MODALS AND VERBS AMONG 60 ESL STUDENTS WHOSE
L1 WAS SPANISH…………………………………………………...……………192
7.5. DISPERSION PLOTS FOR 60 L1 SPANISH SPEAKERS…………………..194
7.6. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS…………………………………………….…….199
VIII. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS,
RECOMMENDATIONS AND REFLECTIONS……………………………………….…204
x