No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Many students around the world have a strong desire to study in the United States, and in recent years international students in the United States have enrolled at an all-time high. There is a significant need to learn more about these students' needs and strategies to identify the most effective practices to improve their academic life and life quality. The demand for overcoming life challenges in a new country and achieve high academic performance with their second language creates high stress for these international students. One of the groups among these international students that has been understudied is the Turkish students. The purpose of this research is to explore the academic and second language-related stress of Turkish international students, in addition to investigating students' self-reported stress management strategies. This study uses a case study methodology to thoroughly understand the impact of the second language of participants' reported stress and how they manage their life and academic performance. The researcher collected interviews from three Turkish-International students who study in a graduate school in the US. The researcher conducted inductive coding and created themes from the qualitative data. The results of the study indicate that students experience challenges due to their second language which creates stressful situations. One of the most critical areas that participants emphasized is the difficulties that they experience while they speak. Participants indicated that the challenges of speaking tasks affect their self-confidence and they tend to speak up less. One of the other critical findings of the study that participants highlighted is that they need to spend more time studying just to be able to survive in a highly competitive academic life as it is challenging to comprehend content knowledge with a second language. The obligation of studying in long hours affects their social and family life. The researcher explored the coping mechanisms that participants found effective and a summary related to the COVID-19 pandemic and how it impacted these students' stress.

The purpose of the study was to analyze the self-reported experiences of Japanese English as a foreign language (EFL) pre-service teachers with listening comprehension skills in their teaching classroom as university students and in their learning classroom as EFL students. Currently, Japanese EFL education is changing rapidly and focusing on developing overall English skills that include listening, speaking, reading, and writing. However, pre-service teacher EFL education in Japan does not stress the importance of listening comprehension pedagogy. Moreover, there have been few studies about listening pedagogy from the perspective of preservice teachers. Through analyzing pre-service teacher's self-reported listening learning experiences, the current study aimed to analyze the current listening pedagogy targeting elementary, junior, and high school EFL preparation. Three participants responded to an interview conducted in Japanese regarding their experiences with the EFL listening pedagogy experiences in their teaching classroom as university students and in their learning classroom as EFL students. The interview data were transcribed, translated into English, and analyzed through a qualitative research approach. The findings revealed that the pre-service teacher training track focused mostly on developing the pre-service EFL teachers' language proficiency rather than their pedagogical knowledge. Several possible explanations for this trend that were Japanese-context specific were provided, as well as directions for future research on the topic.

Summary When it comes to studying bilingualism and language acquisition in kids and infants, minimal pair-word learning is of particular importance due to this process being at play within a language and between languages. Having to discriminate between similar-sounding words within a language (i.e., dye & bye) and across languages (i.e., elephant & éléphant) is a complex task. The assumption that researchers have had since the early 1980s is that bilinguals may be better at certain aspects of word learning due to having to manage two languages concurrently. Previous studies have found mixed results regarding minimal pair word learning for both monolingual and bilingual groups depending on the ages. Discriminating between similar-sounding words is typically challenging before the age of 17 to 20 months regardless of the number of languages a child is learning. To investigate this question, we tested 19 participants between the ages of 14 and 18 months of age (14 monolingual and 5 bilingual). The level of attrition during the habituation trial or testing phase of the experiment made the data collection particularly difficult. Infants were recruited online from the Ottawa-Gatineau region and in Canada and the United States via a website for parents wishing to participate in various studies. During test trials, we recorded the looking time to the correctly and incorrectly labeled objects. Participants' performances were analyzed considering their language background, age, and socioeconomic status. Participants in the study were not able to discriminate between the two similar-sounding words regardless of their demographics. In conclusion, even while having access to visual cues from the speaker, monolingual and bilingual infants were not able to successfully learn similar-sounding words. Future studies should use a similar task using a live speaker via Zoom as opposed to a pre-recorded video to investigate whether the results would be different.

No description available.

No description available.

