نقاط الضعف الشائعة في الدراسات التطبيقية الخاصة باللغة العربية
The objective of this article is to evaluate recent empirical studies on Arabic language. The problem addressed here is the Phenomenon that big number of Arabic studies do not yield consistent findings. The implied question is "What are Common Weak Points in Arabic Practical Studies and What...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Book chapter |
| Language: | Abkhazian |
| Published: |
Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia
2012
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://ddms.usim.edu.my/handle/123456789/5437 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | The objective of this article is to evaluate recent empirical studies on Arabic
language. The problem addressed here is the Phenomenon that big number
of Arabic studies do not yield consistent findings. The implied question is
"What are Common Weak Points in Arabic Practical Studies and What
Should be Done for Correction?" This article is evaluative in nature using
the method of "met analysis". It is based on the idea that proper application
of research procedures yield consistent information on Arabic language. It
critically reviews a number of recent empirical research carried out on Arabic
language. The major focuses is on weaknesses of the studies in question. The
analysis of the studies involves methods, procedures and findings. Then the
article draws an overall conclusion on the reviewed studies. The results of this
evaluation show that, there is little empirical research on Arabic language.
Some results of Arabic studies do not show significant effects and other
findings are not reliable. The studies are still too few to support meaningful
conclusions on Arabic language acquisition. Some studies reported findings
though they had methodological loopholes. Yet, many researchers of Arabic
language do not control extraneous variables that influence their findings.
Hence, there has always been unanswered questions about the influence
of unstructured language aspects in their findings. Further questions arise
about the influence of their research methods on the unstructured language
aspects in general. Implications and general remarks are provided and
based upon remarkable issues pertaining reviewed methods, procedures and
findings. |
|---|