The Acquisition of the Persian Ezafe by Iraqi Arabic Learners: Testing MOGUL Framework in Second Language Acquisition

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, University of Allameh Tabataba’i, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

The acquisition of the Persian Ezafe construction, as a central morphosyntactic feature, can be challenging for non-Persian learners, particularly Arabic speakers whose first language lacks a comparable structure. This study examined the learning of this construction by 90 Iraqi Arabic-speaking learners with the aim of identifying the developmental trajectory of acquisition, the role of first language transfer, and the effect of explicit instruction on the internalization of Ezafe, drawing on the MOGUL framework to analyze the interaction of modular and non-modular knowledge. The research questions focused on how proficiency level, Arabic transfer, and instructional intervention influence the accuracy and efficiency of producing and processing Ezafe. A mixed-methods design was adopted, including oral reading, sentence completion, real-time processing, error analysis, and instructional intervention. This methodology was selected for its ability to evaluate syntactic (modular) and phonological (non-modular) aspects simultaneously, with MOGUL providing the analytical framework for their interaction. The findings confirmed a proficiency-dependent developmental trajectory: beginners, influenced by Arabic transfer, often omitted the Ezafe vowel, but with minimal instruction they showed understanding of the relation between noun and adjective or between head noun and dependent noun (modular knowledge). The diminishing role of Arabic transfer was observed with increasing proficiency. Instructional intervention improved reading accuracy from 65% to 85%, sentence completion from 55% to 82%, and reduced reaction times from 1400 ms to 1000 ms, supporting the positive effect of explicit instruction on production accuracy. These results confirmed the MOGUL account of modular–non-modular interaction. Pedagogical applications include frequency-based practice, visual representations such as syntactic diagrams, and interactive technologies. The study contributes both to advancing second language acquisition theory and to improving Persian language pedagogy for non-native learners.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  • استاجی، اعظم؛ جهانگیری، نادر. (1385). «منشأ کسرۀ اضافه    در زبان فارسی». فصلنامه مجله  دانشکده ادبیات           علوم‌انسانی اصفهان(مطالعات و پژوهش‌های          دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی). شماره،4. صص. 81          -69
  • شریفی، شهلا. (1393). «بررسی کسره‌ی اضافه در ساخت اضافه‌ی زبان فارسی و برخی از گویش‌های خراسان رضوی و جنوبی:         تنوعات و تبعات». مجموعه‌مقالات نهمین همایش   زبان‌شناسی      ایران . جلد ۲، صص ۷۵۵–۷۷۰. تهران:   دانشگاه علامه    طباطبایی.
  • عبدوس، محمد؛ مینایی بیدگلی، بهروز. (۱۳۹۶). «بهبود شناسایی         موجودیت‌های نامدار فارسی با استفاده از           کسرۀ اضافه».    پردازش علائم و داده‌ها، شماره 14.         پیاپی 4. صص. ۴۳–۵۴.
  • عموزاده، محمد؛اسفندیاری، نسیم. (1391). «بررسی مقایسه‌ای ساخت اضافه در زبان فارسی بر اساس الگوهای           شناختی و غیر شناختی». نشریه پژوهش‌های زبانشناسی     تطبیقی. شماره 2. پیاپی 4. صص. 54-91.

- همایونفر، مژگان. (۱۴۰۰). «کسرۀ اضافه: هسته نمای اسم در       فارسی». علم زبان، شماره 8. پیاپی 14. صص. 53–۸۷.

 

 

 

 

 

منابع انگلیسی

Al Khalaf, M. A. H. (2018). Modular and extra-modular second language knowledge of   unaccusativity and unergativity by Najdi Arabic L2 learners of English (Doctoral         dissertation, University of Leeds).

Estaji, A. & Jahangiri, N. (2006). The Origin of Ezafeh in Persian. Journal of  Faculty of Humanities and Literature, 47, 69-81. [In Persian].

Foster-Cohen, S. H. (2017). Making the most of MOGUL: Reflections on interlanguage in           childhood language disorders. IRAL, International Review of Applied Linguistics in    Language Teaching, 55(4), 349–364.

Gunawardena, C. (2022). Acquisition of L3 French object clitics by L1-Sinhala-L2-English         speakers. Language Related Research, 13(5), 223-252.

Gunawardena, C. P. (2022). Acquisition of the verb movement parameter in French by adult        English speakers. Sri Lanka Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(1), 11-20.

Hopp, H. (2010). Ultimate attainment in L2 inflection: Performance similarities between non-      native and native speakers. Lingua, 120(4), 901–931.

Kong, S. (2015). The role of first language transfer in second language acquisition: Evidence       from Chinese learners of French. Second Language Research, 31(2), 123-145.

Marsden, H., Whong, M., & Gil, K.-H. (2018). What’s in the textbook and what’s in the mind:    Polarity item “any” in learner English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40(1),   1–28.

Sharwood Smith, M., & Truscott, J. (2005). Stages or continua in second language acquisition: A             MOGUL solution. Applied Linguistics, 26(2), 219–240.      

Sharwood Smith, M., & Truscott, J. (2014). Explaining input enhancement: A MOGUL   perspective. IRAL, International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching,            52(3), 253–281.

Schwieter, J. W., & Benati, A. (2019). The Cambridge handbook of language learning (Cambridge handbooks in language and linguistics). Cambridge University Press.

Truscott, J. (2006). Optionality in second language acquisition: A generative, processing- oriented account. Second Language Research, 22(3), 311-342.

 

 

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 25 May 2025
  • Revise Date: 21 August 2025
  • Accept Date: 30 August 2025

Share

How to cite

Statistics