The Dense Use of Lexicalization in Dialogues by EFL Students at Jordan University-Aqaba
- 1 Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Foreign Languages, University of Jordan, Aqaba, Jordan
- 2 Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Foreign Languages, University of Jordan, Aqaba, Jordan
Abstract
This qualitative and quantitative analysis, researching language and social interaction, is one of its kinds, to examine the current ESL pedagogical strategies in native and residential Jordanian college students. It uses lexicalization in spoken dialogues produced by English language and literature students at the Department of English Language and Literature at Jordan University/Aqaba branch. It includes 30 participants selected randomly. The study uses Hoey’s (1991) Matrix of Lexical Cohesion and a Semi-structured Interview to collect data from the participants. The findings indicated that the density of lexicalization has a significant contribution in the creation of cohesion of the spoken dialogues. This research recommends that further research be conducted to investigate other types of spoken dialogues
- Ahmed, A. H. (2010). Students’ Problems with Cohesion and Coherence in EFL Essay Writing in Egypt: Different Perspectives. Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal (LICEJ), 1, 214-221.
- Al Khotaba, E. (2010). The Use of Lexical Repetition and Patterning in Written Compositions of Jordanian Students Majoring in English Language and Literature at Mu’tah University: A Case Study. Ph.D. Thesis. Malaysia: University Sains Malaysia.
- Bani Abdo, I., & Breen, G. (2010). Teaching EFL to Jordanian Students: New Strategies for Enhancing English Acquisition in a Distinct Middle Eastern Student Population. Creative Education, 1, 39-50. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2010.11007
- Chakraverty, A., & Gautum, K. (2000). Dynamics of Writing. Forum, 38, 40-55.
- Gay, L. et al. (2009). Educational Research. Competencies for Analysis and Application (9th ed.). Pearson International Edition, Cambridge University Press.
- Gay, L., & Airasian, P. (2003). Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Application (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson International Edition.
- Gordon, T. F., & Walton, D. (2009). Proof Burdens and Standards. In I. Rahwan, & G. Simari (Eds.), Argumentation and Artificial Intelligence (pp. 239-260). Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0_12
- Hoey, M. (1991). Patterns of Lexis in Text. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Jeffries, L., & McIntyre, D. (2010). Stylistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Joffe, H. (2002). Jordan in Transition. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Lewis, P. (2009). Ethnologue: Languages of the World (16th ed.). Dallas, TX: SIL International.
- McBurney, P., & Parsons, S. (2002). Dialogue Games in Multi-Agent Systems. Informal Logic. Special Issue on Applications of Argumentation in Computer Science, 22, 257-274.
- McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- McCarthy, M. (1998). Spoken Language & Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Prakken, H., & Sartor, G. (2006). Presumptions and Burdens of Proof, Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2006. In The Nineteenth Annual Conference. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
- Skinner, H., & Brown, C. (2003). Jordan. Milwaukee: Gareth Stevens Publishing.