Wong, Yuet On. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2008. / Includes bibliographical references. / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / Chapter Chapter 1: --- Sign phonology models / Chapter 1.0 --- Introduction --- p.1 / Chapter 1.1 --- Structuralism and Stokoe's pioneering work --- p.3 / Chapter 1.2 --- Insights from Generative phonology --- p.6 / Chapter 1.2.1 --- Is handshape a segment or autosegment --- p.7 / Chapter 1.2.2 --- "CV phonology, the Movement Hold Model and the Hand-Tier model" --- p.8 / Chapter 1.2.3 --- Dependency Phonology --- p.10 / Chapter 1.2.4 --- Interim Summary --- p.13 / Chapter 1.3 --- The handshape node --- p.13 / Chapter 1.3.1 --- Sandleŕةs (1989) handshape node --- p.13 / Chapter 1.3.2 --- Brentaríةs (1998) handshape node --- p.16 / Chapter 1.3.3 --- Eccariuśة（2002) handshape node --- p.19 / Chapter 1.3.3.1 --- The Joint feature [Crossed] of the PSF node --- p.21 / Chapter 1.3.3.2 --- Branching of Selected Fingers into Primary and Secondary Selected Fingers --- p.21 / Chapter 1.3.3.3 --- The Secondary selected fingers node --- p.24 / Chapter 1.3.3.4 --- The Thumb node in the Secondary selected fingers branch --- p.24 / Chapter 1.3.3.5 --- Quantity in SSF vs. Quantity in PSF --- p.25 / Chapter 1.3.3.6 --- The Point of reference node in the Secondary selected fingers branch --- p.25 / Chapter 1.4 --- The proposed Handshape Unit Model --- p.25 / Chapter 1.4.1 --- Handshape unit node --- p.28 / Chapter 1.4.2 --- HIM node --- p.30 / Chapter 1.4.3 --- The Type node --- p.31 / Chapter 1.4.4 --- The Number of movements node --- p.33 / Chapter 1.4.5 --- The handshape node --- p.33 / Chapter 1.4.6 --- The Nonselected fingers node --- p.33 / Chapter 1.4.7 --- The Selected fingers node --- p.35 / Chapter 1.4.8 --- The Primary selected fingers node --- p.36 / Chapter 1.4.9 --- The Thumb node --- p.37 / Chapter 1.4.10 --- The Fingers node --- p.39 / Chapter 1.4.11 --- The Quantity node --- p.40 / Chapter 1.4.12 --- The Point of reference node --- p.40 / Chapter 1.4.13 --- The Joint position node --- p.42 / Chapter 1.4.14 --- The Finger position node --- p.44 / Chapter 1.4.15 --- The Secondary selected fingers node --- p.45 / Chapter 1.4.15.1 --- Primary vs. Secondary selected fingers --- p.45 / Chapter 1.4.15.2 --- Comparing the SSF node with the PSF node --- p.46 / Chapter 1.4.15.3 --- The Quantity node of the Secondary selected fingers node --- p.46 / Chapter 1.4.15.4 --- The Point of reference node of the Secondary selected fingers node --- p.48 / Chapter 1.4.15.5 --- Joint position node of the Secondary selected fingers node --- p.48 / Chapter 1.4.15.6 --- Finger position node of the Secondary selected fingers node --- p.49 / Chapter 1.4.15.7 --- Conclusion --- p.49 / Chapter 1.5 --- Outline of the thesis --- p.51 / Chapter 1.6 --- Notation conventions --- p.51 / Chapter Chapter 2: --- Literature review and introduction to the current study / Chapter 2.0 --- Introduction --- p.53 / Chapter 2.1 --- Generalizations of phonology acquisition phenomena --- p.53 / Chapter 2.1.1 --- Early child speech as prephonemic --- p.53 / Chapter 2.1.2 --- Commonly acquired sound segments at the end of the babbling stage --- p.55 / Chapter 2.1.3 --- Characteristics of early words - Loss of phonological contrasts --- p.55 / Chapter 2.1.4 --- Systematic mappings --- p.56 / Chapter 2.1.5 --- Context-dependent rules / processes --- p.56 / Chapter 2.1.6 --- Strategies and metalinguistic awareness in the early period --- p.57 / Chapter 2.1.7 --- Stages of the phonological development --- p.57 / Chapter 2.2 --- Acquisition of phonology in sign language --- p.58 / Chapter 2.2.1 --- Acquisition of location --- p.59 / Chapter 2.2.2 --- Acquisition of movement --- p.61 / Chapter 2.2.3 --- Acquisition of handshape --- p.62 / Chapter 2.2.3.1 --- Acquisition of spoken and signed language phonology: Common observations --- p.62 / Chapter 2.2.3.2 --- Acquisition phenomena specific to handshape acquisition --- p.64 / Chapter 2.2.3.3 --- Substitution --- p.66 / Chapter 2.2.3.4 --- Applying a linguistic phonology model in handshape acquisition study --- p.67 / Chapter 2.2.3.5 --- Group data: a reanalysis --- p.73 / Chapter 2.3 --- Interim summary --- p.78 / Chapter 2.4 --- Implications on the current study --- p.78 / Chapter Chapter 3: --- Hypotheses and Methodology / Chapter 3.0 --- Introduction --- p.80 / Chapter 3.1 --- Markedness and acquisition hypotheses of the current study --- p.80 / Chapter 3.2 --- Background information for the current study --- p.89 / Chapter 3.2.1 --- Subject of the present study --- p.89 / Chapter 3.2.2 --- Data collection --- p.90 / Chapter 3.2.3 --- Types of signs included in the present study --- p.91 / Chapter 3.2.3.1 --- Identification of handshape for analysis: signs with more than one handshape --- p.94 / Chapter 3.2.4 --- Coding of the data --- p.96 / Chapter 3.2.5 --- Criteria for acquisition --- p.98 / Chapter 3.3 --- Chapter summary --- p.100 / Chapter Chapter 4: --- Results / Chapter 4.0 --- Introduction --- p.102 / Chapter 4.1 --- Order of Acquisition of HKSL handshapes --- p.103 / Chapter 4.1.1 --- Analysis of CC's data --- p.103 / Chapter 4.1.2 --- Data from other handshape acquisition studies --- p.110 / Chapter 4.2 --- Not-attempted handshapes --- p.115 / Chapter 4.3 --- Errors of Substitution --- p.117 / Chapter 4.3.1 --- Data which confirm H2 --- p.122 / Chapter 4.3.1.1 --- Quantity substitution --- p.122 / Chapter 4.3.1.2 --- Point of reference substitution --- p.123 / Chapter 4.3.1.3 --- Joint position substitution --- p.123 / Chapter 4.3.1.4 --- Finger position substitution --- p.124 / Chapter 4.3.2 --- Data which do not confirm or reject H2 --- p.124 / Chapter 4.3.2.1 --- [Crossed] in the Finger position node --- p.125 / Chapter 4.3.2.2 --- Secondary selected fingers substitution --- p.125 / Chapter 4.3.2.3 --- Thumb feature substitution --- p.126 / Chapter 4.3.3 --- Data which reject H2 --- p.126 / Chapter 4.3.3.1 --- Thumb selection substitution --- p.126 / Chapter 4.3.4 --- Summary of data testing against H2 --- p.127 / Chapter 4.4 --- HIM and handshape acquisition --- p.128 / Chapter 4.4.1 --- Defining HIM --- p.129 / Chapter 4.4.2 --- H3: Accuracy of Finger selection and finger configuration is lower when HIM is specified --- p.130 / Chapter 4.4.2.1 --- HIM and finger selection --- p.131 / Chapter 4.4.2.2 --- Analysis of the relationship between HIM and finger configuration --- p.132 / Chapter 4.4.2.3 --- Generalizations --- p.133 / Chapter 4.4.3 --- Detailed analysis of signs involving HIMs --- p.135 / Chapter 4.4.3.1 --- Data which confirm H3 --- p.135 / Chapter 4.4.3.2 --- Data which partially confirm H3 --- p.137 / Chapter 4.4.3.3 --- Data which reject H3 --- p.138 / Chapter 4.4.3.4 --- Interim summary --- p.140 / Chapter 4.4.4 --- HIM complexity --- p.140 / Chapter 4.5 --- Conclusion --- p.142 / Chapter Chapter 5: --- Physiology and Handshape Acquisition / Chapter 5.0 --- Introduction --- p.144 / Chapter 5.1 --- Motoric account for handshape acquisition --- p.145 / Chapter 5.2 --- Physiology Account --- p.147 / Chapter 5.2.1 --- Criterion (a): Muscle Opposition in Configuration --- p.149 / Chapter 5.2.2 --- Criterion (b): Independent extensor / sufficient support --- p.151 / Chapter 5.2.3 --- Criterion(c): Profundus / juncturae tendinum --- p.152 / Chapter 5.2.4 --- Other factors