However
through the present study a nonacademic sense is considered, so a great
amount of authenticity is taken care of in this regard. In real life
situations speakers try to save time and energy by economization of
the number of words produced; nevertheless, a maximally comprehensible
utterance is also required.
1-1-3.
Authenticity:
Utterances produced by English speakers in real life situations are
highly "authentic", since the two paradigms of disambiguation
and economization are only applied to one's speech within meaningful
and highly authentic settings. Richard, Platt and Platt (1992: 27) defined
authenticity as: "the degree to which language teaching
materials have the qualities of natural speech or writing."
According to the above definition an utterance, even in nonacademic
settings, may be authentic if it contains qualities of natural speech.
This researcher tried to gather data in authentic-like situations. This
was done by having interlocutors take part in data collection.
1-2.
Conceptual Framework
In uttering a linguistic structure, two forces are conceived to act
on the speaker's cognitive system. First, the speaker must choose the
appropriate constituents; and then, he has to order them in such a fashion
as to best fulfill his goal of communicating the intended message (Ferreira
and Dell, 2000). For these processing tasks to be operationalized, the
following points seem to be a given. As the creator of the utterance,
the speaker must use all resources at his disposal to be timely and
efficient in locating and selecting the constituents of the utterance.
Consequently, the speaker faces somewhat of a dilemma--being timely
and efficient on the one hand, and trying to be maximally comprehensible
on the other.
Thus, in uttering an expression, the speaker's linguistic system is
subject to the pressures of two opposing forces:
i- being timely and efficient, and ii- being optimally comprehensible.
This line of reasoning has provided psycholinguists with the opportunity
to evaluate the nature and the extent of the interaction between the
mentioned pressures on the speaker's cognitive system. In this light,
certain structures in English have provided the platform for the evaluation
of the said forces on the speaker's language mechanism. The structures
of this nature permit the psycholinguist to assess the intensity of
these pressures as well as illuminating the influence of such pressures
on the choices the speaker makes in producing utterances. This class
of linguistic structures are composed of those that present the speaker
with the choice of including an optional constituent for the sake of
disambiguating his utterance or to forgo the use of such words for being
economical.
Perhaps of all such structures, the ones made up of the optional complementizer
that provides the most suitable type for this line of enquiry. This
claim is based on the assertion that with such utterances, the speaker
is more likely to be challenged with the task of disambiguating the
utterance.
In so far as the above-mentioned pressures could empirically be verified
as having a bearing on the speaker's utterances, further evidence for
the psychological validity of the cognitive accounts of language processing
would be provided. Such evidence has already been obtained in the domain
of L1 processing (Ferreira and Dell, 2000); however, no full-fledged
study has of yet addressed the issue in the context of L2 processing.
Hence, this study is concerned with evaluating the claims made about
the operation of the pressures on the L2 speaker's cognitive system
when faced with structures containing the optional that, and
the ensuing choices made by the speaker in forming this utterances.
1-3.
Objective of the Study
This study seeks to determine whether the same forces are at play in
L2 processing, namely economization and disambiguation. This would be
accomplished through a task composed of certain structures devised to
evaluate the strength of the forces on the cognitive system of L2 speakers
in processing and producing language.
1-4.
Significance of the Study
From the theoretical point of view, the findings of the conceived study
will be tremendously valuable in shedding light on the intricacies of
inner processing of L2 by foreign language speakers. More specifically,
one might be able to ascertain the effect(s), if any, of the mentioned
forces on the choices the foreign language speaker makes in production
of L2.
Furthermore, in pinpointing the influence of the forces that operate
on the cognitive system of the L2 speaker, and considering the nature
of the task that will be discussed hereafter, it is believed that some
insight could be gained on the order of presentation of certain L2 structures
for the benefit of both the syllabus designer and the L2 teacher.
1-5.
Hypotheses of the Study
This study seeks to determine whether the following strategies are resorted
to in producing utterances:
1) The strategy of economization when uttering disambiguous structures;
and
2) The strategy of disambiguation in producing partially disambiguous
structures.
Hence, the following hypotheses were considered for this study:
In producing disambiguous utterances, the speaker would be more inclined
to employ the economization strategy (i.e. omitting the optional constituent
that). Thus,
H1: Xe > Xd
However, with partially ambiguous structures the disambiguation strategy
is more likely to be utilized:
H2: Xd > Xe
For both types of structure, the null hypothesis would be:
H0: Xe = Xd
Key:
Xe — mean instances of utilizing economization
Xd — mean instances of utilizing disambiguation
CHAPTER
TWO
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2-0.
