People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria

Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research

Larbi Ben M’hidi University-Oum El Bouaghi

Faculty of Letters and Languages

Department of English

The Influence of French Lexical Borrowing on the Quality of

English Written Productions of Algerian EFL Students at Larbi

Ben M’hidi University-Oum El Bouaghi

Dissertation Submitted to the Department of English in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree of Master in Didactics

Candidate (s) Supervisor

1. Kenza ZINAI Dr. Nassira BOUDERSA (ENSC)
2. Rafika SAIDI

Board of Examiners
1. Djihad AZEROUEL President (Larbi Ben M’hidi University)
2. Nassira BOUDERSA Supervisor (ENS-Assia Djebar-Constantine)
3. Fadila HADJRESS Examiner (Larbi Ben M’hidi University)

Academic Year: June 2018-2019

 i

Declaration

We hereby declare that all information and data in the Master research

entitled : The Influence of French Lexical Borrowing on the Quality of

English Written Productions of Algerian EFL Students at Larbi Ben

M’hidi University, have been obtained and presented in accordance with the

academic rules and ethical conduct of academic research. We do also declare

that, as required by these academic rules and ethical conduct, we have fully

cited, referenced and acknowledged all materials and results that are not

original to this work.

Full name : Kenza ZINAI

Signature : ……………

Full name : Rafika SAIDI

Signature : ……………
 ii

Dedication 1

In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

I dedicate this work to

My beloved parents Saigh and Fouzia for their love, patience and for

their moral, emotional, and financial support. May Allah bless them

forever.

My lovely brothers Hakou and Mohamed for their love and support.

My kindest cousins Oumaima, Aya, Chaima, Lydia and Imylia for

their love and encouragement.

All the family members of SAIDI and TOUNSI.

My friends with whom I shared the university life with its lights and

ShadowsRomaissa, Soraya, Imane, and Hanaa.

Especially toRania, Romaissa, Meriem, Hadjer, Zeyneband Manal.

To all my teachers.

Rafika
 iii

Dedication 2

In the name of Allah the most Gracious, the most Merciful. All the
praise is due to Allah, the sustainer of all the world. I shall pay my
deepest gratitude to His Almighty for giving me the will and the
strength to finish this work.

I dedicate this work to

My dear mother and precious father whose love and support always
strengthen me.

My kindest brother Abdou and my lovely sister Chaima who always

help me in all possible way.

All the family members of Zinai and Hafidh.

All my dear friends who never stopped supporting or giving up on me

even in the hardest times when I lost motivation and stopped believing
in my dreams, namely: Amina,Hadjer, Meriam, Manel, Romaissa,
Sana, and Zineb.

All my classmates with whom I shared the university life with all its
lights and shadows.

And respectfully to all my teachers.

May Allah bless you all.

Kenza
 iv

Acknowledgments

First, we would like to thank Allah for giving us strength and will to

complete this work.

We would like to express our sincere gratitude to our Supervisor

Dr.Nassira BOUDERSA. Without her, this work would not have been

completed. Special thanks are due to her for being patient with us

throughout the stages of the research, and for her continuous support,

guidance, kindness, help and advice.

Special thanks to

Mr. Hamadouche Mokhtar for his encouragement, wise guidance, and

significant support.

Mr. HadjBouri for his help and fruitful pieces of advice.

We would also like to thank the president of the jury, Djihad AZEROUE

and the examiner,Fadila HADJRESS, for their acceptance to examine our

work. Your evaluation and remarks are highly appreciated.

