ISLAMIC AZAD UNIVERSITY
Central Tehran Branch
Faculty of Foreign Languages – Department of English
A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement For The Degree Of Master Of Arts In Translation Studies
The Analysis of Translation Strategies of Cultural Presuppositions in James Joyce’s “Dubliners”
Advisor:
Dr. M. Fahim
Reader:
Dr. A. Baradaran
January
2012
(در فایل دانلودی نام نویسنده موجود است)
تکه هایی از متن پایان نامه به عنوان نمونه :
(ممکن است هنگام انتقال از فایل اصلی به داخل سایت بعضی متون به هم بریزد یا بعضی نمادها و اشکال درج نشود ولی در فایل دانلودی همه چیز مرتب و کامل است)
Table of Contents
Epigraph. II
Dedication. III
Acknowledgments. IV
Table of Contents. V
List of Tables. VIII
List of Graphs. IX
Abstract X
CHAPTER I: Background and Purpose.. 1
1.1. Introduction. 2
1.2. Significance of the Study. 7
1.3. Statement of the Problem.. 11
1.4. Research Questions 14
1.5. Definition of the Key Terms 15
1.6. Limitations and Delimitations 16
CHAPTER II: Review of the Related Literature.. 18
2.1. Introduction. 19
2.2. Translation. 21
2.3. Culture. 25
2.4. Language and Culture. 29
2.5. Translation and Culture. 33
2.6. Translation Problems 36
2.6.1. Linguistics Differences. 37
2.6.2. Social Differences. 41
2.6.3. Cultural Differences. 42
2.7. Presuppositions 47
2.7.1. Philosophical Presupposition. 48
2.7.2. Semantic Presupposition. 48
2.7.3. Pragmatic Presupposition. 49
2.7.4. Cultural Presupposition. 50
2.8. Cultural Presuppositions 50
2.9. Different Classifications of Cultural Presuppositions 52
2.9.1. Newmark’s Classification. 53
2.9.2. Thriveni’s Classification. 58
2.9.3. Pavlovic’s Classification. 60
2.10. Translation Strategies 63
2.11. Translation Strategies for Cultural Presuppositions 66
2.11.1. House’s Strategies. 67
2.11.2. Newmark’s Strategies. 68
2.11.3. Baker’s Strategies. 72
2.11.4. Hervey and Higgins’ Strategies. 74
2.11.5. Aixela’s Strategies. 77
2.11.6. Vinay and Darblenet’s Strategies. 81
2.11.7. Wiersema’s Strategies. 82
2.12. Concluding Points 83
Chapter III: Methodology.. 84
3.1. Introduction. 85
3.2. Corpus 86
3.3. Theoretical Framework. 88
3.4. Design. 97
3.5. Procedure. 97
3.6. Data Collection. 98
3.7. Data Analysis 98
Chapter IV: Results and Discussions. 100
4.1. Introduction. 101
4.2. Description of the Data. 101
4.2.1. Cultural Presuppositions. 102
4.2.1.1. Ecology. 102
4.2.1.2. Material Culture (Artifacts) 102
4.2.1.3. Social Culture. 104
4.2.1.4. Organizations, Customs, Ideas. 105
4.2.1.5. Gestures and Habits. 107
4.2.2. Translation Strategies. 108
4.2.2.1. Transference. 108
4.2.2.2. Naturalization. 109
4.2.2.3. Cultural Equivalent 110
4.2.2.4. Functional Equivalent 110
4.2.2.5. Descriptive Equivalent 111
4.2.2.6. Synonymy. 112
4.2.2.7. Through-translation. 113
4.2.2.8. Shifts or Transposition. 114
4.2.2.9. Reduction and Expansion. 115
4.2.2.10. Couplets, Triplets, and Quadruplets. 116
4.2.2.11. Notes, Additions, and Glosses. 117
4.3. Analysis of the Data. 121
Chapter V: Conclusion, Implications, and Suggestions for Further Research.. 126
5.1. Introduction. 127
5.2. Conclusion. 128
5.3. Pedagogical Implications 130
5.4. Suggestions for Further Research. 132
References 134
Appendixes 139
List of Tables
Table 1: Food. 18
Table 2: Clothes. 18
Table 3: Housing. 18
Table 4: Transport 18
Table 5: Work. 18
Table 6: Leisure. 18
Table 7: Political and Administrative. 18
Table 8: Religious. 18
Table 9: Artistic. 18
Table 10: Historical Terms. 18
Table 11: Gestures and Habits. 18
Table 12: Transference. 18
Table 13: Naturalization. 18
Table 14: Cultural Equivalent 18
Table 15: Functional Equivalent 18
Table 16: Descriptive Equivalent 18
Table 17: Synonymy. 18
Table 18: Through-translation. 18
Table 19: Shifts. 18
Table 20: Reduction. 18
Table 21: Couplets. 18
Table 22: Triplets. 18
Table 23: Additions. 18
Table 24: Notes. 18
Table 25: Overall frequencies of cultural presuppositions. 18
Table 26: Overall frequencies of translation strategies. 18
Table 27: All cultural presuppositions separately for each short story. 18
Table 28: All cultural presuppositions and their translation strategies. 18
List of Graphs
Graph 1: Percentages of Cultural Presuppositions. 18
Graph 2: Percentages of Translation Strategies. 18
Abstract
Translation as a way to transfer the meaning is a kind of activity that involves not only two languages, but also two cultures. Like any other field of study, translation deals with all the aspects of human life such as social, industrial, and cultural. In other words it is not enough for translators to have a good command of both the source and target languages; they have to be completely aware of both the source and target cultures. Each culture creates certain messages, connotations, and denotations. Therefore it is likely that many concepts occur in one language and culture but not in the other. In other words, one of the major problems facing translators is how to find equivalents for implicit ideas, opinions, and presuppositions, which have their bases in their underlying cultures. Facing with unshared elements of culture, namely cultural presuppositions, between the source and target language, translators have a variety of options to treat the cultural aspects of the ST and finding the most appropriate strategy to convey these aspects in the TT. The present study will focus on different translation strategies which the Persian translators of James Joyce’s “Dubliners” (2001) have applied to deal with translation problems rooted in cultural presuppositions. The process of classification of cultural presuppositions and the translation strategies for dealing
with them is based on Newmark’s (1988) translation categorizations.
CHAPTER I
Background and Purpose
1.1 Introduction
Translating as an activity is almost as old as mankind, but the history of translation as a discipline dates back to no more than two decades ago (Schaffner & Kelly-Holms, 1995). In this short period of systematic investigation of this discipline, the nature of such studies has undergone a drastic change. Traditionally there has been a dividing line between the language and the extra linguistic reality. Although there have been different definitions of translation but most of them emphasized the linguistic aspects of the translation process. For instance, Catford’s (1974) definition of translation is as follows: “translation is the replacement of textual material in one language by equivalent textual material in another language.” (P.20). As it can be seen here what is significant is the equivalent textual material. Next, Newmark (1981) defines translation in this way: “Translation is a craft, consisting of two languages, in the attempt to replace a written message and/or statement in another language” (P.7).