Introduction
In this chapter the related studies previously carried out on the Effect
of Disambiguation and Economization on Language Production are reviewed.
2-1.
Theoretical Considerations
It is axiomatic that in conveying an intended meaning the speaker of
a language faces a variety of options. These options are mostly language
specific (i.e. different languages permit different configurations of
words to convey meaning). To cite an example of such alternations in
syntax, one may consider the active vis-à-vis passive structures
in English. A more subtle alternation is the speaker's option to use
optional words (Ferreira and Dell, 2000).
2-1-1.
Syntactic Flexibility
It has been argued that the reasons underlying the speaker's choice
in the use or omission of optional words are three fold. The first is
the subtle difference in meaning as maintained by Thompson and Mulac
(1991). It has been asserted that the structure:
In analyzing
this structure, the parser is more likely to anticipate an adverb
once he gets to you, again, based on the higher frequency of
these structures. Thus, the ambiguity occurs the moment the comprehender
reaches you; and the bias is for the structure to proceed with
an adverb. However, the listener's expectations prove counterintuitive
for the structure ends with a complementizer.
It is a given that no garden path phenomenon would result if you
were replaced with any other personal NPs, nor if the optional that
complementizer was not omitted.
In a research study investigating the tendency for disambiguating such
structures by including the complementizer that; Elsness (1984)
compared written texts against spoken ones. The results indicated that
no compelling evidence differentiated written and spoken texts in their
use of the complementizer that for disambiguating purposes. In
another study (Rayner & Frazier, 1987) found that the time taken
for reading disambiguated (i.e. structures with no omission) was less
than the text that had structures with omissions.
2-2.
Empirical Literature
A fair amount of work on a similar issue - lexical availability in relation
with syntactic and lexical production - was advanced by Ferreira and
Dell (2000). The study was held at the universities of California, San
Diego and Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Six experiments conducted through
the study along with several tasks designed showed remarkable results
about native speakers of English. These experiments tested the
predictions concerning optional word mention of two general approaches
to language production as speakers only sometimes include the that
in sentence complement structures like The coach knew (that)
you missed practice.
One approach claims that language production processes choose syntactic
structures that ease the task of creating sentences, so that words are
spoken opportunistically, as they are selected for production. The second
approach claims that a syntactic structure is chosen that is easiest
to comprehend, so that optional words like that are used to avoid
temporarily ambiguous, difficult-to-comprehend sentences. In all experiments,
speakers did not consistently include optional words to circumvent a
temporary ambiguity, but they did omit optional words (the complementizer
that) when subsequent material was either repeated (within a
sentence) or prompted with a recall cue. The results suggest that speakers
choose syntactic structures to permit early mention of available material
and not to circumvent disruptive temporary ambiguities.
With each use of a linguistic expression, two acts are accomplished.
First, the creator of the linguistic expression - the speaker - must
find the right words and order them in accordance with an intended thought.
Second, the recipient of the linguistic expression - the listener -
must understand those words to recover the original thought that the
speaker intended to convey. To be timely, speakers must create their
utterances as efficiently as possible. But an utterance is only effective
if it is understood at least as rapidly as it is created. Thus, the
system that creates linguistic expressions is subject to two simultaneous
pressures: It must produce well-formed linguistic expressions as efficiently
as possible, but it also must produce utterances that can be easily
comprehended.
One way to evaluate the impact of these pressures is to examine the
decisions that are made when the language production system builds a
sentence and to determine whether those decisions aid the efficiency
of production or of subsequent comprehension. One specific decision
that the language production system must take is whether to include
optional function words in certain sentences such as:
Complementizers like that in sentence complement structures,
as in I suspected (that) you learned the whole thing, and relative
complementizers and auxiliary verbs like who were in sentences with
passive relative clauses, as in the astronauts (who were) selected
for the mission made history.
The six experiments presented by Ferreira and Dell tested the degree
to which such optional word mention is influenced by two separate mechanisms,
one of which leads production to operate more efficiently, while the
other leads production to create utterances that are more easily understood.