We express our thanks to all teachers at the department of English at Larbi

Ben M’hidi University.

 v

Abstract

A good deal of Algerian EFL students face several problems in English writing,

especially at the level of lexis. Certain lexical problems are mainly due to the

interference of the French language in the English writing of these students. EFL students

borrow lexical words from French and use them in their writing. Due to the French

lexical interference, Algerian EFL students tend to commit lexical errors in their English

writing. On the basis of this, we hypothesized that prior knowledge of French lexis is

one of the main sources (interference) of lexical errors in Algerian EFL students’ English

writing. We also hypothesized that if Algerian EFL students use lexical borrowing from

French, this will negatively influence the quality of their English written productions. To

conduct the research investigation, a questionnaire was designed and administered to ten

teachers of written expression at the department of English-University of Larbi Ben

M’hidi, in the academic year 2018-2019. The analysis of the questionnaire showed that

lexical interference from French is one of the main reasons for Algerian EFL students’

lexical errors in English writing. In light of this, the first research hypothesis was

confirmed. The analysis of the results showed also that the use of borrowing from the

French language influences negatively the quality of EFL students’ English texts. In light

of this, the second research hypothesis was also confirmed.

key words: Negative transfer, French lexis, English lexis, Writing quality.
 vi

List of Abbreviations and Symbols

EFL :English Foreign Language

Eng :English Language

Fr :French Language

L1 :First Language

L2 :Second Language

L3 :Third Language

MT : Mother Tongue

TL : Target Language

(+) : positive

(-) : negative
 vii

List of Tables

Table NumberPage

Table 01: Categories and Subcategories of Lexical Transfer ……………………………...17

Table 02: Types of Lexical Borrowing …………………………………………………...…26

Table 03: Examples of Partial Lexical Borrowing ……………………………………....…27

Table 04:The Differences between Error and Mistake ……………………………………32

Table 05: Algerian EFL Teachers’ Gender ……………………………………………….…49

Table 06: Teachers’ Years of Experience in Teaching at the Level of University……...50

Table 07: Algerian EFL Teachers’ Experience in Teaching the Subject of Writing at

University …………………………………………………………………………………….…51

Table 08: Teachers’ Opinion about Algerian EFL Students’ Level in Writing ……….…53

Table 09: Algerian EFL Students’ Difficulties in Writing ……………………………...…54

Table 10: Levels/Aspects of Language Difficulty in English Writing…………………….55

Table 11: Mistakes/Errors in EFL Students’ Writing ……………………………………….56

Table 12: The Frequency of Errors /Mistakes in Algerian EFL Students’ Writing ……..57

Table 13: Teachers’ Opinion about Whether or not Algerian EFL Students’ Have Lexical

Difficulties in English Writing ………………………………………………………………...58

Table 14: Algerian EFL Students’ Use of the French Language in the English Class.....60

Table 15: Algerian EFL Students’ Use of the French Language in the English Writing

…………………………………………………………………………………………………....61

Table 16: The Amount of Algerian EFL Students’ Use of French in English Writing ...62

Table 17: The Language Level of French Use in English Writing ……………………….63
 viii

Table 18: The Type of Lexical Aspects where EFL Students Use French in Their

English Writing ………………………………………………………………………………….64

Table 19: The Presence of French Lexis in Algerian EFL Students’ English Writing :

Focus on Borrowing ……………………………………………………………………………69

Table 20: The Most Used Type of Borrowing in Algerian EFL Students’ English

Texts………………………………………………………………………………………………

……70

Table 21: Written Expression Teachers’ Attitudes Towards French Lexical Borrowing in

Algerian EFL Students’ English Texts ……………………………………………………..…71

Table 22: Teachers’ Opinion about whether or not Borrowing Words from French Is

Considered as Error in English Writing …………………………………………………...…72

Table 23: Types of Lexical Borrowing Errors : Intra-ligual and Inter-lingual ……………74

Table 24: Types of Intralingual Errors in EFL Students’ English Writing ………………76

Table 25: Teachers’ Encouragement for EFL Students to Borrow French Words in

English Writing with Explanation ……………………………………………………………..77

Table 26: Teachers’ Tolerance vis-à-vis Algerian EFL Students’ Use of French Words in

the English Written Productions …………………………………………………………….…80

Table 27: EFL Teachers’ Opinion about the Influence of French Lexical Borrowing on

the Algerian EFL Students’ Writing Quality …………………………………………………82

Table 28: TheNature of French Lexical Borrowing Influence on the Quality of the

English Text : Negative or Positive Influence..........................................................................83