Defining translation seems simple at first glance and there are many definitions of this kind. However, translation is not strictly limited to language, rather, language and culture are deeply intertwined and it is the translation which bridges the gap between different languages and hence, cultures. Here it is clear that these definitions by famous theoreticians exclude the factor of culture in translation. As Snell-Hornby (1988) claims, translation must be regarded something more than merely transcending the linguistic elements from one language to another. It has recently come to be understood as a cultural system and it was to be treated with delicate observing the cultural aspects. Gradually some theorists confirm this fact that translation is an activity which involves a kind of verbal, but never strictly verbal communication. Miremadi (1991), for instance, has stated: “it is a two-way process: from one culture to the others and form other cultures into one’s culture. In other words, there is a give and take process” (P.11). Toury (1978) also believes that “Translation is a kind of activity which inevitably involves at least two languages and two cultural traditions” (P.200). The reason for such a drastic change in the point of view toward the translation studies is that the contemporary approach sees language as the integral part of culture. Language is an expression of culture and individuality of its speakers; so cultural meanings are intricately woven into the texture of the language.
Newmark (1988) defines culture as: “the way of life and its manifestation that is peculiar to a community that uses a particular language as its means of expression” (P.93). Culture is a complex collection of experiences which condition daily life; it includes history, social structure, religious, traditional customs and every day usage. Translating as an activity and translation as the result of this activity are inseparable from the concept of culture.
Regarding this definition, it is clear that there are many words and expressions that differ from one culture to another; for instance, way of living varies from one society to another according to the beliefs of the people, the situation in which they live, the technological advances, etc. So, every culture has its own characteristics. The people of a special society know the characteristics of their culture while the people of other communities are not able to understand it. Histories of different societies and cultures are characterized by events and processes that shape their cultural cognition. It is possible that different events and processes have similar effects on language use and it is also possible that similar processes and events have different impacts on the structure of a language and how it is used by its speakers. Speakers of different languages exhibit different verbal and nonverbal behaviors in their interactions and the possibilities of misunderstanding are rife when two totally different cultures come into contact with each other. It is worth to mention here that what is interesting for people of a society within their own culture may not be enjoyable for people in another society. Each culture expresses its idiosyncrasies in a way that is “culture-bound”. That is, the origin and use of cultural words and idiomatic expressions are intrinsically and uniquely bound to the culture concerned. Since the culture of a community can determine its language, the vocabulary of a language are created and used by the people of that society according to their needs in the specific culture in which they are living. Therefore, translators obviously do not deal with translating individual words deprived of context, but deal with whole texts which are culturally embedded and based on a community of references predictably shared by most members of the source culture. The deeper a text is embedded in its culture, the more difficult it is to work on.
A “cultural presuppositions” item is created in situations when there is nonexistence on the different value of an item in the target language culture and a conflict will arise in the process of translating these kinds of items. It is clear that a word often does not mean exactly the same thing as its equivalent in another language. Ping (1999) defined Cultural presupposition as underlying assumptions, beliefs, and ideas that are culturally rooted, widespread, but rarely if ever described or defined because they seem so basic and obvious as not to require verbal formulation. Therefore, there may be some vocabulary in some cultures for which there is no equivalence in another one. Here is the point where translation problems will arise and there should be a solution.
Newmark (1988) believed that the translation of a work attempts to produce on its reader an effect as possible to that obtained on the readers of the original. However, with culturally-bound words this is often impossible. Indeed, the meaning which lies behind those kinds of expressions is always strongly linked to the specific cultural context where the text originates or with the cultural context it aims to re-create. As this statement implies, translators are permanently faces with the problem of how to treat the cultural aspects implicit in the source text (ST) and of finding the most appropriate technique of successfully conveying these aspects in the target language. These problems may vary in scope depending on the cultural and linguistic gap between the two languages concerned (Nida, 1985). Therefore, one of the most challenging tasks for all translators is how to render culture-specific elements in translating a foreign language. So, having a good understanding of both cultures can be helpful for the translator. S/he should look at differences between cultures which are a very important issue in translation of any kind and translation of literature is no exception. Indeed, not much attention has been paid to this problem by translation theories.
Literary translators face a far more complicated process. They require knowledge of linguistics, an appreciation of literature and an awareness of literary terms and concepts. Literature gives public form to private meanings and thus helps those who receive its messages to reach out to other human beings in the world, knowing that they share some of the same concerns and feelings. Therefore, one of the factors to be considered in translating literature is the role of culture. There are various cultures in the world and not all of them are the same. These cultures are different from one language to the other and this matter may cause some difficulties in translation of different works and in particular translation of literature. The present study aims to investigate the translators’ approaches and strategies in dealing with cultural presupposition items in a literature work and finding the most and the least frequent translation strategies in this regard. For the purpose of this research, the material is consisted of fifteen short stories included in James Joyce’s Dubliners. In selecting the corpus for the present research the focus was on those themes in which cultural items were more probable to appear.
دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی
واحد تهران مركزی
دانشكده زبانهای خارجی ، گروه زبان انگلیسی
پایان نامه برای دریافت درجه كارشناسی ارشد (M.A)
گرایش آموزش زبان انگلیسی
عنوان:
بررسی مقابله ای یادگیری رقابتی و توام با همكاری بر یادگیری كاربرد زبان
استاد راهنما:
دكتر نسیم شنگرف فام
استاد مشاور:
دكتر حمید مرعشی زاده
تابستان1392
(در فایل دانلودی نام نویسنده موجود است)
تکه هایی از متن پایان نامه به عنوان نمونه :
(ممکن است هنگام انتقال از فایل اصلی به داخل سایت بعضی متون به هم بریزد یا بعضی نمادها و اشکال درج نشود ولی در فایل دانلودی همه چیز مرتب و کامل است)
ABSTRACT
The present study was an attempt to investigate the comparative effect of cooperative and competitive learning on EFL learners’ achievement of speech acts. As appropriate application of speech acts is of paramount importance in the second language development, the present experimental study was designed to see which method best helps the learners enhance their abilities in speech acts of apology and greeting. Based on the results of the proficiency test of PET, 55 female EFL learners at intermediate level whose scores fell within one standard deviation below and above the mean were selected and divided into two groups for the purpose of the study. Then a piloted researcher-made discourse completion test (DCT) comprised of 20 items was administered as the pretest. Following 10 weeks of treatment via employing cooperative and competitive methods, the posttest was administered. The outcome of the pre and post-test data analyses clarified that the participants in the cooperative group significantly outperformed those in the competitive group demonstrating that employing cooperative learning as a combination of classroom techniques could promote the second language speech act knowledge of the learners. Findings of the present study could be employed by second language teachers, materials developers, and ELT practitioners to help the EFL learners move towards cooperative learning.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER I: Background and purpose……………………………………………………………………………… 1
1.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 2
1.2 Statement of problem…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 9
1.3 Statement of Research………………………………………………………………………………………………. 11
1.4 Statement of the Research Hypothesis………………………………………………………………………… 11
1.5 Definition of the Key Terms……………………………………………………………………………………… 11
1.6 Significance of the Study………………………………………………………………………………………….. 12
1.7 Limitations and Delimitations……………………………………………………………………………………. 13
CHAPTER II: Review of the Related Literature………………………………………………………………. 15
2.1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 16
2.2. Speech Acts……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 16
2.3. Core Assumptions and Statements…………………………………………………………………………….. 18
2.4. Scope and Application…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 19
2.5. The Performatives……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 20
2.5.1. Explicit and Implicit Performatives…………………………………………………………………………. 22
2.6. Felicity Conditions………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 24
2.7. The Locutionary, Illocutionary and Perlocutionary Acts………………………………………………. 28
2.7.1. Locutionary Acts………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 29
2.7.2. Illocutionary Acts…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 31
2.7.3. Perlocutionary Acts………………………………………………………………………………………………. 33
2.8. Cooperative Learning………………………………………………………………………………………………. 34
2.8.1. Social Interdependence Perspective………………………………………………………………………… 37
2.8.2. Cognitive Development Perspectives………………………………………………………………………. 38
2.8.3. Behavioral Social Perspectives……………………………………………………………………………….. 38
2.8.3.1. Positive Interdependence……………………………………………………………………………………. 39
2.8.3.2. Individual Accountability/Personal Responsibility…………………………………………………. 40
2.8.3.3. Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction……………………………………………………………………… 41
2.8.3.4. Teamwork Skills………………………………………………………………………………………………… 42
2.8.3.5. Group Processing ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 42
2.8.4. Structuring Cooperative Learning…………………………………………………………………………… 45
2.8.5. Interactions in Groups…………………………………………………………………………………………… 47
2.8.6. Students Perceptions of Cooperative Learning…………………………………………………………. 50
2.9. Competitive Learning………………………………………………………………………………………………. 52
CHAPTER III: Methodology…………………………………………………………………………………………. 57
3.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 58
3.2. Participants…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 58
3.3. Instrumentation………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 59
3.3.1 Preliminary English Test (PET)……………………………………………………………………………….. 59
3.3.2 Discourse Completion Test……………………………………………………………………………………… 60
3.3.2.1 Reliability and validity of the instrument……………………………………………………………….. 63
3.4. Materials………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 63
3.5. Procedure……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 63
3.5.1. Pretest ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 63
3.5.2. Treatment…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 64
3.5.3. Posttest……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 66
3.6. Design……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 67
3.7. Statistical Analyses………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 67
CHAPTER IV: Results and Discussions………………………………………………………………………….. 68
4.1 Pilot study of Preliminary English Test (PET)……………………………………………………………… 69
4.2. Subject-Selection Statistics………………………………………………………………………………………. 70
4.3 Pilot study of MCDCT …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 70
4.4. Proficiency Test (PET)…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 71
4.5. Pretest of Speech acts………………………………………………………………………………………………. 73
4.6 Post test of speech acts……………………………………………………………………………………………… 73
4.7 Testing Assumptions………………………………………………………………………………………………… 74
4.8. Empirical Validity…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 76
4.9. Reliability Indices……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 77
4.10 Reliability of the Writing Tasks in the PET test………………………………………………………….. 77
4.11. Discussion…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 79
CHAPTER V: Conclusion and Pedagogical Implications…………………………………………………… 83
5.1 Restatement of the Problem………………………………………………………………………………………. 84
5.2 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 86
5.3 Pedagogical Implications…………………………………………………………………………………………… 87
5.4. Suggestions for Further Research………………………………………………………………………………. 88
REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 91
APPENDIX A……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 105
APPENDIXI B…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 128
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 4.1 Descriptive statistics of PET pilot study…………………………………………………………….. 89
Table 4.2 Descriptive Statistics of subject selection……………………………………………………………. 70
Table 4.3 descriptive statistics of pilot study of MCDCT pre/post test ………………………………… 70
Table 4.4 Descriptive statistics of PET by groups………………………………………………………………. 71
Table 4.5 Independent samples t-test of PET scores…………………………………………………………… 72
Table 4.6 Descriptive statistics of speech acts posttest by groups………………………………………… 73
Table 4.7 normality tests…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 74
Table 4.8 Independent samples t-test of Posttest scores……………………………………………………… 75
Table 4.9 Pearson Correlation PET with Pretest and Posttest of Speech Acts……………………….. 76
Table 4.10 K-R21 Reliability…………………………………………………………………………………………… 77
Table 4.11Inter-Rater Reliability of the Writing Pretest …………………………………………………….. 78
Table 4.12 Intra-Rater Reliability of the Writing Pretest…………………………………………………….. 78
CHAPTER I
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
- Introduction
It is generally recognized that the goal of language teaching is to develop learner’s ability to communicate appropriately in a given target language and culture. This means that it is not enough for teaching practices to exclusively focus on the features of the target language linguistic system. Otherwise, inappropriate use of language can lead to pragmatic failure and those speakers who do not use pragmatically appropriate language run the risk of appearing uncooperative at very least or more seriously, rude or uncultured (Bardovi-Harlig, Hartford, Mahan-Taylor, Morgam, & Reynols, 1991).
Pragmatic ability in a second or foreign language is part of a nonnative speaker’s (NNS) communicative competence and therefore has to be located in a model of communicative ability (Savignon, 1991). In Bachman’s model (1990, p. 87ff), ‘language competence’ is subdivided into two components, ‘organizational competence’ and ‘pragmatic competence’. Organizational competence comprises knowledge of linguistic units and the rules of joining them together at the levels of sentence (‘grammatical competence’) and discourse (‘textual competence’). Pragmatic competence subdivides into ‘illocutionary competence’ and ‘sociolinguistic competence’. ‘Illocutionary competence’ can be glossed as ‘knowledge of communicative action and how to carry it out’. The term ‘communicative action’ is often more accurate than the more familiar term ‘speech act’ because communicative action is neutral between the spoken and written mode, and the term acknowledges the fact that communicative action can also be implemented by silence or non-verbally. ‘Sociolinguistic competence’ comprises the ability to use language appropriately according to context. It thus includes the ability to select communicative acts and appropriate strategies to implement them depending on the current status of the ‘conversational contract’ (Fraser, 1990).
Obviously, in EFL settings, one of the most dominant reasons is the learners’ transfer of speech act strategies from their native language (Ellis, 1994).