A couple of considerations used in the study of Ferreira and Dell, (2000)
will proceed to further clarify what the experiments sought to prove.
2-2-1.
Lexico-syntactic Flexibility and Optional Word Mention
A language's syntax is a description of the allowable configurations
of words in that language in terms of categories like noun, verb
and so forth. Languages offer some flexibility within their syntactic
systems, so that a particular idea can be communicated with distinct
configurations of words. In English, such flexibility commonly occurs
with the alternations that occurs with the active (The tortoise defeated
the hare) versus the passive (the hare was defeated by the tortoise)
form of a sentence. However, a more subtle form of flexibility occurs
with optional word mention, where a speaker can grammatically
include or omit certain function words.
From the perspective of the information processing system that underlies
language, such flexibility is a valuable resource that can be exploited
to achieve different goals. Ferreira and Dell mentioned three of those
goals, and their experiments addressed two of them.
One possibility is that syntactic flexibility is used to communicate
subtle nuances of meaning, so that actives and passives are meaningfully
different ("Mistakes were made"), as are sentence complement
structures with or without the that (Thompson & Mulac, 1991).
Most language users have the intuition that the syntactic variation
that comes with syntactic flexibility primarily caters to such communicative
needs, and research has shown that syntactic alternatives are not fully
interchangeable (McKoon & Ratcliff, 1997) and communicate subtle
differences in meaning (e.g., Thompson & Mulac, 1991, argue that
omission of that involves weakening the distinctions between
the main and embedded clauses, so that high epistemicity of the main
clause or topicality of the complement clause lead to that being
dropped).
However, psycholinguistic research has revealed that syntactic flexibility
can also be exploited to address processing-related challenges faced
by language users.
Next, two ways that syntactic decisions can alleviate processing difficulties
that arise during language use are discussed. With the first strategy,
the production system uses syntactic flexibility to more easily create
fluent utterances. With the second strategy, the production system uses
syntactic flexibility to present utterances that are easier for a potential
listener to comprehend. These two processing functions of flexibility
-easing the burden of the speaker and that of the listener - are not
mutually exclusive; both could be at work, even at the same time. However,
as Ferreira and Dell showed through their study, there are circumstances
under which the two approaches make different predictions and hence
the experiments presented by them allowed for an investigation not only
of whether the strategies apply but also of their relative influence
in affecting speaker choices.
2-2-2.
Availability-Based Sentence Production
As was previously mentioned the concept of lemma and lemma
driven sentence production as appeared in the works of Levelt, 1989,
and Garrett, 1975, are important for language production. The same theory
guided Ferreira and Dell's study as well.
Most models of language production assume that the information processing
heart of sentence production occurs with grammatical encoding.
Grammatical encoding begins with a message -the representation
of the concepts and their interrelations that a speaker wishes to express
- and ends with the selection of word forms - representation
of the phonological content of the words of a sentence. It is between
these two stages that the production system accesses lemmas:
representations of the syntactic properties of the to-be-produced words.
Lemmas are important for many reasons, one of which is that sentence
production is often characterized as lemma driven; that is, lemmas
are taken to encode the information that is used to construct the syntactic
structure of a sentence. (This emphasis on the role of lexically specific
information has a long history in linguistics, as in Bresnan, 1978,
1982, and is now becoming important in psycholinguistic theory as well;
MacDonald, Pearlmutter, & Seidenberg, 1994).
Lemma-driven production has desirable properties, especially that it
supports incremental production (Ferreira, 1996; Levelt, 1989)
- the construction of a sentence piecemeal, from beginning to end. This
approach permits selected words to be produced in compatible sentences,
so that "Wh-words" such as what and who can
trigger the use of interrogative structures or so particular verbs can
call on appropriate intransitive, transitive, or ditransitive structures.
However, not only do the syntactic privileges of the to-be-produced
lemmas affect syntactic structure, but so too can the timing
of lemma selection have important effects on the syntactic structure
of a sentence. This point can be illustrated with passive versus active
production as mentioned before.
As their study showed production proceeds more efficiently if syntactic
structures are used that permit quickly selected lemmas to be mentioned
as soon as possible. We call this the principle of immediate mention.
The principle of immediate mention makes a straightforward prediction
for sentence complement structures with optional complementizers, like
The coach knew (that) you missed practice.
