Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen
linguistlist.org>
I'm currently working on a paper on markedness and I would like your help. The question is as follows: Are markedness construct hypotheses valid in explaining transfer syntactic errors committed by beginning adult Arab learners? Problem: The problem concerns the determination of markedness values that can be assigned for the following syntactic features in both Arabic and English. This is to be able to check on the markedness hypotheses that learners tend to transfer the unmarked features from their native language to their interlanguage where they resist transferring marked ones. Syntactic structures: 1. The existence of the auxiliary in the verb phrase, most remarkably the present progressive. English possesses auxiliary whereas Arabic does not. Arabic learners omit either the auxiliary or the "ing" participle that goes with it. For example:*He writing / *He is write. So, which is marked on this phenomena, Arabic or English? And how? 2. The copula: English has copula , Arabic does not. Again which is marked and which is unmarked? And how? (Arabic learners omit the copula in their construction of English sentences. For example: John good.) 3. The genitive: in English it comes before the noun while in Arabic it comes after the noun. Arabic learners place the genitive after the noun: House John small. Based on frequency across languages or any other criteria, which construction is considered marked and which unmarked? 4. Adjective: in English it proceeds the noun whereas in Arabic it follows the noun. 5. Redundant subjects: Arab learners show tendency to retain the pronoun. In other words, they apply the pronoun and the noun in the same sentence. For example: John he is good / He John is good. How could we tell whether this structure is marked or unmarked and on what criteria? In short, what criterion can be used to decide the markedness status of the structures referred to above in both Arabic and English. Best regards,Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Dear Sir, I am a Chinese university teacher, during my graduate study I found great interest in the study of the co-operative principle and the politeness principle. later in my teaching I found that the pragmatical principles are of a theoretical guidance of language teaching. I want to further develop this point, but the references I could find here in my place are rather limited, could you please send me some information about what you have collected on this point or let me know where I can get enough references? the two main points I have are: 1.the relationship between the two principles are dialectical; 2.the appropriate employment of the two principles could strengthen the power of communication; 3.the summaris of communication could enrich the contents of the principles. thank you very much. yours Zhang YanMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue