How Students Mistake the s-Genitives and the of-Genitives in a Local Ecuadorian Context Learning
Keywords:genitive case, of-genitive, possessive case, learning process, TESOL
Considering a local action research in English learning approach may be the right way to help teacher to manage some of the daily issues they face in their classroom since one of its principle is bridging the traditional divide between educational theory and professional practice (McNiff, 2017). This contribution aims to map the different mistakes students may produce in their learning process in a TESOL context regarding the use of the Saxon genitive or the of-genitive form (Lyons, 1986; Tratz & Hovy, 2013) when expressing ownership of something or talking about things that belong to other things. Since the action research approach is a collaborative systematic inquiry done by teachers to gather information about, and subsequently improve, the ways their particular educational setting operates, how they teach, and how well their students learn. The analysed data are collected through a participatory dynamic process in which students fill in a questionnaire. Before answering the questionnaire, Tourism students in the Amazon State University have been put in contact with the common previously identified mistakes usually made using the possessive / genitive case form in order to identify the situated problem and its causes, and suggest the required corrective actions to undertake. Several sociolinguistic factors such as mother tongue, gender, and cultural background have been identified as possible causes reflecting the geographical location and social proximity of the language in contact approach (Muhvić-Dimanovski, 2005; Hickey, 2013). A discussion, dealing with the result interpretation and the suggested corrective actions, will take place in order to improve the learning process.
Han, Z. (2004). Fossilization in adult second language acquisition (Vol. 5). Multilingual Matters.
Hickey, R. (Ed.). (2012). The handbook of language contact. John Wiley & Sons.
Long, M.H. (2003). Stabilization and fossilization in interlanguage. C.J. Doughty and M.H. Long (eds) The handbook of second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell Publiching
Lyons, C. (1986). The syntax of English genitive constructions. Journal of Linguistics, 22, 01, 123-143.
McNiff, J. (2017). Action research: All you need to know. Sage.
Michel, J. B., Shen, Y. K., Aiden, A. P., Veres, A., Gray, M. K., Pickett, J. P., ... & Pinker, S. (2011). Quantitative analysis of culture using millions of digitized books. science, 331(6014), 176-182.
Muhvić-Dimanovski, V. (2005). Languages in Contact. Linguistic Anthropology, Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems, EOLSS.
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10(1-4), 209-232.
Wei, X. (2008). Implication of IL fossilization in second language acquisition. English Language Teaching, 1(1), 127-131.
How to Cite
Pontifical Catholic University of Ecuador, Esmeraldas Campus.
The scientific journals which signed the agreements from the Encounters of Latin-American Journals are authorized to reproduce, in part or completely, the articles published here, with only the mention to the source clearly pointed out. Other interested parties will be able to reproduce the contents previous authorization of the editor- in- chief of the journal.
The articles and papers published are the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the thought of our Editorial Board.