In general, such availability-based effects on sentence production
link the availability of the to-be-produced lemmas to the processes
responsible for selecting the sentence structures to be used. The operation
of availability-based effects has been demonstrated in a wide range
of structures involving order-of-mention effects here (e.g., the choice
between using an active or passive; like Bock, 1986a, 1987).
Bock (1986a, 1987) has developed a fair amount of work on a relevant
issue as well.
2-2-3.
Ambiguity-Sensitive Sentence Production
Along with syntactic flexibility that can be exploited not only to make
production processing proceed more efficiently, but also to make a potential
listener's comprehension processing proceed more efficiently, Ferreira
and Dell made use of another concept of ambiguity in sentence production.
Given a choice among sentence alternatives, the most straightforward
way to increase comprehension efficiency is to avoid sentences that
are more difficult to comprehend. A kind of difficulty arises especially
with the sentence complement structures and passive relative
clause structures in English.
As mentioned before, the notion of garden path has been well
studied in the psycholinguistic literature examining sentence comprehension.
Garden paths occur when sentences (a) contain temporary syntactic ambiguities
and (b) are biased at the point of temporary ambiguity toward a syntactic
analysis that is eventually inappropriate. A sentence is said to contain
a temporary syntactic ambiguity when it momentarily permits more than
one syntactic interpretation. However, a temporary ambiguity is not
sufficient to cause notable difficulties in comprehension (indeed, every
sentence contains an indefinite number of temporary ambiguities as it
unfolds).
Difficulties specifically occur when biases lead comprehension processes
to commit
to a syntactic analysis for the temporarily ambiguous fragment that
is incompatible with the analysis that the entire sentence will eventually
require. For example, given The coach knew you . . ., comprehension
processes are unable to determine whether you is a direct object
or an embedded subject.
However, processing biases (which can include syntactic simplicity,
Frazier & Fodor, 1978, and frequency of occurrence, MacDonald et
al., 1994), cause comprehenders to take the post verbal noun phrase
in such structures to be a direct object; here, they take you to be
the direct object of the verb know. Nevertheless, by definition, sentence
complement structures continue with you as an embedded subject, as in
the coach knew you missed practice (Ferreira and Dell, 2000).
Thus, when a comprehender receives the second verb (missed), the misanalysis
is discovered (i.e., you must be an embedded subject) and the initial
direct object interpretation is discarded in favor of the correct embedded
subject interpretation. The same psycholinguistic process is true with
passive relative clause structures.
Thus, when sentences with sentence complements or passive relative clauses
are produced in their reduced form (without the optional function
words), they may constitute garden path sentences. However, if the same
sentences are produced in full form (with optional function words),
the garden paths can be avoided. This implies that syntactic flexibility
can be exploited by production to increase comprehension efficiency
in a straightforward way: If the reduced form of a sentence includes
a garden path, then produce that sentence in its full form. Any such
tendency would have the effect of reducing the number of ambiguous sentences
seen in spoken language, though it is unlikely that any such pressure
would be so powerful as to eliminate temporary ambiguities completely.
One study (Elsness, 1984) examined whether there is any tendency in
natural spoken and written text for writers to produce the full forms
of sentences that include garden paths in their reduced forms.
The study did not find compelling evidence for such a tendency, despite
the fact that it has been shown that readers read full forms of sentences
more easily than reduced ones (Rayner & Frazier, 1987). However,
it is possible that a strong tendency to avoid ambiguity was not discovered
for two reasons: First, the specific sentence choices made during writing
may respond to a variety of demands which may have little to do with
temporary ambiguity. Ferreria and Dell's experiments, by contrasting
ambiguous and unambiguous under controlled circumstances, were more
sensitive to any effect. Second, writing is likely to be a more deliberative
process than speaking, so that if a tendency to avoid ambiguity is implicit,
it may be more apparent in a spoken task.
Ferreira and Dell's six experiments tested the ambiguity-avoidance and
availability-based claims using variants of a sentence recall task.
This work on native speakers of English showed compelling processing
results.
2-2-4. Results
The results of experiments might be taken to indicate that speakers
are selfish, exploiting the flexibility of language to ease only the
task of creating sentences. Such a conclusion, however, overlooks two
considerations. First, communicative pressure, indeed affects optional
word mention. That is, speakers can change their overall level of that-mention
when understandability is important. Second, a range of challenges face
language users when communicating. As noted by Clark (1996), one pressure
that language users experience in a communicative setting is the need
to "hold the floor" in a timely manner. The results of their
experiments were testament to the importance of this pressure.
The need for language users to communicate in a timely fashion implies
that specific strategies, like the availability-based one, are necessary
so that speakers can manage the complexities that are involved in producing
language.
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
3-0.
Introduction
This chapter includes the description of research methodology. It deals
with the participants, instruments, data collection procedure, and statistical
analysis procedure.
3-1.
Participants
The participants in this study consisted of 41 junior students of English
at Shiraz Azad University. Each of the participants was chosen randomly
from among male and female students. The justification for choosing
these participants - particular target population - is that during their
three years of study they had been exposed to a sufficient corpus of
both formal and informal L2 English. Thus their exposure to the type
of structures is somewhat similar to the built in bias for one kind
over another.
Moreover to offset the effect of age-related variations the participants
were all above 18 years of age, as happens in all upper academic-university
- situations. They also came from almost the same socio-economic backgrounds.
As for the variable of intelligence, the present study sides with Lenneberg
(1968) and Steinberg (1982) in rendering it a non-factor due to the
minimum levels claimed to be required for language acquisition and processing.
3-2.
The Task
A sentence recall task consisting of 20 pairs of structures was designed
for the study. All the structures had I as the pronoun preceding the
complementizer that. However, Half of the structures had the
complementizer proceeded by he and the other half by you.
The task was designed in two pairs of structures each of ten sentences.
Structures in the two pairs were the same except for the pronoun preceding
the complementizer. Through the first pair odd numbers had you
and even ones had he as the pronoun, the reverse happened
in pair (II). An example is given in Table 3.1. The whole task is also
included in the appendix
In constructing
the structures, the second clause appeared first followed by the first
clause. This reversed order of presentation is deemed necessary to make
the participants resort to an actual processing procedure rather than
merely repeating the structures while performing on the recall task.
The prediction motivating the design of the recall task was that with
the first group of structures the participants were faced with the opportunity
to employ the disambiguation strategy; while with the latter type the
economization strategy was more likely to be utilized.
As for memory considerations, the literature reveals that memory for
entire sentences is often quite accurate, at least for short retention
intervals (Potter and Lombardi, 1990, 1998).
As examples in table 3.1. reveal, in reconstructing the first type of
structures, the participants were faced with a partially ambiguous mood
that is the pronoun you leads to a garden path situation as it
may be followed by either an adverb or a verb phrase. Thus, in order
to avoid this partial ambiguity, the participant was more likely to
not omit the complementizer that for the sake of clarity. With
the second type of structures; however, the participants are not faced
with a partially ambiguous situation since the pronoun that follows
the first verb within the first clause doesn't permit any other constituent
to follow it but a verb phrase. Hence, the parsers in most likelihood
omit the optional that in conjoining the two clauses.
3-3.
Administration Procedure
The 20 pairs of the structures of the task were tape recorded and played
back through head phones to the participants, on an individual basis.
The participants were instructed to put the two clauses of each structure
in correct order (i.e. to change the order of their presentation), and
to orally report the reconstructed sentences to the interviewer sitting
in front of them. This scheme (i.e. the use of headphones and an interlocutor
- the interviewer) provides for an air of authenticity for the task.
This claim is substantiated on the grounds that a real communicational
setting will be constructed when the participant reports the reconstructed
sentences to an actual interlocutor.
Furthermore, a 10 second time span for the onset of production of each
sentence is incorporated into the administration of the task. By limiting
the interval allowed for production, in effect, a real life communication
encounter would be simulated for the participants. Hence, the utilization
of the economization and disambiguation strategies is more likely to
surface in the participants' production.
3-4.
Data Analysis Procedure
Since two pairs of structures each of ten sentences which were the same
except for the subordinate clause pronouns were used, the difference
between the means for the inclusion and omission of the complementizer
that in two streams of input (i.e. structure types 1 and 2) can
be the answer to the research questions.
Therefore, in order to obtain the results a series of matched t-tests
were administered on both the within type and between type means of
the structures for the inclusion or omission of the complementizer.
The results of analysis are summarized in the following chapter.
CHAPTER
FOUR
RESULTS AND DATA ANALYSIS
4-0.
