فاعلية النموذج الوظيفيّ التكامليّ في تعليم المفاعيل الخمسة للناطقين بغير العربيّة

الوليد حسن علي مُسَلَّم

doi:10.53286/6g5s8536

Authors

Al-Waleed Hassan Ali Musallam Associate Professor of Syntax and Morphology, Department of Teaching Arabic to Speakers of Other Languages, College of Arts and Humanities, King Khalid University, Saudi Arabia. https://orcid.org/0009-0005-6373-7178

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.53286/6g5s8536

Keywords:

Functional Language Performance, Grammatical Achievement, Teaching Arabic to Speakers of Other Languages, The Five Objects, Integrated Functional Model

Abstract

This study investigates the effectiveness of an integrated functional model that connects grammatical forms with meaning and communicative use in teaching the five objects (al-mafāʿīl al-khamsah) to learners of Arabic as a foreign language. Employing a quasi-experimental design with pre- and post-testing, the study involved 134 upper-intermediate learners equally assigned to an experimental group receiving instruction through the proposed model and a control group taught using the conventional grammar-and-examples method. Grammatical achievement and functional language performance were assessed through two standardized tests, while learners' attitudes toward the instructional model were measured using a post-intervention questionnaire. Statistical analysis revealed that the experimental group significantly outperformed the control group (p < .001) in both grammatical achievement and functional language performance. Participants taught through the integrated model also expressed highly positive attitudes toward the instructional approach. The findings demonstrate that integrating grammatical structure with meaning and authentic language use substantially improves learners' mastery of Arabic grammar while facilitating the transfer of grammatical knowledge to practical communication. The study concludes that the integrated functional model offers an effective pedagogical framework for teaching Arabic grammar to non-native speakers and supports the development of both grammatical competence and functional language proficiency.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

الجرجانيّ، ع. (1992). دلائل الإعجاز (محمود محمد شاكر، تحقيق؛ ط.3). مطبعة المدنيّ.

جغبوب، م. (2017). اللسانيات التطبيقية ومقاربات تعليم اللغة العربية للناطقين بغيرها: المقاربة الإجرائية أنموذجًا. مجلة العلامة، (5)، 342–354.

ابن جنّي، أ. ا. ع. (د. ت.). الخصائص (حمد عليّ النجّار، تحقيق). الهيئة المصريّة العامّة للكتاب.

حسّان، ت. (2006). اللغة العربيّة: معناها ومبناها (ط.5). عالم الكتب.

حسن، ع. (1974). النحو الوافي. دار المعارف.

الراجحيّ، ع. (1995). علم اللغة التطبيقيّ وتعليم العربيّة. دار المعرفة الجامعيّة.

صيني، إ؛ عبدالعزيز، ن. م؛ حسين، م ا. (1985). مرشد المعلّم في تدريس اللغة العربيّة لغير الناطقين بها: تطبيقات عمليّة لتقديم الدروس وإجراء التدريبات (ط.2). مكتب التربية العربيّ لدول الخليج.

طعيمة، ر. (1989). تعليم العربيّة لغير الناطقين بها: مناهجه وأساليبه. المنظّمة الإسلاميّة للتربية والعلوم والثقافة.

عبده، د. (1985). التراكيب اللغويّة في كتب تعليم العربيّة لغير الناطقين بها: بعض معايير اختيارها وبعض الملاحظات حول طريقة شرحها. المجلّة العربيّة للدراسات اللغويّة. 4(1)، 49–58.

العمايرة، ح. (2011). توظيف اللسانيات الحديثة في تطوير تعليم العربية: أسلوب النداء في عينة من كتب تعليم العربية للناطقين بها وللناطقين بغيرها أنموذجًا. مجلة الممارسات اللغوية. (4)، 9–44.

الفوزان، ع. (1435). إضاءات لمعلّمي اللغة العربيّة لغير الناطقين بها. العربيّة للجميع.

محمد، ع؛ والعتيبي، ب. (2019). مناهج البحث في اللسانيات التطبيقية: تعليم اللغة العربية للناطقين بغيرها أنموذجًا. مجلة الدراسات اللغوية والأدبية، 20(1)، 84–99.

المخزوميّ، م. (1986). في النحو العربيّ: نقد وتوجيه (ط.2). دار الرائد العربيّ.

الناقة، م. ك. (1985). تعليم اللغة العربيّة للناطقين بلغات أخرى. جامعة أمّ القرى.

ابن هشام، ع. (1985). مغني اللبيب عن كتب الأعاريب (مازن المبارك ومحمد علي حمد الله، تحقيق؛ ط.6). دار الفكر.

References

American Educational Research Association. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 33–40.

American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association.

Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47.

Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (Eds.). (1998). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. Cambridge University Press.

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.

Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics’ test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809

Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. Longman. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315836010

Hedges, L. V. (1981). Distribution theory for Glass’s estimator of effect size and related estimators. Journal of Educational Statistics, 6(2), 107–128. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986006002107

Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics: Selected readings (pp. 269–293). Penguin.

Jonsson, A., & Svingby, G. (2007). The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences. Educational Research Review, 2(2), 130–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2007.05.002

Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press.

Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 863. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2003). Teaching language: From grammar to grammaring. Heinle.

Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. B. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39–52). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.2.07lon

Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37–66. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197001034

Mel’čuk, I. (2016). Language: From meaning to text (D. Beck, Ed.). Academic Studies Press.

Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749.

Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158.

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton Mifflin.

Sireci, S. G. (1998). Gathering and analyzing content validity data. Educational Assessment, 5(4), 299–321.

Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford University Press.

Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics (pp. 125–144). Oxford University Press.

VanPatten, B., & Benati, A. G. (2010). Key terms in second language acquisition. Continuum.

Vickers, A. J., & Altman, D. G. (2001). Analysing controlled trials with baseline and follow-up measurements. BMJ, 323, 1123–1124.

Welch, B. L. (1947). The generalization of “Student’s” problem when several different population variances are involved. Biometrika, 34(1–2), 28–35.

Widdowson, H. G. (1978). Teaching language as communication. Oxford University Press.