affecting the ease and difficulty of a handshape --- p.152 / Chapter 5.3 --- Accounting for CĆةs acquisition data --- p.153 / Chapter 5.3.1 --- Acquired handshapes --- p.153 / Chapter 5.3.2 --- Attempted but not yet acquired handshapes --- p.156 / Chapter 5.3.2.1 --- Anńةs (1993) scoring system: An evaluation --- p.158 / Chapter 5.3.2.3 --- Substitutions and Anńةs (1993) scoring system --- p.159 / Chapter 5.3.3 --- Unattempted handshapes --- p.164 / Chapter 5.4 --- Conclusion --- p.167 / Chapter Chapter 6: --- Conclusion / Chapter 6.1 --- Summary of the study --- p.170 / Chapter 6.2 --- Physiology and handshape acquisition --- p.170 / Chapter 6.2.1 --- p.170 / Chapter 6.2.2 --- Review of Anńةs model --- p.171 / Chapter 6.3 --- Bases of markedness in the current thesis --- p.172 / Chapter 6.4 --- Handshape acquisition affected by factors other than markedness --- p.173 / Chapter 6.5 --- Unresolved issues and limitations --- p.173 / Chapter 6.5.1 --- The dependents of the Handshape Unit Model --- p.174 / Chapter 6.5.2 --- The Thumb --- p.175 / Chapter 6.5.3 --- Underspecification --- p.175 / Chapter 6.5.4 --- Feature markedness ranking --- p.176 / Chapter 6.5.5 --- Possible idiosyncrasy --- p.176 / Appendices / References

Previous research in Second Language Acquisition (SLA) has shown that some of the systematic errors of second language (L2) learners can be attributed to the influence of the native language (L1). In fact, many hypotheses in generative SLA have focused on the role of L1 transfer ranging the spectrum from No Transfer to Full Transfer. The goal of this dissertation was to investigate L1 transfer by focusing on L1-L2 differences in terms of linguistic features; specifically, how differences in the featural and morpholexical organization of L1 and L2 pronominal paradigms affect SLA. In this work I operationalize L1 transfer in terms of the Feature Reassembly Hypothesis (FRH; Lardiere, 2009). The hypothesis pioneers conceptualization of L1 transfer as an initial attempt by L2 learners to establish a direct mapping between L1 and L2 forms. The FRH is particularly suitable to the study of L2 development because it predicts that when a one-to-one initial mapping is unsuccessful, L2 learners will gradually reorganize the L1 grammatical system until they attain (possibly complete) convergence. Empirical testing of the hypothesis is critical since determining when and why transfer occurs opens numerous possibilities to predict transfer errors and to develop pedagogical approaches to tackle negative transfer. In the current study I focus on the L2 acquisition of four 3rd person singular French object pronouns in the interlanguage of native speakers of English. Difficulties in the acquisition of Romance object pronouns have been amply documented in L2 research. However, most of the previous studies of the topic have focused on L2 acquisition of clitic pronouns and their syntactic properties. The present study takes a novel approach investigating the acquisition of strong as well as clitic pronouns. In my dissertation I test different kinds of knowledge including learners' comprehension of different kinds of pronouns. Going beyond production data, my experimental tasks include a grammaticality judgment task with correction, a picture selection task, and a self-paced reading task. The experimental tasks were administered to a group of native speakers (n=43) and L2 learners of French (n=87). The overall picture that emerges from the current study allows unveiling the initial mapping and subsequent reassembly of the semantic and morphosyntactic features implicated in the acquisition process of the four forms under investigation.