A Processability Theory Study: Past -ed Acquisition in University Learners in Indonesia

Ima Widyastuti

Abstract


Abstract

 

This study is to see the Past –ed morphological acquisition which is placed on the Stage 2 of the Processability Theory (PT). The participants of this study were 26 university students in speaking classroom at Sarjanawiyata Tamansiswa University, Indonesia. The data, which was gathered from semi-structure individual interviews with several topics, were analysed using an Emergence Criterion (Pienemann, 1998).  The present study found that all participants did not acquire the Past -edon Stage 2 of English Developmental Stages. Several possible reasons were discussed in the study to find out why they were not able to produce Past –ed forms. However, the further research is also required due to the very limited research on this case. 

Keywords


participants, processability

Full Text:

PDF

References


Chaer, A. (2003). Seputar tata bahasa baku bahasa Indonesia. (1st Ed). Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Collins, P. & Hollo, C. (2000). English grammar: an introduction. Hampshire: Palgrave.

Dulay, H.C. & Burt, M.K. (1974). Errors and strategies in child second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 8 (2), 129-136. Retrieved March 24, 2009, from EBSCOhost database.

Håkansson, G., Pienemann, M. & Sayehli, S. (2002). Transfer and typological proximity in the context of second language processing. Second Language Research, 18(3), 250-273. Retrieved March 15, 2009, from EBSCOhost database.

Hawkins, R. & Liszka, S. (2003). Locating the source of defective past tense marking in advanced L2 English speakers. In Hout, R.V., Hulk, A., Kuiken, F., Towell, R. (eds), The lexicon-syntax interface in second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamin B.V.

Pallotti, G. (2007). An operational definition of the Emergence Criterion. Applied Lingustics. 28(3), 361-382. Retrieved April 20, 2009, from EBSCOhost database.

Pienemann, M. (1998). Language processing and second language acquisition: Processability Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Pienemann, M. (2005). An introduction to processability theory. In Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Sakai, H. (2008). An analysis of Japanese university students’ oral performance in English using processability theory. System, 36 (4), 534-549. Retrieved March 20, 2009, from http://www.system/sakai.japan.769975.com.

Salameh, E., Håkansson, G. & Nettelbladt, U. (2004). Developmental perspectives on bilingual Swedish-Arabic children with and without language impairment: a longitudinal study. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 39 (1), 65-90. Retrieved March 12, 2009, from EBSCOhost database.

Selinger, H.W. & Shohamy, E. (1989). Second language research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Zhang, Y., Liu, B., & Bower, E. (in preparation). Nature or nurture? Past tense marking by advanced Chinese speakers of L2 English.

Zhang, Y. & Widyastuti, I. (2010). Acquisition of L2 English Morphology: A Family case study. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 33 (3), 29.1-29.17. Melbourne: Monash University Press.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26555/adjes.v2i1.2024

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 119 times
PDF - 135 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2015 Universitas Ahmad Dahlan

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

ADJES (Ahmad Dahlan Journal of English Studies)

ISSN: 2356-5012, e-ISSN: 2477-2879

Published by Universitas Ahmad Dahlan

 

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

 

View ADJES Stats