A CORPUS-BASED STUDY OF THE GRAMMATICAL AND LEXICAL ERRORS COMMITTED BY LEARNERS OF ENGLISH AT BASIC EDUCATION DIPLOMA LEVEL IN “A” DISTRICT IN OMAN

 

Student Name
Institution
Course
Supervisor
Submission Date

ABSTRACT
The current study aimed at…

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge ….

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iv
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background of the Problem 1
1.2 Statement of the problem 2
1.3 Research Purpose and Objectives 3
1.4 Research Questions 4
1.5 Rationale and Significance of the study 4
1.6 Structure of the Dissertation 5
2.0 REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 6
2.1 Definitions of Grammatical and Lexical Errors 6
2.2 Causes and Sources of Grammatical and Lexical Errors 6
2.3 Errors made by Native Arabs ESL Learners 6
2.4 Theoretical Framework 6
3.0 METHODOLOGY 9
3.1 Corpus Description 9
3.2 Error Categories 9
3.3 Participants 9
3.4 Research Design 9
3.5 Research Procedure 9
3.6 Data Validity and Reliability 9
3.7 Outline of piloting stage 9
3.8 Ethical Issues 9
4.0 RESULTS 11
5.0 DISCUSSION 12
6.0 CONCLUSION 13
6.1 Main Findings 13
6.2 Practical Implications of the research 13
6.3 Future Research Possibilities 13
6.4 Limitations and Drawbacks of the Study 13
REFERENCES 14
APPENDIX 17
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Structure of the dissertation 5
CHAPTER 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Problem
Even though Arabic is Oman’s official language, English is regarded as a significant foreign language, and is used in both private and public organisations and domains
such as education, the media and business (Al-Jardani, 2012). According to Al-Jadidi (2009), the use of English as the global language and the increased participation
of Oman in international trade and globalisation have significantly influenced the learning and teaching of English in Oman. As a result, English is taught as the
official second language alongside Arabic as from the first Grade as part of the school curriculum in the Basic Education System of Oman. However, due to the
differences in the linguistic characteristics of Arabic as compared to English, Oman English learners find it difficult to master English (Al-Jadidi, 2009). The rate
at which Arabic ESL learners are making lexical and grammatical errors has become a major concern in teaching and learning English courses (Mahmoud, 2005; Ridha and
Al-Riyahi, 2011). Arabic language uses a native orthographic alphabet unlike English that uses the Latin alphabet (Fender, 2003).
Previous researchers have found that the Arabic language contains idiosyncratic structures, cues and sentence contexts that are much different from those of English
language, which make it challenging for native Arabic language speakers to learn English (Hayes-Harb, 2006; Saigh and Schmitt, 2012; Suleiman, 2013). In addition,
second language learners have been found to have a first language transfer where they often assign their first language processing sequences over to the second
language when trying to process the second language word forms, irrespective of whether these processes do, or do not, fit in with the second language form system
(Fender, 2008; Hayes-Harb, 2006). When native Arabic speakers try to assign their Arabic processing sequences over to the English language, grammatical and lexical
errors are bound to happen because these two languages are distinct in terms of their forms and structures.
1.2 Statement of the problem
Data on the English language tests from the Tests and Examination Administration Department in the Ministry of Education in Oman show that most students perform well
in their speaking and listening tests but fail in their writing and reading skills. Similarly, the British Council in Muscat, Oman that administers the IELTS test for
international studies, migration and work, Oman IELTS candidates show poor comprehension skills but good communicative skills, with reading comprehension recording the
poorest grades and preventing these candidates from passing their IELTS tests.
According to Ijaz, Mahmood and Ameer (2014), the comprehension difficulties are because of poor knowledge and usage of vocabularies and words. Llach (2006) further
adds that lexical errors are a proof of low language proficiency and lack of vocabulary knowledge. He added that examiners use lexical errors as a quality predictor
and composition assessment criteria for written discourse (Llach, 2006). On the other hand, Sun and Shang (2009) argued that grammatical errors, which entail spelling,
punctuation, agreement, tense and voice errors among others, are more pertinent and easily recognizable in written rather than oral discource. Abu-Rabia (1997)
explains that Arabic language relies heavily on the consonantal orthographic structures, which make it hard for native Arabic language users to recognise or structure
English words. As a result, they end up making a lot of grammatical and lexical mistakes in their English language use.
Regrettably, the current study identifies a research gap in the subject area, prompting this research. While previous linguistic research has been undertaken to
identify the grammatical and lexical errors made by English as a Second Language (ESL) learners, few have focused on a population whose native language is Arabic. Some
researchers like has on the reading processes of native Arabic speakers is very little, creating a knowledge gap. Further, fewer researchers who have undertaken
similar works focused on other types of errors. For instance, Panahifar and Sadeghi (2013) focused on the collocational errors made by Iranian ESL learners while Ijaz
et al. (2014) focused on the general errors made by Pakistani ESL learners. However, not all Iranians are native speakers of Arabic, and neither do Pakistanis use
Arabic as their native language. A more relevant research was undertaken by Mahmoud (2005) who undertook a through in-depth and systematic examination of the lexical
errors made by ESL learners by analysing 42 essays written by native Arabic speakers. The study found that 80% of these errors were lexical, out of which 61% of these
lexical errors were because of first language (Arabic) transfer (Mahmoud, 2005). While Mahmoud (2005) work was critical, it only focused on the lexical errors, and the
sample used was small for generalisation of the findings.
Therefore, undertaking a study that focuses on Oman ESL learners not only provides data that can be generalised for this population, but can also be used on the
greater native Arabic speakers’ population. Given the identified research and knowledge gaps, the study purpose and objectives for this study are established. As a
result, the study shall not only create a stable groundwork of knowledge that is valuable in the area of the study, but will also fill the identified research gaps
whilst uncovering any inconsistencies that may require further research.
1.3 Research Purpose and Objectives
The current study aims at examining the grammatical and lexical errors committed by Oman English learners at basic education diploma level. In fulfilling this purpose,
the study undertakes a corpus-based study aimed at:
• Identifying the most common grammatical and lexical errors committed by Oman ESL learners
• Determining the most frequent errors made by Oman learners between grammatical and lexical errors
• Explaining the possible causes of the grammatical and lexical errors made by Oman ESL learners
• Providing the most possible solutions to reduce the identified errors
1.4 Research Questions
The current study aims at addressing the following research questions:
• What are the most common grammatical and lexical errors committed by learners?
• Which errors are more frequent, between grammatical and lexical errors?
• What are the possible causes and solutions to the lexical and grammatical errors

1.5 Rationale and Significance of the study
When Oman students finish their Grade 10 (end of the basic education level), they take preparatory exams to determine the most appropriate post-basic education
(secondary education) to undertake. However, an analysis of the English exam results produced shows that these students keep committing the same errors year after
year. Therefore, undertaking this study that aims at identifying and analysing the lexical and grammatical errors produced by Oman ESL learners hopes to establish why
these errors occur, and provide sustainable solutions that can be applied to avoid the repetition of this circle. Moreover, the study findings shall be shared with the
key stakeholders including the government, schools and teachers among others, in the hope that they will create awareness for English teaching curriculum adaptation.
The current study can be applied for both practical and theoretical use. Theoretically, the study findings identify some teaching strategies and techniques relevant to
linguistic theories. On the other hand, the study has practical significance since its findings can be adopted in enhancing the quality of teaching English in Oman
schools, and consequently, improving the English proficiency levels of learners. Further, the findings of this study can be adopted by curriculum developers and
syllabus designers in various learning institutions as an effective teaching and learning of English language. Since Oman ESL learners are Arabic native speakers, the
results of this study could be useful not only within Oman, but across the entire Arab world. Moreover, this study opens avenues for future research based on the
identified gaps and limitations.
1.6 Structure of the Dissertation
The dissertation has six major chapters: introduction, review of the literature, methodology, results, discussion and conclusion sections. The referencing materials
are listed in the references section while the appendix contains supporting evidence and other materials used in the study. The figure below describes the structure of
this dissertation.
Figure 1: Structure of the dissertation

CHAPTER 2
2.0 REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 Definitions of Grammatical and Lexical Errors

2.2 Causes and Sources of Grammatical and Lexical Errors

2.3 Errors made by Native Arabs ESL Learners

2.4 Theoretical Framework
According to Saigh and Schmitt (2012), learners face a challenge in learning a foreign language because their cognitive memories are so accustomed to the regularities
and features of their native language. Such a phenomenon is attributed to the language enhancement and development process which pertains the L1 word form,
particularly, the graphemes and phonemes, which are combined to those of L2 (Saigh and Schmitt,2012). As people continue to enhance the developmental aspects of their
native language, they become more proficient in the language. However, when people such people start learning a second language, they face major challenges in trying
to separate the learned systems and features of L1 from L2. Therefore, they end up approaching the foreign language from their first language perspective, which may
further hinder the course of their learning.
Most researchers have undertaken studies explaining L1 transfer effects on L2 Word recognition and spelling. Some of these studies have yielded irrefutable data
proofing transfer effects in the expanses of phonological cognition and processing, orthographic skills, comprehension skills, and vocabulary skills. There are several
theories and hypothesis explaining L1 transfer effects on L2 word recognition and spelling, and the conflicting role of vowels and consonants in word recognition. The
conceptual framework only breaks the ground for the literature review chapter, where more concepts and previous studies will be discussed in-depth. Some of the related
theoretical frameworks discussed include Cummins’ (2000) Theory of Language and Cognition and Chomsky (2005) Universal Grammar theory.
In order to comprehend the nature of transfer processes in L2 reading, Cummins (2000) explored the cross-language transfer concept of comprehension skills in his
theory of language and cognition. Cummins (2000) theory states that language is not a behavioural but rather, a cognitive development. In his support for bilingualism,
he states that a proficiency in L1 provides learners a strong foundation for L2 achievement (Cummins, 2000). In this theory, Cummins (2000) presented two hypotheses:
the interdependence hypothesis and threshold hypotheses. The threshold hypothesis states that language-specific kinds of knowledge, such as grammar and vocabulary,
have a considerable influence on both L1 and L2 reading comprehension. The hypotheses argue that the proficiency in L1, coupled with metacognitive knowledge and
transfer processes, enhances L2 learners’ reading comprehension (Cummins, 2000).
The interdependence hypothesis, on the hand, states that learners transfer their L1 linguistic and cognitive processes as well as their meta-linguistic and literacy
skills to L2 reading and spelling, hence creating an interdependence between the languages. Cummins (2000) interdependence hypothesis is highly supported by Saigh and
Schmitt (2012) who argue that learners heavily rely on their L1 spelling and reading knowledge when learning a second language. However, Saigh and Schmitt (2012) offer
a correction to the threshold hypothesis by arguing that the difficulty to learn a second language is not caused by the learner’s low proficiency in their L1, but by
the differences in idiosyncratic structures and systems like orthographic compositions among others. These sentiments are echoed by findings of Randall and Meara
(1988) study, which found that native Arabic ESL learners applied the Arabic orthographic structures in English reading comprehension and word identification, which
caused a difficulty, because these orthographies are very different. Therefore, Cummins (2000) hypothesis of interdependence provides a strong theoretical framework
for this study.
A similar argument is also offered by Chomsky’s (2005) universal grammar theory, which argues that humans generate language using a profound structure that empowers
them to produce and transfer their grammar to other languages. He argued that people generate and develop specific skills during their first language learning process,
which they naturally transfer to L2. From this theory, Chomsky (2005) developed the transfer hypothesis that states that the fundamental differences between L1 and L2
in reading comprehension are negligible for the learners; therefore, learners transfer their L1 metacognitive knowledge and reading strategies to L2. The hypothesis
further adds that learners apply their gained L1 skills and knowledge from the beginning of learning L2, and continue to do so in the future. Transfer hypothesis
argument that “first language metacognitive knowledge influences L2 reading comprehension and word identification” makes Chomsky’s (2005) universal grammar theory a
significant theoretical framework for this study.

Outlines the findings/issues raised by other studies that are relevant to your project.
Should be state-of-the-art in its focus.
Should be critical rather than just a descriptive list of studies you have read.
Addresses contextual issues relevant to your study.
Leads up to a statement of your research questions.

CHAPTER 3
3.0 METHODOLOGY
3.1 Corpus Description

3.2 Error Categories

3.3 Participants

3.4 Research Design

3.5 Research Procedure

3.6 Data Validity and Reliability

3.7 Outline of piloting stage

3.8 Ethical Issues
I have contacted the authority in the ministry of education and they gave me a letter to receive the needed data. It took more than one month to receive the entire
data file as it was the second semester examination time for the diploma sttudents and after that declaring the results so they were busy and even the computer
processing the data that I need was slow.)
Research Methodology: (how you intend to get and analyse data)
It will be a homemade corpus. Exam papers will be investigated by using corpus linguistic procedures. These exam papers are digitized and they will be from the Tests
and Examination Administration Department in the Ministry of Education in Oman. They will be from first semester in the school academy year 2014-2015. The examinees’
age is about 17-18 years old. They have been taught English as second language in Omani schools since they were at the age of seven.

CHAPTER 4
4.0 RESULTS
•Presentation of your findings as they relate to your research questions.
•If new themes emerged from the data, you can set them out here.
•Be critical in how the data is presented.
•Avoid merely listing answers to your questionnaire/interview guide.
The number of leaners: 4945 learners
– You need to transfer their pdf papers to text and made a DIY corpora then analyze the data.
The DIY corpora must indicates the errors and compare between the lexical and grammatical errors so I will also include the answer key file.
I will include all the needed file and some articles explaining how to make the DIY corpora.
http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/fss/courses/ling/corpus/blue/l04_1.htm

CHAPTER 5
5.0 DISCUSSION
Compares and contrasts your findings to those of the studies you discussed in the lit. review.
Did you find something similar to the other studies or something different?
If different, why do think this was? What are some potential causes?

CHAPTER 6
6.0 CONCLUSION
6.1 Main Findings

6.2 Practical Implications of the research

6.3 Future Research Possibilities
Causes of the lexical and grammatical errors
6.4 Limitations and Drawbacks of the Study

REFERENCES
Abu-Rabia, S. (1997). Reading in Arabic orthography: The effect of vowels and context on reading accuracy of poor and skilled native Arabic readers. Reading and
Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 9, 65-78.
Al-Jadidi, H. S. (2009). Teaching English as a foreign language in Oman: An exploration of English language teaching pedagogy in tertiary education. Doctoral
dissertation, Victoria University Melbourne, Australia.
Al-Jardani, K. S. S. (2012). English language curriculum evaluation in Oman. International Journal of English Linguistics, 2(5), pp.40-44.
Biber, D., Conrad, S. and Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. and Finegan, F. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Longman.
Carter, R. and McCarthy, M. (2006). Cambridge grammar of English: A comprehensive guide to spoken and written English grammar and usage. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Chomsky, N. (2005). Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry, 36, pp.1-22.
Corder, S. P. (1981). Error analysis and interlanguage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Fender, M. (2003). English word recognition and word integration skills of native Arabic and Japanese speakers: Learners of English as a second language. Applied
Linguistics, 24, pp.289-313.
Fender, M. (2008). Spelling knowledge and reading development: Insights from Arab ESL learners. Reading in a Foreign Language, 20(1), pp.19-42.
Granger, S. and Leech, G. (1998). Learner English on computer. London: Routledge.
Hayes-Harb, R. (2006). Native speakers of Arabic and ESL texts: Evidence for the transfer of written word identification processes. TESOL Quarterly, 40(2), pp.321-
377.
Hernández, M. S. (2011). Raising student awareness about grammatical and lexical errors via email. Revista de Lenguas Modernas, 1(14), pp.263-281.
Hourani, T. M. Y. (2008). An analysis of the common grammatical errors in the English writing made by 3rd secondary male students in the eastern coast of the UAE.
Dubai: British University in Dubai.
Hunston, S. and Francis, G. (2000). Pattern grammar: A corpus-driven approach to the lexical grammar of English. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Ijaz, M. T., Mahmood, M. A. and Ameer, A. (2014). A corpus based study of the errors committed by Pakistani learners of English at graduation level. Journal of
Education and Practice, 5(24), pp.159-162.
James. C. (2001). Errors in language learning and use: Exploring errors analysis. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Jayasundara, J. M. and Premarathna, C. D. (2012). A linguistics analysis on errors committed in English by undergraduates. International Journal of Scientific and
Research Publications, 34(1), pp.1-6.
Llach, M. D. (2006). Lexical errors in young EFL learners: How do they relate to proficiency measures?. Interlingüística, 1(17), pp.63-73.
Mahmoud, A. (2005). Collocation errors made by Arab learners of English. Asian EFL Journal, 5(2),pp.1-10.
Naba’h, A. A. (2011). Lexical errors made by in-service English language teachers in Jordan. Damascus University Journal, 27(1), pp.49-75.
O’Keefe, A., McCarthy, M. and Carter, R. (2007). From corpus to classroom: Language use and language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Panahifar, F. and Sadeghi, K. (2013). A corpus-based analysis of collocational errors in the Iranian EFL learners’ oral production. Journal of Teaching Language
Skills, 4(4), pp.53-78.
Randall, M. and Meara, P. (1988). How Arabs read Roman letters. Reading in a Foreign Language, 4(2), pp.133-145.
Saigh, K. and Schmitt, N. (2012). Difficulties with vocabulary word form: The case of Arabic ESL learners. System, 40(1), pp.24-36.
Stubbs, M. (2002). Words and phrases: Corpus studies of lexical semantics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Suleiman, Y. (Eds) (2013). Arabic sociolinguistics: Issues and perspectives. New York: Routledge.
Sun, J. and Shang, L. (2009). A corpus-based study of errors in Chinese English majors’ English writing. Asian Social Science, 6(1), pp.86-94.

APPENDIX

TO GET YOUR ASSIGNMENTS DONE AT A CHEAPER PRICE, PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US NOW.