The quality of Second-Language Writing (Hebrew) among Arab students in Israel
Tóm tắt
The paper deals with the level of syntactic complexity of subordinate clauses in argument texts spontaneously produced in hebrew by Arab female freshmen specializing in the teaching of Hebrew at Academic College of Education in Israel. Syntactic complexity is examined by means of the relationships between main clauses and various types of subordinate clauses; by categorizing types of logical connections encoded; and by determining the complexity of the subordinate clause itself. Our research revealed three categories of subordinate clauses arranged by their level of syntactic complexity: a. content clauses indicating a low level of complexity due to their role as mere providers of necessary information; b. Descriptive clauses indicating a high complexity level due to their free main clause placement; c. relative clauses expanding the nominal phrase and creating a high degree of compression. We found that the types of logical connections encoded by the clauses are few, unvaried and at times lexically wrong or completely absent due to first language interference, or are repeated so as to validate the addressor’s position in an argument text. Furthermore their subordinate clauses contained many contents units pointing to undeveloped segments of thought: a kind of brain storm the writer conducts with himself. This may be the beginning of understanding the differences between everyday speech (verb-based, syntactically complex, lexically sparse) and academic writing (noun-based, syntactically relatively simple, but lexically complex and dense/compact).
Tài liệu tham khảo
Amara, M. 2002. Hebrew among Israel’s Arabs: Sociolinguistic aspects. In Te’uda 18, ed. S. Yizreel, 85–105. Tel-Aviv University: Speaking Hebrew.
Armon-Lotem, S. 2005. The acquisition of subordination: From preconjunctionals to later use. In Perspectives on language and language development: Essays in honor of Ruth. A. Berman, 192-204, ed. D. Ravid and H. Bat-Zeev Shyldkrot. Dodrecht: Kluwer.
Azar, M. 1999. On the concessive in contemporary Hebrew. In Studies on ancient and modern Hebrew, ed. S. Sharvit, 285–303. Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press (in Hebrew).
Cummins, J. 1986. Empowering minority student: A framework for intervention. Harvard Educational Review 56(1): 18–36.
Cummins, J. 2008. BICS and CALP: Empirical and theoretical status of the distinction. In Encyclopedia of language and education, Literacy, vol. 2, 2nd ed, ed. B. Street and N.H. Hornberger, 71–83. New York: Springer.
Fruchtman, M. 1971. Coordination and subordination as a criterion for the style of writing types. Hebrew Computational Linguistics 2: 29–45 (in Hebrew).
Grabe W, and Kaplan R. B. 1989. Writing in a SecondLanguage: Contrastive Rhetoric. in: David. M. Johnson and D. H. Roen (Eds.) Richness in Writing: Empowering ESL Student, New York, London: Longman: 263–283.
Hyland, K. 2001. Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purpose 20: 207–226.
Halliday, M.A.K. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. Fourth edition. Revised by Christian M.I.M. Matthiessen. London and New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Henkin, R. 1997. Between Arabic and Hebrew in Rahat in the Negev: Preliminary survey on mixed office language, 363–381. Jerusalem: Masorot – Mehqarim be-masorot ha-lashon u-vi-leshonot ha-yehudim.
Livnat, Z. 2011. The rhetoric of the scholarly paper. Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University.
Manor, R., and Y. Schlesinger. 2012. Dynamism in presentational texts of different addressers. Helqat lashon 43–44: 392–410.
Margolin, B. 2002. On inter-cultural cohesion patterns. Script 5–6: 81–99 (in Hebrew).
Margolin, B., and H. Ezer. 2014. The quality of argumentative writing among Jewish (L1) and Arab (L2) students in Israel’s colleges of education. Helqat lashon 46: 157–178.
Marʼi, A. 2013. Wallah OK: A linguistic portrait of the Arabs in Israel, R. Rosental (ed.). Jerusalem: Keter Publishers (in Hebrew).
Meshler, Y. 2011. On the emergence of patterns from discourse: The relative clause family. Leshonenu 73: 167–207 (in Hebrew).
Ministry of Education. 2011. Hebrew as a second language in Arab schools for the three age groups, grades 3 through 12. In Ministry of Education, Pedagogical Secretariat, Department for Curriculum Planning and Development. Jerusalem: Tal.
Nir, B., and R.A. Berman. 2010. Complex syntax as a window on contrastive rhetoric. Journal Pragmatics 42: 744–765.
Olshtain, E, & Cohen, E. 2005. Logical connectors in Hebrew: How well do eighth graders master them? In Perspectives on language and language development, essays in honor of Ruth A. Berman, Ravid, D, & Shyldkrot, H.B. (eds.), pp. 315-326.
Peled, N. 2001. Spoken and written genres. MOFET Institute.
Ravid, D., and T. Egoz-Liebstein. 2012. Mental verbs in the Hebrew lexicon. Helqat lashon 43–44: 224–241 (in Hebrew).
Ravid, D, & Shalom, Ts. 2012. Standards for the assessment of writing in seventh grade, Report presented to the Yad Hanadiv Foundation (in Hebrew).
Rubinstein, A. 1971. The verb phrase. Tel-Aviv: Hakibbutz Hameuhad (in Hebrew).
Salsa-Murcia, M., and E. Olshtain. 2014. Discourse-based approaches: A new framework for teaching and learning a new language. In Topics in language teaching in Israel, part I, ed. S. Donitsa-Schmidt and A. Inbar-Lurieh, 98–121. MOFET Institute: Kalil.
Schleifer, M. 2014. Linguistic and socio-cultural aspects in the production of written and spoken discourse among learners of Ethiopian background in Israel. In Topics in language teaching in Israel, part I, Donitsa-Schmidt, S. & Inbar-Lurieh, A. (eds.), 185-200 (in Hebrew).
Schleppegrell, M.J. 2004. The Language of Schooling: A Functional Linguistic Perspective. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Shahadeh, H. 1998. The Hebrew of Israel’s Arabs. Leshonenu la-am 49(4): 168–180 (in Hebrew).
Shatil, N. 2008. The Arabs in Israel: Linguistic influences and Hebrew acquisition methods. The New Hed Ha-ulpan 93: 70–88 (in Hebrew).
Shohamy, E., and D. Spolski. 2002. From uni- to multi-lingualism? Language education policy in Israel. In Te’uda 18, ed. S. Yizreel, 115–128. Tel-Aviv University: Speaking Hebrew.
Slobin, D.I. 1996. From thought and language to thinking for speaking. In Rethinking linguistic relativity: Studies in the social and cultural foundation of language, Gumperz, J. & Levinson, S. (eds.), 17, 70-96.
Toulmin, S. 1958. The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.