Volume 3, Issue 1, January 2015, Page: 16-21
Research Article Revision and Error Analysis (EA): Have Tunisian Novice Researchers Learnt from their Errors
Chokri Smaoui, RU: DISCOURSE ANALYSIS. Faculty of Letters and Humanities of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia
Elhoucine Essefi, National Engineering School of Sfax, Road of Soukra, km 4 Zipcode3038, Sfax, Tunisia
Received: Sep. 23, 2014;       Accepted: Oct. 23, 2014;       Published: Jan. 27, 2015
DOI: 10.11648/j.ijll.20150301.13      View  2825      Downloads  251
Abstract
This work tried to see whether Tunisian novice researchers have taken advantage of their errors or not. By studying a case study in terms of Corpus Linguistics, it was found out that difficulties of Tunisian novice researchers lie in their unfamiliarity with error terminology and with the tradition of the corrective feedback. This lacuna is inherited from the Tunisian official programs, which have excluded this endeavour from their interests. Thus, Tunisian novice researchers could not profit from the corrective feedback either during their educational career or during the revision process of their Research Articles.
Keywords
Error Terminology, Error Analysis (EA), Corpus Linguistics, Corrective Feedback
To cite this article
Chokri Smaoui, Elhoucine Essefi, Research Article Revision and Error Analysis (EA): Have Tunisian Novice Researchers Learnt from their Errors, International Journal of Language and Linguistics. Vol. 3, No. 1, 2015, pp. 16-21. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20150301.13
Reference
[1]
Berry, R. (1995). Language teachers and metalinguistic terminology. Paper presented at the Third international conference on teacher education in second language teaching, Hong Kong, City University of Hong Kong, March 14–16, 1995.
[2]
Burt, M. and kisparsky, S. (1972). Approach to Error Analysis’. In Richards, J. (Ed.). Error analysis: Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition. 172-188. Essex: Longman.
[3]
Corder, S. (1974). ‘Idiosyncratic Dialects and Error Analysis’. In Richards, J. (Ed.). Error analysis: Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition. 158-171. Essex: Longman.
[4]
Davies, F. (1988). Reading between the lines: Thematic choice as a device for presenting writer viewpoint in academic discourse. Especialand, 9, 173-200.
[5]
Ellis, R. (2007). Corrective Feedback in Theory, Research and Practice [Abstract]. Presented at the 5th international conference on ELT in China & the 1st congress of chinese applied linguistics. Beijing, China: Beijing Foreign Language Studies University, May 17–20, 2007. Retrieved 23.10.07.
[6]
Ellis, R. (2014). The relevance of the ‘implicit’ vs ‘explicit’ distinction for language teachers. Paper presented at the second international conference of the Tunisian Association of Teachers of English (TATE), Tunis, Tunisia.
[7]
Ferris, D. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland, & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing (pp. 81e104). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[8]
Gosden, H. (1993). Discourse functions of Subject in scientific research articles. Applied Linguistics, 14, 56-75.
[9]
Gosden, H. (1995). Success in Research Article Writing and revision: A Social-Constructionist Perspective. Pergamon, 14, 37-49.
[10]
Knot-r-Cetina, K. (1981). The manufacture of knowledge. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Gruyter.
[11]
Lee, I. (1997). ESL learners’ performance in error correction in writing: Some implications for teaching. System, 25(4), 465–477. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 98, 67–100.
[12]
Magilow, D. H. (1999). Case study #2: Error correction and classroom affect. Teaching German, 32(2), 125–129.
[13]
Richards, J. (1974). ‘A Non-Contrastive Approach to Error Analysis’. In Richards, J. (Ed.). Error analysis: Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition. 172-188. Essex: Longman.
[14]
Schulz, R.A. (1996). Focus on form in the foreign language classroom: Students’ and teachers’ views on error correction and the role of grammar. Foreign Language Annals, 29, 343–364.
[15]
Smaoui, Ch. (1993). Error Analysis: communicative concern as a major contributor to students’ errors. Unpublished M.A. thesis. University of Kairaouan, Tunisia.
[16]
Smaoui, Ch. (2010). Foreign language learners’ ways of expressing ‘difficult’ concepts. In Tarchouna, N. (ed.), Cross-Cultural Dialogues: Proceedings of the English Department Conference, Faculty of letters & Humanities, Sousse (7-9 December 2006): 131-151. Imprimerie Officielle de la République Tunisienne.
[17]
Smaoui, Ch. & Sefi, E. (forthcoming). Reading process as first stage of the publication industry: have Tunisian novice researchers acquired the appropriate reading skills to do a literature review? International Journal of Language and Linguistics.
[18]
Stockwell, R.P., and Martin, J. W. (1965). The grammatical structure of English and Spanish. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[19]
Swales, J.M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
[20]
Yates, R. and Kenkel, J. (2002). Responding to sentence-levels errors in writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11, 29-47.
[21]
Yeh, S., Lo J. (2009). Using online annotations to support error correction and corrective feedback. Computers & Education, 52, 882–892.
[22]
Wardaugh, R. (1970). The contrastive analysis hypothesis. TESOL Quarterly 4: 123-30.
Browse journals by subject