In recent years, with the unremitting development of Speech Act Theory, it has gradually emerged as an important topic and has been considered as a basic theory in pragmatics. A speech act as an action performed by means of language is an important element of communicative competence and the Speech Act Theory not only conveys the linguistic rules people share to create the acts, but also leads language learners to use this language tactfully or appropriately. It is believed that to learn a language is indeed to learn how to communicate in that language. However, evidence shows that many learners of English fail to achieve the tactful or appropriate use of English in their daily communication with native speakers. Thereby, researchers suggest that applying Speech Act Theory in language teaching has become increasingly imperative (Green, 2010).
One of instructional techniques the language teachers can use to increase learner’s achievement of speech acts is cooperative learning (Wright, 2010). Cooperative learning is an instructional technique that enables students to work together to maximize their own and each other’s learning (Ellis, 2008). Now cooperative learning is applied in almost all school content areas and increasingly, in college and university contexts all over the world and is claimed to be an effective teaching method in foreign/second language education by many scholars (Kessler, 1992, as cited in Brown, 2007).
Ochs and Schieffelin (2011) argue that a central tenet of second language development research is that learners’ participation in communicative practices are promoted but not totally determined by course books, teachers, or even
the built environment. A very crucial factor to consider in the process of second language development, especially when it comes to the effective communication, is the presence of socially and culturally informed persons, peers, and the like. Within a cooperative atmosphere and based on the perspective which mainly stresses cooperation, not competition, learning will be promoted. This, of course could find enough supports in the constructivism literature (Jaramillo, 1996; Lantolf & Thorne, 2006; Mitchell & Myles, 2004; Van Lier, 2004; Vygotsky, 1986; Young, 1993), and is technically named scaffolding.
“Within the body of cooperative learning, scaffolding plays a crucial role. Particularly in the early stages of learning, an instructor might invite student participation in the task at hand. “This practice engages the student in learning and provides her/ him with ownership of the learning experience” (Hogan and Pressley, 1997, p. 76). “For example, a teacher might write the decimal point on the chalkboard and then ask a student to identify the next step in converting a fraction to a decimal. The student might be invited to participate verbally or she might be asked to come to the chalkboard and contribute her ideas or strategies in writing. Rather than asking a student for direct participation, an instructor might scaffold learning by asking students to contribute clues or ideas” (Hogan and Pressley, 1997, p. 91).
According to Van Lire (2004), there are many benefits of cooperative learning, and it should have its place in the classroom for several reasons. Humans are social beings that learn extremely well through interaction. While using methods of cooperative learning, students will develop a sense of community and commitment. This method of learning also supports positive peer teaching and learning which is beneficial as well.
Cooperative learning can also be focused on from the perspective of motivation: Motivational perspectives on cooperative learning focus primarily on the reward or goal structures under which students operate (Slavin, 1995). From this perspective, cooperative incentive structures create a situation in which the only way group members can attain their own personal goals is if the group is successful. Therefore, to meet their personal goals, group members must both help their group-mates to do whatever helps the group to succeed and, perhaps even more importantly, to encourage their group-mates to exert maximum efforts. In other words, rewarding groups based on group performance (or the sum of individual performances) creates an interpersonal reward structure, in which group members will give or withhold social reinforces (e.g., praise, encouragement) in response to group-mates’ task-related efforts (Slavin,1983).
Cooperative learning can create a situational perspective for the second language learners named “the social cohesion perspective” (Cohen, 1994), which is an emphasis on teambuilding activities in preparation for cooperative learning and processing or group self-evaluation during and after group activities.
It is generally asserted that cooperative learning is a highly appropriate option for all students because it emphasizes active interaction among individuals of diverse abilities and background (Yule, 1996) and demonstrates more positive student outcomes in academic achievement, social behavior and effective development.
One of instructional techniques language teachers can use to increase learner’s achievement of speech acts is competitive learning, and according to Johnson, Johnson, and Stanne (2000), competitive learning is that kind of learning in which the students have got to work against each other for the purpose on achieving a good grade. So one student should achieve the goal and another one is bound to fail. Thus the competitive learning can be interpersonal of inter-group. Competitive learning is of great value if the students want to view the material they have learned.
Competitive learning exists when one student goal is achieved but all other students fail to reach that goal (Johnson & Johnson, 1991). Competitive learning can be interpersonal (between individuals), or intergroup (between groups), where a group setting is appropriate. This strategy has been described as the most appropriate when students need to review learned materials (Griffiths & Podirsky, 2002). However, there have been many criticisms of this type of learning, including promoting high anxiety levels, self-doubt, selfishness, and aggression. It may also promote cheating and interfere with learners’ capacity to problem-solveing (Johnson & Johnson, 1991). Competitive interaction strategy could be used in the studies where students work in subgroups. This way Members of each subgroup work strictly on his/her own, strive to be the best in the subgroup for price or reward.
Literature evidence concerning the relative effectiveness of and practical preferences of pundits among these teaching techniques have been varied and mixed. In a study carried out by Dowell (1975, cited in Pneuman, 2009) on the effectiveness of a competitive and cooperative on the comprehension of a cognitive task, he stated that the students in the cooperative learning environment performed better than they did in a competitive environment. Alebiosu (1998) was of the view that students exposed to cooperative learning strategies performed significantly better in all the skills than their counterparts exposed to competitive or individualistic learning strategies. Johnson and Johnson (1991) contended that achievement outcomes were actually more accepted in competitive settings for high self-concept children than in the cooperative settings. Esan (1999, as cited in Pneuman, 2009) was of the view that individualistic setting showed a positive attitude towards mathematics than both cooperative and competitive setting. Okebukola and Ogunniyi (1984) presented that the cooperative arrangement was better for promoting achievement while the competitive arrangement was better for practical skills. Ojo and Egbon (2005) were of the view that the cooperative learning environment was found to be more conducive to learning than the competitive setting. Okediji, Anene, and Afolabi (2006) found that cooperative learning strategy groups performed significantly better than their non-cooperative counterparts, but found no significant difference in performance between competitive and noncompetitive learning strategy groups. There was also no significant interaction effect of cooperation and competition.
- Statement of the Problem
According to Hudson, Detmer, and Brown (1995), speech act categories are cultural concepts, and they vary from one society to another. For instance, there is considerable variation in address form use, across languages, across national boundaries, across social groups within the same country from one individual to the next, and even in the behavior of the same person. Therefore, it is not enough for foreign language learners only to know the language, but it is important for them to be able to communicate correctly and effectively, foreign language learners need to understand what the purpose of speech act is and how to achieve the purpose through linguistic forms. In this respect, still it seems that most English learners have difficulty in comprehension and recognition of speech acts.