Introduction
Having gained the findings and results from the raw data, statistical
analysis was carried out within the framework of "within type"
and "between type" effects. In the following sections, these
forums are elaborated on in detail.
4-1.
Within Type Effects
Given that the primary objective of this study was to investigate whether
there existed any meaningful differences between the use of that
within each group of structures having you or he at the
beginning of the subordinate clause. It was deemed that a series of
matched t-tests would be beneficial in reaching a conclusion in this
regard.
What follows, are the results of this battery of t-tests presented for
each of the two groups involved through the present study.
4-1-1.
Complement Structures with Ambiguous Pronoun You
The result of a matched t-test carried out on this type of structures
with the ambiguous pronoun you indicates that the difference
between the you structures with that and those without
it was significant. As the following table indicates:
4-1-2.
Complement Structures With Unambiguous Pronoun He
The result of a matched t-test carried out on this type of structures
with the unambiguous pronoun he indicates a significant difference
between he structures with that vs. those without it.
As the following table indicates:
4-2.
Between Type Effects
The design conceived for the analysis of between type effects was another
matched t-test. In this part the means obtained from the two different
groups of he and you were compared. The result of this
matched t-test, too, indicates a significant difference between he
and you structures with that.
4.3.
Results Summarized in Figures
As mentioned before the number of thats in structures with the
unambiguous pronoun he was more limited compared to those having
you. The following figure on the next page summarizes the "between"
and "within type" effects. The figure was designed according
to the means acquired through statistical analysis of the results. It
makes a fair comparison of the number of thats used through the
experiment.
CHAPTER
FIVE
SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS,
AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
5-0.
Introduction
This chapter provides the study's summary, discussions, conclusions,
implications, and suggestions for further research.
5-1.
Summary
This research aimed at examining the effects of disambiguation and economization
paradigms on English language production used by Iranian EFL learners.
The participants in this study were 41 junior students of English Translation
at the Azad University of Shiraz. The participants were randomly selected
from among male and female EFL learners at the above mentioned university.
Two groups of complement structures served as a recall task were designed.
There were 10 pairs of sentences with clauses put in the reverse order.
All structures had I as the main clause pronoun; while, half of them
had the ambiguous pronoun you and the other had the unambiguous
pronoun he at the beginning of the subordinate clauses proceeding
the possible use of complementizer that.
Participants were then asked to put the two clauses of each pair in
the correct order and use the complementizer that when deemed necessary.
The research question addressed by this study was:
Q:
Do disambiguation and economization forces affect Iranian EFL Learners'
utterances?
In order
to answer this question, three matched T-tests were carried out to obtain
the relationship within and between the intended groups.
5-2.
Discussion
This study was performed to examine whether disambiguation and economization
paradigms had any significant effect on the language production (i.e.
utterances) of the participants.
The answer was affirmative for both paradigms. The said forces were
both influential in the production of utterances by Iranian EFL learners.
Disambiguation and economization forces were found to have a significant
effect on the choice of optional words (e.g. that) used by EFL learners.
It was also found that disambiguation and economization paradigms usually
came to surface under special circumstances. Through the present study
the use of ambiguous and unambiguous pronouns were the effective stimuli.
Results of a series of matched t-tests carried out on within and between
type relationships showed meaningful differences, too.
Finally, given the efforts expended on eliminating the artificiality
of the experiment, disambiguation and economization as the forces working
through one's speech were more likely to be used in real life situations
or other native-like ones as used with the intended participants in
this study.
With respect to the null hypothesis of the study, the results provided
a fair amount of evidence for its rejection. Namely, that the two groups
of structures exhibited significant differences in so far as the use
of that was concerned.
5-3. Conclusion
The results of this study indicated that disambiguation and economization
paradigms come to surface as forces acting on individuals' speech every
time one makes an utterance. It means that:
1) D.E. paradigms are the result of a series of complex psychological
processes which happen while speaking that may deal with STM, as well.
2) Certain words through real-life situations may trigger the
use of D.E. paradigms. The said forces may happen in productive skills
as speaking, in particular.
5-4.
Implications
The present study has yielded the following implications for the development
of skills, meaningful drills and comprehension activities.
Having paid attention to disambiguation and economization paradigms
in speaking and listening skills, one may communicate more effectively
in more native-like situations as may happen with EFL learners of English.
More Authenticity can be seen through the use of disambiguation and
economization forces in EFL situations. Teachers may also benefit
by making the students aware of the optional word use, syntactic flexibility
and other related items; therefore, more meaningful activities may also
be applied to classroom situations.
EFL learners who gained mastery over disambiguation and economization
use in communicative classrooms may have fewer problems in comprehension
skills, understanding spoken English, and dealing with foreigners.
5-5.
Suggestions for Further Research
1. This study was carried out on the effects of D.E. paradigms on speaking
in particular. Similar study can be conducted on these effects on other
language skills especially writing as another productive skill.
2. This research was conducted with EFL university students in Shiraz
Islamic Azad University, a similar research can be carried out in other
universities with students of different proficiency levels to confirm
or disconfirm the findings.
3. The sample in this study, as is true with all university situations,
was chosen from among students over 21 years of age. Further studies
may address other age groups.
4. This study was carried out at the university level with students
of fairly good command of English. It can be also replicated at institute
level with students of other language command levels.
5. Finally, the present study dealt with pronouns and different types
of them as far as ambiguity is concerned. Other similar studies may
work on other entries of English grammar.
REFERENCES
1- Carrol,
D. (1999). Psychology of Language.
2- Chastain, K. (1988). Developing Second Language Skills. Orlando,
FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers.
2- Cook, V. (1991). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching.
London: British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data.
3- Elsness, J. (1984). That or zero? A look at the choice of object
clause connective in a corpus of American English. English Studies,
65, 519-533.
4- Ferreira, F., & Clifton, C. (1986). The independence of syntactic
processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 348-368.
5- Ferreira, F., & Hendeyson, J.M. (1990). Use of verb information
in syntactic parsing: Evidence from eye movements and word by word self-paced
reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,
16, 555-568.
6- Ferreira, V.S., & Dell, G.S. (2000) Effect of ambiguity and lexical
availability on Syntactic and Lexical Production. Cognitive Psychology,
40, 296-340.
7- Ferreira, V.S. (1996). Is it better to give than to donate? Syntactic
flexibility in language production. Journal of Memory and Language,
35, 724-755.
8- Francis, W.N., & Kucera, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English
Usage: Lexicon and Grammar. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
9- Frazier, L., & Fodor, J.D. (1978). The sausage machine: A new
two-stage model of the parser. Cognition, 6, 291-325.
10- Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligence: The Theory of Practice
Basic Books.
11- Garrett, M.F. (1975). The analysis of sentence production. In G.H.
Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (PP. 133-177).
New York: Academic Press.
12- Gierse, C. (1993). Ideas on how to motivate learner independence.
Modern English Teacher 2/4.
13- Goleman, D. (1996). Emotional Intelligence. Why can it matter more
than IQ? Bloomsbury.
14- Hadfield, J. (1992). Classroom Dynamics. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
15- Lenneberg, E. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York:
Wiley.
16- Lombardi, L., & Potter, M.C. (1992). The regeneration of syntax
in short term memory. Journal of Memory and language, 31, 713-733.
17- Mousavi, S.A. (1999). 2nd ed. A Dictionary of Language Testing.
Tehran: Rahnama Publications.
18- Richards, J.C., Platt, J., & Platt, H. (1992). Longman Dictionary
of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. London: Longman.
19- Riverse, V.O. (1968). Teaching Language Skills.
20- Seliger, H.W. & Shohamy, E. (1989). Second language research
methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21- Steinberg, D. (1981). Psycholinguistics: Language, Mind, and World.
APPENDIX
A
Two Groups of Sentence Complement Structures Served as a Recall Task
The unambiguous (he) or ambiguous (you) pronoun was positioned
at the asterisk in each of the two groups. Each group had 10 pairs of
complex sentences differing in only the pronoun at the beginning of
the subordinate clauses. The two clauses were played back to listeners
in the reverse order individually.
APPENDIX
B
The Questionnaire Used to Investigate the Impact of
Disambiguation and Economization
The present questionnaire was used by every interlocutors while participants
were reporting the reconstructed structures to them. This was respectively
done on an individual basis. The 10 second interval simply let the interlocutors
mark the intended spaces.
Student
Name: ---------------------
Sex: M F
Age: --------------------
University Year
1
2
3
4
See
MS Word Doc for full text