Table 29: The Extent to French Lexical Borrowing Has an Influence on the Quality of

the English Text……………………………………………………………………………...…84

 ix

Table of Contents

Declaration ………………………………………………………………………………….…...i

Dedication 01…………………………………………………………………………………….ii

Dedication 02……………………………………………………………………………………iii

Acknowledgments………………………………………………………………………………..iv

Abstract………………………………………………...…………………………………………v

List of Abbreviationsand Symbols ……………………………………….…………………vi

List of Tables………………………..…………………………………………………………vii

Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………………ix

General introduction…………………………………………………………………………….1

1. Statement of the Problem………………………………………………………………...1

2. Research Aims…………………………………………………………………………….2

3. Research Questions and Hypotheses…………………………………………………….2

3.1.Research Questions…………………………………………………….…2

3.2.Research Hypotheses …………………………………………………….3

4. Research Methodology……………………………………………………………………3

4.1.Research Sample …………………………………………………………3

4.2.Research Tools …………………………………………………………...4

5. Structure of the Dissertation………………………………………………………….….4

Chapter One : Language Contact in the Algerian Educational Context

Section One:French and English as Foreign Languages in the Algerian Educational

Context

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………6
 x

1.1.1. The Language Situation in the Algerian Context: Foreign Language

Contact………..…………………………………………………………………….6

1.1.2. Bilingualism / Multilingualism in the Algerian Society……………………..….8

1.1.3. French and English in the Algerian Educational System…………………..…9

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………..11

Section Two: The French and the English Language Systems: Focus on Lexis

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………12

1.2.1. Definition of Lexis………………………………………………………………..12

1.2.2. Types of Lexis…………………………………………………………………….13

1.2.3. Similarities and Differences between the French and the English Lexis…….14

1.2.4. Types of Lexical Transfer ……………………………………………………….15

1.2.4.1.Word Form (Borrowing)…………………………………………….16

1.2.4.1.1. Substitution…………………………….…17

1.2.4.1.2. Relexification …………………………….17

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………..…19

Chapter Two : Lexis and Writing in EFL Contexts

Section One : Lexical Competence and Writing in EFL Contexts

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………20

2.1.1. The Nature of the Skill of English Writing in EFL

Contexts…………………………………………………………………………..20

2.1.2. The Importance of Lexis/Vocabulary in English Writing …………………...21

2.1.3. The Influence of French Vocabulary Use on the Quality of the English

Writing of Algerian EFL Students…………………………………………..…22

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………..…26
 xi

Section Two : Lexical Errors in EFL Writing Contexts

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………27

2.2.1. Error Versus Mistake in EFL Students’ Writing…………………………………27

2.2.2. Definition of Lexical Errors……………………………………………………...…29

2.2.3. Lexical Errors’ Taxonomies……………………………………………………...…30

2.2.4. Sources of Lexical Errors in EFL Students’ Writing……………………………31

2.2.4.1. Language Transfer/Interference at the Level of Lexis…………………..……32

2.2.4.1.1. Positive Language Transfer…………………………………………33

2.2.4.1.2. Negative Language Transfer…………………………………...……34

2.2.4.2. Intralingual and Developmental Errors …………………………………….…..34

2.2.4.2.1. False Analogy………………………………………………………..35

2.2.4.2.2. Overgeneralization …………………………………………………..35

2.2.4.2.3. Hypercorrection…………………………………………………...….35

2.2.4.2.4. Faulty categorization ………………………………………….…….36

2.2.4.3. Inter-lingual Errors…………………….…………………………………………36

2.2.4.4. Proficiency Level…………………………………………………………………36

2.2.4.5. Vocabulary Size………………………………………………………………..…37

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………..………38

Chapter Three : Data Collection, Data Analysis and Discussion of the Results

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………39

3.1.Research Questions………………………………………………………………………39

3.2.Research Hypotheses……………………………………………………………….……40

3.3.Research Tools………………………………………………………………………..…40

3.3.1. Questionnaire……………………………………………………………………..40
 xii

3.3.1.1.Description of the Teachers’ Questionnaire…………………………….…40

3.3.1.2.Aims of the Teachers’ Questionnaire…………………………………...…43

3.3.1.3.Administration of the Teachers’ Questionnaire……………………………44

3.4.Questionnaire Analysis and Discussion of the Results……………….…………...…44

General Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………….84

Recommendations…………………………………………………………………………….....88

Research Limitations ………………………………………………………………………..…89

References ……………………………………………………………………………………….90

Appendix : Teachers’ questionnaire

Résumé

‫ملخص‬
General Introduction

1. State ment of the Problem

2. Research Aims

3. Research Questions and Reaserch Hypotheses

3.1. Research Questions

3.2. Research Hypotheses

4. Research Methodology

4.1. Research Sample

4.2. Research Tool

5. Structure of the Dissertation

 1

General Introduction

During the learning process of foreign language, a good deal of Algerian EFL

students may face difficulties to master, or reach a proficient level in, the foreign

language. It has been widely acknowledged in research that in learning a second

language, the first language can have an interference in the process of learning that

language. This case may concern only the first language and the second language.

This is not, in fact, the only case, when it comes to the foreign language,

especially in the Algerian context. Interference is also claimed to happen between the

first foreign language, which is French, and the second foreign language, which is

English. Despite the fact that these two languages do not completely have the same

origins, they are close to each other and share several linguistic similarities as well as

significant and influential differences. These latter can create serious problems to

language learners, especially in the case of learning English since, in the Algerian

educational context, it is usually learnt after the French language.

1. Statement of the Problem

A good deal of Algerian learners of English as a second foreign language (EFL)

face serious problems of language borrowing from the French language (the first

foreign language) to the English language (the second foreign language). Some Algerian

EFL students may hold a wrong assumption, which is the fact that the lexis of both

French and English is very similar and that there are no differences at all between the

two languages. In light of this, these students may have a strong tendency to use

similar words, phrases, and expressions from the French language and apply them in

the English language production, especially in writing. Since lexis is considered to be

 2

an essential part of any language system, making inappropriate or wrong language use

(interference and negative language transfer from French into English) can be

considered as a serious writing problem, especially if it leads to errors in writing and

result in poor quality of English written productions by Algerian EFL students.

In the present research, we believe that language interference is not only found

between the first language (mother tongue) and the first foreign languages (French). In

fact, it can also be found between the first foreign language (French) and the second

foreign language (English), and this is the case in the Algerian context. In light of

this, we assume that the main source of lexical errors in the English written

productions of Algerian EFL students is mainly due to the influence (interference) of

the French lexis. We also assume that borrowing from the French lexis can influence

the quality of the English text negatively.

2. Research Aims

The present research aims first at investigating if a prior knowledge of French

lexis (interference) is one of the main sources of lexical errors in Algerian EFL

students’ English writing. The research aims also at investigating if the use of French

lexical borrowing has a negative influence on the quality of the English text.

3. Research Questions and Research Hypotheses

3.1.Research Questions

In this research, we are mainly interested in investigating the influence of the

French lexis on Algerian EFL students’ written production at the level of lexis. In

light of this, the present research seeks to answer the following questions:

 Do Algerian EFL students have lexical problems in their English

writing?
 3

 What are the major types of lexical problems (mistakes/errors) faced

by Algerian EFL students’ in their English writing?

 What are the sources of lexical problems in Algerian EFL students’

written productions?

 Do Algerian EFL students make lexical borrowings from French in

their English writing?

 Does the use of lexical borrowing from French affect, negatively, the

quality of the English texts of Algerian EFL students?