Even at the advance level, normally learners are familiar with only a formal style which is widely used in academic contexts; they also seem to feel that they are incomplete in interpreting the native speaker’s intentions and that their own pragmatic intentions may not be fully appreciated, this pragmatic failure can especially be traced in the areas of speech acts. Facilitating the development of pragmatic competence with respect to a particular speech act or function necessarily entail both description of the use of speech acts and approach for developing pragmatic competence. Language learners must be exposed to language samples which appropriately observe social, cultural and discoursal conventions. Speakers who do not use pragmatically appropriate language run the risk of appearing uncooperative at least, or more seriously rude or insulting.
:
هدف از انجام این مطالعه مقایسه اثر داستان گویی و ایفای برانگیزه زبان آموزان بوده است. بدین منظور پس از برگزاری آزمون (PET) در ابتدای مطالعه به منظور همسان سازی، از بین 90 زبان آموز در سطح متوسط و در گروه سنی 13 تا 17 سال موسسه زبان های خارجی آریان در شهر گرگان60 نفر انتخاب شدند و بدین ترتیب دو گروه مختلف آزمایشی را شکل دادند: 30 نفر در گروه آزمایشی 1 و 30 نفر در گروه آزمایشی 2 . پرسشنامه انگیزه گاردنر به عنوان پیش آزمون ازهر دو گروه گرفته شد. سپس گروه آزمایشی 1مورد آموزش از طریق داستان گویی و گروه آزمایشی 2، مورد آموزش از طریق ایفای نقش در آموزشگاه قرار گرفتند. پس از سپری کردن 20 جلسه آموزشی در یک ترم،همان پرسشنامه،به عنوان پس آزمون برگزار و در پایان دوره آموزشی میانگین نمرات هر دو گروه از طریق آزمون مستقل تى محاسبه شد. نتایج تفاوت معناداریدر میزان انگیزه گروه آزمایشی ایفای نقشنسبت به گروه آزمایشی دوم نشان داد واین گروه نسبت به گروه داستان گویی توانست برتری داشته باشد.
ABSTRACT
This study was an attempt to investigate the comparative effect of storytelling and role playing on EFL learners’ motivation. To fulfill the purpose of this study, 60 female learners with the age range of 13 to 18 years old were selected among a total number of 90 learners studying at Arian Institute in Gorgan through their performance on a piloted PET for homogenizing them prior to the study. Four classes with 15 participants in each were randomly assigned to two experimental groups with two different treatments. Both experimental groups attended 20 sessions with the same material, and the Gardner’s attitude and motivation test battery (AMTB) was administered as the pretest and posttest of the study. The mean scores of the two groups on this posttest were computed through an independent samples t-test in order to test the hypothesis raised in the study. The results demonstrated that learners benefited significantly from role playing and storytelling instructions.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iv
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES vii
CHAPTER I: BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE 1
1.1. Introduction 2
1.2. Statement of the Problem 5
1.3. Statement of the Research Question 6
1.4. Statement of the Research Hypothesis 6
1.5. Definition of Key Terms 6
1.6. Significance of the Study 8
1.7. Limitations and Delimitation 9
1.7.1. Limitations 9 1.7.2. Delimitation 10
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE 11
2.1. Introduction 12
2.2. History of Storytelling 15
2.2.1. Storytelling in the English Language Classroom 16
2.2.2. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and
Storytelling 17
2.2.3. Storytelling and Task-based Language Teaching 19
2.2.4. The National Curriculum, Communicative Language 20
Teaching (CLT) and Storytelling
2.2.5. Learner Autonomy and Storytelling 21
2.2.6. Multiple Intelligences (MI) and Storytelling 22
2.2.7. Rationale for Storytelling 24
2.2.8. Studies on Storytelling 24
2.3. Role playing 26
2.3.1. Role playing and Task-based Language Teaching 26
(TBLT)
2.3.2. Advantages of Role playing 27
2.3.3 Disadvantages of Role playing 31
2.3.4. Rationale for Using Role playing 32
2.4 Motivation 34
2.4.1. Types of Motivation 37
2.4.1.1 Instrumental and Integrative Motivation 37
2.4.1.2 Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation 38
2.5.Theories and Constructs Reflecting Motivational Beliefs 39
and Attitudes
2.5.1 Attribution Theory 39
2.5.2 Self- efficacy 41
2.5.3 Mastery Experience 41
2.5.4Social Modeling 41
2.5.5.Social Persuasion 42
2.5.6.Psychological Response 42
2.5.7.Self – worth Theory 43
2.5.8.Goal Theories 43
2.5.9. Self – Determination Theory (SDT) 44
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY 46
3.1. Introduction 47
3.2. Participants 47
3.3. Instrumentations and Materials 48
3.3.1. Tests 48
3.3.1.1. The Preliminary English Test (PET) 48
3.3.1.2. Attitude and Motivation Test Battery a 50
Pretest and a Posttest
3.3.2. Materials 51
3.3.2.1. Main Course Book for Both Groups
3.3.2.2. Flashcards and Posters for Both Groups 51
3.4. Procedure 51
3.5. Design 54
3.6. Statistical Analyses 55
CHAPTER IV: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 56
4.1. Introduction 57
4.2. Participant Selection 57
4.2.1 PET Pilot Study 58
4.2.1.1 PET Administration for Homogenizing 59
the Participants
4.2.2. Inferential Statics 67
4.2.2.1. Post-Test Results 71
4.2.2.2. Post-Test Descriptive Statistics 71
4.3. Testing the Null Hypotheses 74
4.4. Discussion 75
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND PEDAGOGICAL 82
IMPLICATIONS
5.1. Introduction 83
5.2. Summary of the Findings 83
5.3. Pedagogical Implications 85
5.3.1. Implication for EFL Teachers 85
5.3.2. Implication for EFL Syllabus Designers 86
5.4. Suggestions for Further Research 87
REFERENCES 89
APPENDICES 97
Appendix A: Preliminary English Test (PET) 98
Appendix B: Appendix B: Writing Rating Scale 120
Appendix C: Attitude and Motivation Test Battery 122
by Gardner, 1985 (AMTB)
Appendix D: Sample Lesson 126
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistics of the PET Pilot Administration 58
Table 4.2 Reliability Estimates of the PET before and after Removing 59
Malfunctioning Items
Table 4.3 Reliability of the PET in First Homogenization 60
Table 4.4 Descriptive Statistics of the Two Ratings of PET Writing 60
Section (First Homogenization)
Table 4.5 Correlation between the Two Ratings of the PET 61
Writing Tasks (First Homogenization)
Table 4.6: Descriptive Statistics of Total PET (First Homogenization) 62
Table 4.7 Reliability of the PET (Second Homogenization) 62
Table 4.8 Descriptive Statistics of the Two Ratings of PET Writing 63
Section (First Second Homogenization)
Table 4.9 Correlation between the Two Ratings of the PET Writing 64
Tasks (Second Homogenization)
Table 4.10 Descriptive Statistics of Total PET (Second Homogenization) 64
Table 4.11 Descriptive Statistics of the Total PET Scores of the Two 65
Experimental Groups
Table 4.12: Independent Samples Test on the Total PET at the Onset 66
Table 4.13: T-test for both experimental groups 67
Table 4.14: Paired Samples Test for the experimental group 1 68
Table 4.15: Paired Samples Test for the experimental group 2 69
Table 4.16: Independent Samples Test Experimental 1 70
and Experimental 2 (Pretest)
Table 4.17: Descriptive Statistics of the motivation Post-test 72
Table 4.18: Independent Samples Test Experimental 1 74
and Experimental 2(Posttest)
Figure 4.1: Scatter Plot of Descriptive Statistics of the motivation Post-test
CHAPTER I
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
1.1 Introduction
Scholars in the field of teaching and learning English as a foreign or second language have long been concerned with finding ways to increase the learners’ motivation and removing the barriers they bring with themselves into the educational environment. Incorporating different instructions and techniques into the classroom adds variety as well as opportunities for a lot of language production. Some believe that these techniques can be used as integral part of the class. Using storytelling and role playing in EFL classes have gained special attention in recent years. If the teacher believes that the activity will work and the necessary support is provided, it can be very successful. However, if the teacher is not convinced about the validity of using role-play, the activity “will fall flat on its face just as you expected it to” (Ladousse, 1987, p.7). A widely spread and one of the best communicative activities as well as cooperative learning is a role play which trains the students in the classroom to cope with unpredictable real-life situations in an English speaking environment. Ladousse (1987) points out the special reasons for using role play in the lessons. It puts students in situations in which they are required to use and develop language necessary in social relationships and helps them to build up their social skills. Using role play is useful especially while teaching shy students who have difficulty participating in conversations about themselves. Through this activity they are put into various roles and no longer feel that their own personality is implicated. Role play is an essential communicative technique which develops fluency, promotes interaction in the classroom and increases motivation.
Nowadays, with the development of communication technology, the necessity of learning English as one of the most important languages of the world became more apparent. Therefore, the need for learning communicative skills increases. On important issue in teaching – learning settings is psychological ones like stress, anxiety, and motivation. The present study deals with the effect of two applicable instructions of teaching on motivation. It is important that educators recognize the impact of the tasks on their students and ensuring that they are considering learners academic and emotional needs.
However, storytelling has a strong effect on learners’ perception and comprehension. Baker and Greene (1977) assert “storytelling increases the listeners’ awareness-sense of wonder, of mystery, of reverence for life” (p.17).
Louise Phillips (2000), in her research about storytelling mentioned the importance and effect of storytelling: There is enough research that has found valuable learning potential in storytelling experiences for children. This research indicates that storytelling “(a)enhances children’s imagination” (Raines and Isbell, 1994;pp. 264-265); “(b) supports and improves children’s social lives” (Britsch, 1992; p. 80); “© develops their cognitive skills such as ‘deferred imitation’, speculation and knowledge”(Britsch, 1992; p.23; Nicolopoulou, Scales and Weintramb, 1994; p. 103; Mallan, 1991;p. 12); “(d) contributes significantly to all aspects of language development” (Cooper, Collins and Saxby, 1992; Mallan, 1991); and “(e) is an effective bridge to early literacy” (Bruner, 1986; Rosen, 1988 as cited in Miller and Mehler, 1994).
The power and value of reading to children is indisputable (Trealease, 1985; Hall, 1992; Snow, 1992 as cited in Tallant, 1992). In addition to great pleasure, it offers for children both story structure and makes them ready to become independent reader (Tallant, 1992).
It should be noted that role playing activities help the students to experience the “real-world” situations (Oberle, 2004, p 199). Van Ments (1983) mentioned three main advantages of role-playing activities: (a) they are positive and safe in dealing with attitudes and feelings, (b) they provide a safe venue for expressing personal and sometimes unpopular attitudes and opinions, and © “role-playing is highly motivating as the majority of students enjoy these types of activities and become more inspired learners (as Cited in Graves, 2008).
On the other hand, motivation is considered as a key feature in the success of language learning. In fact, Dörnyei (2000) puts that “motivation provides the primary impetus to embark upon learning, and later the driving force to sustain the long and often tedious learning process” (p.425). With regard to the importance of comparison of digital and traditional role-play among Iranian EFL Learners’ proficiency in motivation, most scholars have written paper about the importance of role-playing in motivation.
- Statement of the Problem
Teaching is a process in which teachers have to consider many different aspects if they want to make this process successful such as students level, background, social context, interests, purposes, personality, age, learning styles, abilities, and personality characteristics. About those factors and others, Lightbown and Spada (1997, p. 33) believe: “in addition to personality characteristics, other factors generally considered to be relevant to language learning are intelligence, aptitude, motivation, and attitudes.”
According to AbuêndiaPadilha (1999), it is really important for teachers to promote learner’s confidence by focusing on some issues and topics which make them interested. De Almeida believes that “in this way, learners will be able to continue with their learning process in a meaningful way. Not only can it provide a good language environment, but also motivation.” (2011, p.4)
Ericksen (1978) believes that “Effective learning in the classroom depends on the teacher’s ability … to maintain the interest that brought students to the course in the first place” (Ericksen, 1978, p. 3).
Researchers try to find a way to increase the learners’ motivation and interests and also decrease the amount of difficulty they encounter when they want to learn a new language.
It is widely agreed that learning takes place since activities are engaging and memorable. Research has also shown that well-organized everyday teaching practices and techniques have a great effect in contrast to special efforts to attack motivation directly (Ericksen, 1978).
In line with the discussion presented so far and because of the necessity for motivating instruction in an EFL learning setting, this study sought to compare the effect of storytelling and role playing on EFL learners’ motivation.
Islamic Azad University
Central Tehran Branch
Faculty of Foreign Languages – Department of English
“M.A” Thesis
Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment for the Requirements of the Degree of Master of Arts in Translation Studies
Subject
The Degree of Acceptability of the Academy of Persian Language and Literature (APLL) Astronomy Terminology Equivalents among Technical Translators of the Field
Advisor:
Dr. Kourosh Akef
Reader:
Dr. Behdokht Mall-Amiri
January 2014
(در فایل دانلودی نام نویسنده موجود است)
تکه هایی از متن پایان نامه به عنوان نمونه :
(ممکن است هنگام انتقال از فایل اصلی به داخل سایت بعضی متون به هم بریزد یا بعضی نمادها و اشکال درج نشود ولی در فایل دانلودی همه چیز مرتب و کامل است)
Abstract
Finding Persian Equivalents for technical terms is one of the aims of the Academy of Persian Language and Literature (APLL), and more than 40 scientific committees are now working on this scope in terminology departments of the Academy. The astronomy terminology committee is one of these teams that has started its activity since 2001 and has approved more than 600 of astronomy equivalents for academy fields. In this study, 29 questionnaires including 32terms were given to M.S and PhD degree astronomy technical translators. In order to get the more acceptability of the equivalents, the APLL needs to coin and select the acceptable equivalents coincide with the arrival of new concepts before the entrance of foreign terms.
