Designing a Competence-Based Syllabus for Turkish Speaking Learners of English in terms of Accessibility to Universal Grammar

Emrullah Åžeker

Abstract


This study focuses on designing an English grammar syllabus for Turkish speaking English learners, which is based on the assumption that learning English grammar will be simpler and easier for Turkish speaking learners if it is introduced in a way by which they can achieve accessibility to UG. In this study, I analyze almost all traditional grammar modules presented in a reliable ELT reference course book referring to parameters set between Turkish and English languages, try to determine how much of these modules are accessible through first language competence and finally transfer the results into developing a foreign language learning syllabus, accordingly suggesting a hierarchy of learning for Turkish speaking English learners. The traditional grammar modules are initially categorized as to their phrasal structures and then corresponding sample Turkish and English structures are analyzed in terms of parametric variations. Finally, a competence based English grammar syllabus designed as to parametric variations and language particular grammatical properties is suggested. In this study, I aim to provide Turkish speaking learners of English with an easy access to learning English grammar through their Turkish grammatical competence, getting rid of superfluous explanations and following a natural order of derivations in foreign language grammar presentation practices and syllabus design.

Keywords


English; syllabus; accessibility; competence; Universal Grammar.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bley-Vroman, R.W. (1989). “The logical problem of second language learning†In: V.J. Cook and M. Newson (1996) .Chomsky’s Universal Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

Brown, D.H. (2000). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching, 4th ed. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.

Bulut, T. (1996). The availability of Universal Grammar to adult Turkish learners of English: Parameter resetting. Unpublished PhD thesis. Adana: Çukurova University.

Can, C. (2000). “Türk yetiÅŸkinlerin Ä°ngilizceyi ikinci dil olarak edinimlerinde sözdizimi: ED’ye eriÅŸim savlarının sınanmasıâ€. XIV Dilbilim Kurultayı Bildirileri. Adana: Çukurova Ãœniversitesi Yayınları. 171-80.

Chomsky, N. (1981a). Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.

Chomsky, N. (1981b). “Principles and parameters in syntactic theoryâ€. In: Hornstein, N. and Lightfoot, D. eds. Explanations in linguistics, London: Longman.

Cook, V. J. (1985). “Chomsky’s Universal Grammar and second language learningâ€. Applied Linguistics.6.1-18.

Cook, V. J. (1993). Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

Cook, V. J. (2001). Second Language Learning and Second Language Teaching. 3rded. Arnold, London: Arnold.

Cook, V. J. and Newson, M. (1996). Chomsky's universal grammar: an introduction, Oxford: Blackwell.

Cummins, J. et al. (1984). “Linguistic interdependence among Japanese and Vietnamese immigrant studentsâ€. In: Rivera, C. Communicative Competence Approaches to Language Proficiency Assessment: Research and Application, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 60-81.

Eckman, F. (1977). “Markedness and the contrastive analysis hypothesisâ€. Language Learning. 27. 315 – 330.

Ellidokuzoğlu, H. (1994). Parameter setting in second language syntax: The case of Turkish learners of English. Published Doctorate Dissertation. Istanbul: Boğaziçi University.

Ellis, R. (2008). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. New York: Oxford University Press.

Epstein, S., Flynn, S. and Martohardjono, G. (1996). “Second language acquisition: theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary researchâ€. Brain and Behavioural Sciences. 19. 677-758.

Erk-Emeksiz, Z. (2001). “Do adult second language learners have Access to UG?†. In: Aydın, Ö. “İkinci Dil Ediniminde Evrensel Dilbilgisine EriÅŸimâ€. Dilbilim ve Uygulamaları Dergisi. 2. 11-30.

Felix, S.W. (1978). “Some differences between first and second language acquisitionâ€. In: Cook, V.J. and Newson, M. Chomsky’s Universal Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Felix, S. W. (1996). “Some differences between first and second language acquisitionâ€. In: Cook, V.J. and Newson, M. Chomsky’s Universal Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Flynn, S.1987. A Parameter-Setting Model of L2 Acquisition. Dordrecht: Reidel.

Hawkins, R. and Chan, C. (1997). “The partial availability of Universal Grammar in second language acquisition: the ’failed features’ hypothesisâ€. Second Language Research. 13. 187-226.

Johnson, M. (2004). A Philosophy of Second Language Acquisition. London: Yale University Press.

Kara, M. (2010). “Gazi Ãœniversitesi TÖMER öğrencilerinin Türkçe öğrenirken karşılaÅŸtıkları sorunlar ve bunların çözümüne yönelik önerilerâ€. Gazi Ãœniversitesi Türk EÄŸitim Bilimleri Dergisi. Yaz. 8.3.

Keenan, E. L. (1972). “On Semantically Based Grammarâ€. Linguistic Inquiry. 3. 413-461.

Krashen, S. D. (1987). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. New York: Prentice Hall.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (1975). “The acquisition of grammatical morphemes by adult ESL studentsâ€. TESOL Quarterly. 9. 409-419.

Nicol, J. and Greth, D. (2003). “Production of subject-verb agreement in Spanish as a second languageâ€. Experimental Psychology. 50 (3). 196-203.

Nunan, D. (1988). Syllabus Design. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Oxenden, C. and Latham-Koenig, C. (2009). New English File (Beginner). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Oxenden, C. and Latham-Koenig, C. (2012). New English File (Pre-Intermediate).Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Oxenden, C. and Latham-Koenig, C. (2012). New English File (Intermediate).Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Oxenden, C. and Latham-Koenig, C. (2013). New English File (Upper-Intermediate). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Radford, A. (2004). Minimalist syntax: Exploring the structure of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Raisier, L. and Higilsmann, P. (2007). “Prosodic transfer from L1 to L2: Theoretical and methodological issuesâ€. Nouveaux cahiers de linguistique française. 28. 41-66.

Schachter, J. (1988). Second Language Acquisition and its relationship to Universal Grammar. Applied Linguistics. 9(3). 219-235.

Schwartz, B. and Sprouse, R. A. (1996). “L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access modelâ€. Second Language Research. 12. 40-72.

Şeker, E. (2010). Communicative Approach as an English Language Teaching Method: Van Atatürk Anatolian High School Sample. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Van: Yüzüncü Yıl University.

Şeker, E. (2015). A Minimalist Approach to Analyzing Phrase Structures through Universal Principles and Parameters to Identify Parametric Variations Between English and Turkish Languages. Unpublished PhD thesis. Van: Yüzüncü Yıl University.

White, L. (2003). Second Language Acquisition and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zoltan, D. (2007). Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. Madrid: Oxford University Press.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies
ISSN 1305-578X (Online)
Copyright © 2005-2022 by Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies