The Semantic Roles Which Cause Difficulty To The Fourth Year Students Of English At The University Of Anbar
Resumen
The present study aims at investigating the difficulty of identifying the cases of Semantic Roles that encounter the fourth year students of English at the University of Anbar. Also, it aims at identifying which group (i.e. students who study English at College of Arts or those who study English at College of Ed- ucation for Humanities) faces more difficulty in the Semantic Roles than the other, and the third aim is to find out if there is a significant difference in the Semantic Roles difficulty between males and females of the whole sample ac- cording to the variable of gender. This study is restricted to investigate if the fourth year students of English at the University of Anbar encounter difficulty in deciding the cases of Semantic Roles adopted by Fillmore during the second course of the study year 2017-2018. The present study hypothesizes that there is no significant difference between the mean score of the sample’s achieve- ment in the test, on one hand and the estimated theoretical mean of the test on the other hand at level of significance (0.05). The second hypothesis states that there is no significant difference in Semantic Roles difficulty between the group of the fourth year English language students at the College of Arts and the fourth year English language students at College of Education for Human- ities at the level of significance (0.05), and the final hypothesis is that there is no significant difference in the Semantic Roles difficulty between males and females of the whole sample according to the variable of gender and at the level of significance (0.05). The researchers have chosen the sample randomly. It includes (61) students distributed to 28 male and female students who study English in the fourth year at College of Arts and 33 male and female stu- dents who study English in the fourth year at College of Education for Hu- manities. The researchers used a diagnostic test as the main instrument to collect the required data. After applying the test, one sample t-t test is used to accomplish the first aim and two independent samples t-test is used to achieve the second and third aims of this study. Results show that the sam- ple of the study totally faces problems in determining the cases of semantic roles adopted by Fillmore. With respect to the second aim, it is found that the group of College of Arts and College of Education for Humanities suffer from a similar difficulty in identifying the cases of semantic roles. Also, it is found that females’ achievements in the test in both groups are better than males’ achievements in both groups. Finally conclusions, suggestions and recommendations are set.Citas
- Al-Juboury, Najat Ahmed. (1999). A Language Teacher’s Guide to Assessment. Iraq: University of Baghdad.
- Al-Kubaisy, Abdul-Wahid Hameed. (2007). Measurement and Evaluation: Renewals and Discussions. Jordan: Jareer Press.
- Al-Najar, Nabeel Jumaa Salih. (2010). Measurement and Evalua- tion: An Applicative Perspective with Software of SPSS. Jordan: Al-Ha- mid Press.
- Bachman, Lyle F. (2004). Statistical Analyses for Language As- sessment. UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Blansitt, E.L. (1978). ‘Stimulus as a Semantic Role‘. In W. Abra- ham (ed.), Vallence, Semantic Case and Grammatical Relations. Amster- dam: John Benjamins. pp. 311 -24.
- Chafe, W.L. (1970). Meaning and the Structure of Language. Chi- cago: the University of Chicago press.
- Cook, W.A. (1978). ‘A Case Grammar Matrix Model (and its Ap- plication to a Hemingway Text) ‘ In W. Abraham (ed.), Valence. Semantic Cases and Grammatical Relations. Amsterdam: John Benjamins .pp .295- 307.
- ------------ (1979). Case Grammar: Development of the Matrix Model (1970– 1978).Washington: Georgetown University Press.
- Crystal, D. (1997). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonet- ics.4thed. Great Britain: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
- ------------ (2003) A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
- Fillmore, C.J. (1968) ‘The Case for Case ‘. In Emmon Batch and Robert T. Harms (eds.) University of Linguistic Theory. New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. pp. 1- 88
- ---------------- (1971) ‘Types of Lexical Information’. In D. Reibel and S. Schane (eds.), pp. 361 – 75 Fries. C. C. (1952).The Structure of English. London: Longmans, Green and Company.
- Halliday, M. A. K. (1967). ‘Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English’. Journal of Linguistics. 3. 1, 37 – 81. Quoted in Blansitt (1978: 312)
- ----------- (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Lon- don: Edward Arnold.
- Hartmann, R.R.K. and Stork. F.C. (1976). Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. London: Applied Science Publishers Ltd.
- Hutchinson, W .J. (1975). Language of Indexing and Classifica- tion. England: Peter Pereqrinus.
- Klein, W (1986) Second Language Acquisition. Great Britain: Cambridge University Press.
- Mathews, P .H. (1981). Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge Universi- ty Press.
- Mulhim, Sami Mohammed. (2009). Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology. 4th ed. Jordan: Al-Maysara Press.
- Onions, C. T. (1971). Modern English Syntax. London: Routledge and KeganPaul Ltd. Publishers and Distributors, Inc.
- Pallant, Julie. (2010). SPSS Survival Manual: A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using SPSS. 4th ed. Australia: Allen & Unwin Book Publishers.
- Payne, Thomas E. (1997). Describing Morphosyntax: A Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge: New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Quirk, Greenbaum, S.; Leech, G. and Svartvik, J. (1985). A Com- prehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman Group Ltd.
- Quirk, R et al. (1972). A Grammar of Contemporary English. Lon- don: Longman Group Ltd.
- Quirk, R. and Greenbaum, S. (1973). A University Grammar of English. London: Longman Group Ltd.
- Radford, A. (1988). Transformational Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Richards, C. Jack and Richard Schmidt. (2002). Longman Dic- tionary of Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics. 3rd ed. UK: Pearson Education Limited.
- Roberts, P (1954). Understanding Grammar. New York: Harper and Row Publisher, Inc.
- -------------- (1956). Patterns of English. USA: Harcourt, Brace and world, Inc.
- Scheurweghs, G. (1959). Present – Day English Syntax: A survey of Sentence Patterns. London: Longman Green and Co Ltd.
- Stageberg, N. C. (1965). An Introductory English Grammar. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
- Starosta, S. (1978). ‘The One Percent Solution’ .In W. Abraham (ed.), Valence, Semantic Case and Grammatical Relations. Amsterdam: John Benjamin's pp.459-565
-Thakur, D (1998) guistics. London and New York: Routledge Inc.
- Webster, Merriam. (2005). Webster’s Collegiate Dictionarry.11th ed. USA: Merriam Company.
Benjamin’s .pp. 459 – 565.
Thakur, D. (1998). Linguistic Simplified: Syntax. Bharat: Bha-
Trask, R. L. (1993). A Dictionary of Grammatical Terms in Lin-
- Yule, G (1996). The Study of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