Table of Contents
1
1.1 Introduction. 1
1.2 Research Question. 2
1.3 Definition of Key Terms. 2
1.4 Limitations and Delimitations of the Study. 3
1.5 Significance of the Study. 3
.. 5
2.1 Introduction. 5
2.2 Equivalence. 5
2.2.1 Definitions of Equivalence. 7
2.2.2 The Equivalence Controversy. 8
2.3 Terminological Activities of the APLL. 10
2.3.1 The objectives of the APLL. 13
2.4 Conclusion. 14
15
3.1 Introduction. 15
3.2 Corpora of the Study. 15
3.3 Procedure. 17
3.4 Data Analyses. 17
.. 18
4.1 Introduction. 18
4.2 Data Analyses and Research Findings. 18
.. 27
5.1 Introduction. 27
5.2 Conclusions. 27
5.3 Pedagogical Implications. 28
5.4 Suggestions for further Research. 29
. 31
List of Tables
|
Page | |
| Table 4.1. | The English and Persian polysemous of the research terminology | 56 |
| Table 4.2. | The potential productivity of the APLL equivalents | 59 |
| Table 4.3. | The more acceptable APLLES. | 61 |
| Table 4.4. | The equivalents with the five | 62 |
| Table 4.5. | Frequency and percentage of the total agreement and disagreement of the APLLE | 66 |
| Table 4.6. | The frequency and percentage of the agreement and disagreement of the APLLEs | 67 |
| Table 4.7. | Mean of high acceptable equivalents among astronomy technical translators | 68 |
| Table 4.8. | Mean of low acceptable equivalents among astronomy technical translators | 69 |
List of Figures
25
. 26
Figure 4‑3:The total mean of the low acceptable APLLES among the participants. 26
Abbreviations
|
|
| APLL | Academy of Persian language and Literature |
| APLLE | Academy of Persian Language and Literature Equivalent |
1 CHAPTER I
Background and Purpose
1.1 Introduction
Technical translation is a specialized translation involving the translation of texts related to the subject matter areas and deal with the scientific information (Zanon, 2011). Technical translators should understand the source text and know the specific terms of the source and target languages. According to Cabre (1999) a good technical translator must choose the topics they want to work on and attain minimal competence in some specific field in order to be certain to respect the content and form of the two languages they work in.
The APLL has suggested equivalents for some general and technical foreign terms in nine collections including “First Collection” to “Ninth Collection” since 1997. These equivalents were approved by the council of the APLL and finally confirmed by the President to communicate with governmental organizations and institutions. In accordance with the law on the prohibition of the use of foreign terms and expressions, such organizations are duty-bound to use exclusively these equivalents in their publications and correspondence.
1.2 Research Question
– To what extent are the APLL approved astronomy equivalents are accepted?
1.3 Definition of Key Terms
In order to avoid any misconception, the key words used in this study are defined here. It is through these definitions that the researcher can approach the problem.
1.3.1. Equivalent: Hartmann and Gregory (1998) state that “the equivalent is a word or phrase in one language which corresponds in meaning to a word or phrase in another language” (p. 5).
دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی
واحد تهران مرکزی
دانشکده زبانهای خارجی، گروه زبان انگلیسی
پایان نامه برای دریافت درجه کارشناسی ارشد (M.A)
عنوان:
تفاوت مهارت نوشتن گروهی زبان آموزان درونگرا و برونگرا
استاد راهنما:
دکتر عبدالله برادران
سال تحصیلی 94-93
(در فایل دانلودی نام نویسنده موجود است)
تکه هایی از متن پایان نامه به عنوان نمونه :
(ممکن است هنگام انتقال از فایل اصلی به داخل سایت بعضی متون به هم بریزد یا بعضی نمادها و اشکال درج نشود ولی در فایل دانلودی همه چیز مرتب و کامل است)
ABSTRACT
The present study is an attempt to investigate the difference between extrovert and introvert EFL learners’ cooperative writing. Initially 150 intermediate learners were asked to participate in the study. They sat in a PET and 90 homogenous learners, in term of language proficiency, were selected to fill Persian translation of Eysenck Personality Inventory questionnaire. Based on the results, 30 introvert and 30 extrovert learners were randomly assigned to two experimental groups. Both groups received a model of cooperative learning, i.e. Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC) as their treatment. After the treatment was done, they were asked to cooperatively write two essays in descriptive voice on two different topics. Their writings were scored based on Jacobs, Zingraf, Wormuth, Hartfiel, and Hughery (1981) scoring profile by two raters, and the mean of each student’s scores was considered as their cooperative writing score. Then the performance of extrovert and introvert learners on the test was compared using independent samples t-test. The results indicated that introvert learners significantly outperformed extrovert learners.
TABLE OF CONTENT
ABSTRACT. 1
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS. i
LIST OF TABLES. iii
LIST OF FIGURES. iv
C H A P T E R I: BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE. 1
1.1 Introduction. 2
2.1 Statement of the Problem.. 5
3.1 Statement of the Research Question. 8
4.1 Statement of the Research Hypothesis. 9
5.1 Definition of Key Terms. 9
6.1 Significance of the Study. 10
7.1 Limitations and Delimitation. 11
C H A P T E R II : REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE. 12
2.1 Overview.. 13
2.2 Need for Writing. 13
2.3 Cooperative Writing: subcategory of Cooperative Learning. 15
2.4 Cooperative Writing Features. 17
2.4.1 Positive Interdependence and Individual Accountability. 18
2.4.2. Processing Group Interaction. 18
2.4.3. Peer Feedback. 19
2.5. Cooperative writing in EFL classrooms. 19
2.6. Perspectives on cooperative writing. 21
2.7. Benefits of Cooperative Approach in EFL Writing Classroom.. 25
2.8. Preparing EFL Students for peer response in writing classrooms. 26
2.9. Guidelines for preparing EFL students for peer response. 27
2.10. Personality Factors and Teaching Writing. 30
C H A P T E R III : METHODOLOGY.. 37
3.1. Overview.. 38
3.2. Participants. 38
3.3. Instrumentation. 39
3.3.1 Personality Questionnaire. 39
3.3.2 Preliminary English Test (PET) 40
3.2.2 Essay Writing Test 42
3.2.3 Writing Rating Scales. 42
3.4 Procedure. 43
3.5. Design. 45
3.6. Statistical Analysis. 45
C H A P T E R IV: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION.. 47
4.1. Introduction. 48
4.2. Participant Selection. 48
4.2.1. Descriptive Statistics of the PET Piloting. 49
4.2.2. Descriptive Statistics of the PET Administration. 50
4.2.3. Identifying the Degree of Extroversion. 51
4.3. Posttest 54
4.4. Testing the Null Hypothesis. 56
4.5. Discussion. 57
C H A P T E R V : CONCLUSION, PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS. 61
5.1. Introduction. 62
5.2. Restatement of the Problem.. 62
5.3. Pedagogical Implications. 64
5.4. Suggestions for Further Research. 66
REFRENCES. 68
Appendices. 76
APPENDIX A: Eysenck Personality Inventory. 77
APPENDIX B: Preliminary English Test (PET) 80
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistics of the PET Piloting. 49
Table 4.2 Reliability of the PET in the Pilot Phase. 50
Table 4.3 Descriptive Statistics for PET Proficiency Test 51
Table 4.4 Descriptive Statistics of the Participants’ Performance in EPI 52
Table 4.5 Descriptive Statistics of the Participants’ E-Score in EPI 53
Table 4.6 Reliability of the EPI Questionnaire. 54
Table 4.7 Descriptive Statistics for the Essay Writing Posttest in Both Groups 54
-Test on the Performance of Both Groups in the Essay Writing Posttest 56
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1 Histogram of the Scores Obtained on the PET Piloting. 49
Figure 4.2 Histogram of the Scores Obtained on the PET Administration. 51
Figure 4.3 Histogram of the Participants’ Scores in EPI 52
Figure 4.4 Histogram of the E Scores of the Participants in EPI 53
Figure 4.5 Histogram of the Writing Posttest Scores Obtained by the Introvert Group 55
Figure 4.6 Histogram of the Writing Posttest Scores Obtained by the Extrovert Group 55
C H A P T E R I
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
1.1 Introduction
Living in 21 century and being a part of the global village, writing in English is a fundamental skill. Writing well is a necessity for academic success and a basic requirement for communication. ” It is unique and stands out of the four skills of language because its nature allows for examination and reexamination, debate and decision making, choice and revision and cognitive activities which require higher order thinking skills of communicator” (Hobson& Schafermeyer, 1994, p.51 ).
By the sake of writing, learners can participate in a productive practice which sometimes can motivates them to learn new language elements and structures during constant process of reviewing and drafting. Moreover, according to Celce-Murcia (1991), it fosters higher order cognitive activities and mental processing, which is an important component of learning. In addition, it invites feedback, either overt or covert, based on which students make adjustments in their learned language system.
Writing has always been regarded as an important part of academic life which serves different functions and purposes. But writing has always been a difficult skill (Graham, Harris & Manson, 2005) so teachers need some ways to encourage learners and motivate them to write. One way for motivating learners to write is use of cooperative learning techniques. Humans are social and cooperation has been used in all aspects of our lives. So, cooperative learning groups in learning situations can be an acceptable teaching approach. (Johnson & Johnson, 1994; Kagan, 1990; Slavin, 1995).
According to Deutch (1999) Kurt Lewin field theory and social interdependence have great roles in cooperative learning. Social interdependence started in early 1900s. Kurt Koffka who was one of the major figures of Gestalt psychology suggested that interdependence is different in dynamic wholes. “For interdependence to exist there must be more than one person or entity involved, and the persons or entities must have impact on each other in that a change in the state of one causes a change in the state of the others. It may be concluded that it is the drive for goal accomplishment that motivates cooperative and competitive behavior.” (Sharan, 2010, p.113)
In the late 1940s, one of Lewin’s graduate students, Morton Deutsch, extended Lewin’s reasoning about social interdependence and formulated a theory of cooperation and competition. Deutsch’s basic premise was that the type of interdependence structured in a situation determines how individuals interact with each other which, in turn, largely determine outcomes. “Positive interdependence tends to result in promotive interaction; negative interdependence tends to result in oppositional interaction, and no interdependence results in an absence of interaction.”(Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. 2008, p.121)
Cooperative writing is the instructional use of small groups so that students work together to maximize their own and each other’s learning. In this way students will interact with each other and the teacher during the instructional session. As Johnson & Johnson (2008) stated within cooperative situations, individuals seek outcomes that are beneficial to themselves and beneficial to all other group members.
“The basic elements are Positive interdependence, Promotive interaction, Interpersonal and small group skills, Group processing, and individual and group accountability which are essential for effective group learning, achievement, and higher-order social, personal and cognitive skills (e.g., problem solving, reasoning, decision-making, planning, organizing, and reflecting).” (Johnson, D.W & Johnson R.T. 2005, pp.285-360)
According to Sharan, Y. (2010) the benefits of cooperative learning are a better mutual relationship, respect, and higher communication. It also has advantages in thinking strategies. Competitive learners have difficulty in obtaining a balance between being competitive and interacting with others. Their emotional interaction and trust are two other concerns.
Personality types are distinguished from personality traits, which come in different levels or degrees. For example, according to type theories, there are two types of people, introverts and extroverts.), Myers and Briggs (1995 as cited in Bernsterin, Penner, Clarke, Stewart, and Roy 2008) introversion and extroversion are part of a continuous dimension, with many people in the middle.
Although extroversion maybe considered as socially desirable, it is not always an advantage. Conversely, while introversion maybe perceived as less socially desirable, it is strongly associated with positive traits such as intelligence and giftedness for many years, researchers have found that introverts tend to be more successful in academic environments, which extroverts may find boring. Personality traits, along with other factors such as skill and interest, are used to predict future academic and career performance.”(Ryckman 2004, p.61).
2.1 Statement of the Problem
Many EFL teachers complain and wonder why their students do not show considerable improvement in their writings every time they check the students’ writings. This shortcoming on the part of a student’s maybe partly due to personality traits and partly due to atmosphere of the class which is more competitive and teacher-centered rather than cooperative and learner-centered.
Surely, these teachers are not aware of benefits of cooperative writing. Moreover, they may not be aware that learning will not occur at all until students are motivated and psychologically and affectively ready to learn.
Furthermore, teachers probably expect all the students to the inputs in an identical way despite their totally different personalities. Put in other words, these teachers ignore the fact that each student is totally different human being with his/her unique cognitive style and personality.
According to Hobson & Schafermeyer (1994) writing is a productive activity that involves learners in an active participation and activates their mental processing by its nature of revision, examination and decision making which require higher order of thinking skills.
It also seems that teachers need to create a classroom atmosphere that encourages students to participate in all activities including writing. In most of the cases, classes are populated and consist of mixed-ability students, with fast and slow students together. Given these situations, how can the teacher involve all the students in the activities and let them have an active role in the class? A possible solution to this problem is that the teacher should increase the opportunity for students’ participation. Many ways have been proposed in this regard. One way is Cooperative Writing.
The researcher’s interest in Cooperative writing came from the observation of Iranian EFL learners in Tehran institutions and universities which had problems in group work with their learning and mostly had competitive rather than cooperative interests and how it is possible to boost cooperation among them through teaching writing skill.