3.2.Research Hypotheses

Based on the research aims and research questions stated above, we hypothesize

that:

 Algerian EFL students’ lexical errors in English writing are mainly due to the

interference of the French language in EFL students’ English writing.

 If Algerian EFL students use lexical borrowing from French, this will

negatively influence the quality of their English written productions.

4. Research Methodology

4.1.Research Sample

The sample of the present research involves written expression teachers at the

English Department, Larbi Ben M’hidi University, in the academic year 2018-2019.

The total number of teachers is ten teachers.

 4

3.1. Research Tool

To conduct the present research, one main research tool is used, which is the

questionnaire. This central research instruments is used in order to get information

related to Algerian EFL students’ lexical problems in writing, the major types of

lexical problems, the sources of lexical problems and the influence of French lexical

borrowing on Algerian EFL students’ English texts’ quality. The questionnaire is

administrated to teachers of writing at Larbi Ben M’Hidi University in the academic

year 2018/2019. The main focus of the present research is placed on, first, exploring

whether, or not, Algerian EFL students use lexical borrowing from French in their

English writing as a result of language interference. The second main focus of the

present research is placed on investigating, whether or not, lexical borrowing from

French influences the quality of English text written by Algerian EFL students in a

negative way.

4. Structure of the Dissertation

The present research dissertation consists of three chapters. The first chapter is

devoted to two sections. The first section focuses on providing an overview of the

French language and the English language in the Algerian educational context. The

second section focuses on discussing the topic of language contact between the French

and English language, with focus being placed mainly on the lexical level of language.

The second theoretical chapter includes two sections too. The first section covers

aspects of lexical competence and writing in EFL contexts. The second section covers

aspects related to lexical errors in EFL writing. The third chapter involves mainly the

analysis of written expression teachers’ questionnaire and discussion of the results. The
 5

practical chapter concludes with some recommendations about how to overcome French

lexical borrowing problems in the English writing of Algerian EFL students.

Chapter One: Language Contact in the Algerian Educational Context

Section One: French and English as Foreign Languages in the Algerian Educational

Context

Introduction

1.1.1. The Language Situation in the Algerian Context: Foreign Language

Contact

1.1.2. Bilingualism / Multilingualism in the Algerian Society

1.1.3. French and English in the Algerian Educational System

Conclusion

Section Two: The French and the English Language Systems: Focus on Lexis

Introduction

1.2.1. Definition of Lexis

1.2.2. Types of Lexis

1.2.3. Similarities and Differences between the French and the English Lexis

1.2.4. Types of Lexical Transfer

1.2.4.1.Word Form

1.2.4.1.1. Substitution

1.2.4.1.2. Relexification

Conclusion
 6

Section One: French and English as Foreign Languages in the Algerian

Educational Context

Introduction

In order to understand how languages influence each other, we need first to have a

clear idea about their status in a given society. This is the case of the French and the

English language(s)in the Algerian educational context. The presence of one foreign

language is claimed to have an influence on another foreign language, especially if the

two languages share a good deal of similarities at the different levels of their language

system1s. In the first section of this theoretical chapter, focus is placed on language

contact phenomenon and the status of foreign languages, mainly French and English,

in the Algerian educational context.

1. The Language Situation in the Algerian Context: Foreign Language

Contact

In many countries, it is usually a normal situation to find the presence of two or

more languages (mother tongue/first foreign language/second foreign language). This

leads, eventually, to a direct contact between them. In fact, the presence of these

languages, especially foreign languages, is said to influence societies, and what is more

is the fact that the contact between two languages or more can result in one having

an influence on another.

In the case of the Algerian society, it can be said that the language situation is

greatly influenced by different historical and linguistic circumstances. This has made of
 7

it a unique language context; different languages are continuously present and they can

be easily noticed in people’s daily use of language.

Algeria is characterized by the co-existence of different foreign languages. These

include mainly, French and English, besides other rising foreign languages (Spanish,

Chinese, Turkish and so on). The presence of these foreign languages and the

relationship between them is, in fact, a complex one ( Negadi, 2015).

Despite being considered as a first foreign language in Algeria, the French

language seems to be having the position of a co-official language. This position is

implicitly expressed through actual practices in society. The presence of French in the

Algerian context is mainly due, previously, to colonial reasons as well as to certain

economic and political reasons, nowadays. Even though, it has not been explicitly

stated as official, but the language is commonly used by the government and by

members of the Algerian society in a continuous manner.

As far as the French language is concerned, Negadi (2015), explained that the

status of French has changed from being the official language during the period of

colonization. After the Algerian independence in 1962, French has become a first

foreign language because it used to be perceived as a mean of technological progress.

Later on, when the English language started to be taught in the Algerian schools, the

French language had a remarkable influence on it because both languages share many

similarities in their language systems.

Abid-Hocine(2007) emphasized the point that Algeria is the second largest

Francophone country in the world. However, it is now clear to notice that the interest

in foreign languages has shifted from French to English and other internationally
 8

powerful languages. The latter are attracting more interest and are being given more

importance by becoming a stream of study or a required subject in many Algerian

universities. This shift of interest is mainly due to globalization and technological

progress.

In the same line of thought, Crystal (1997) pointed out that in the last few

decades, thousand of newspapers have focused on emphasizing the fact that “English is

the global language”. Nowadays, it is an undeniable fact that the English language is

a symbol of globalization and progress. During the last decades, it is, then, quite

justifiable why a great deal of countries and educational institutions gave the language

more importance than any other foreign language. Crystal (1997) claimed that English

has become a worldwide language because of two reasons: the first reason is the

authority of its men, particularly in the military and political domains, and the second

reason is the influence of its press.

The huge spread of the English language world-widely has made it a dominant

language in all fields of life, especially in the fields of science and technology,

economic development, military and political arenas and so on. This dominance and

the importance that is associated with the language have motivated people to learn the

language in order to keep-up with the emerging progress and to ensure that they are

connected with the whole world.

2. Bilingualism / Multilingualism in the Algerian Society

The linguistics situation in Algeria is totally a complex one. Language contact

between two or more languages leads to a linguistic phenomenon known as

bilingualism/multilingualism. On one hand, a bilingual person is the person who can

 9

speak two languages. Mackey (1962, p.55) defined bilingualism as, “ the ability to use

more than one language.” In the same line of thought, Bloomfield (1933, p.55),

explained that bilingualism refers to “the native like control of two languages.” On the

other hand, multilingualism refers to the acquisition of languages other than the first

or the second (Cenoz, 1997). That is to say, multilingualism is the use of more than

two languages.

In certain situations, the Algerian society can be seen as a multilingual one. There

are people who speak the Algerian Arabic(mother tongue), Tamazight (mother tongue),

French(first foreign language), and English(second foreign language). Zohra (2015)

emphasized the fact that Algeria is a multilingual society due to the presence of many

languages. Besides that, Chemami(2016, p.227) highlighted also the fact that Algeria is

a multilingual society by stating that, “ the linguistic land scape of Algeria is

plurilingual because, there are four spoken languages: literary Arabic, Algerian Arabic,

Tamazight and French.”

3. French and English in the Algerian Educational System

The Algerian educational system passed through several stages vis-à-vis foreign

languages. To begin with, in the colonial period, Algerians were obliged to learn the

French language(Rezig, 2011). In fact, French used to be the only language used for

education. After the Algerian independence in 1962, a good deal of Algerians (one

million) were able to read in French, while another great majority (four millions) was

able to speak the language. The Arabic language was, then, obligatory introduced to

all levels of education (Bennoune,2000, as cited in Benrabeh, 2007). After few months,
 10

French was re-introduced to be taught with Arabic (Gordon, 1966, as cited in

Benrabeh, 2007).

Later on, the English language emerged as a powerful international language of

science and technology. In light of this, it was also introduced to be taught as a

second foreign language after the French language (Ouahmiche, Beddiaf & Beddiaf,

2017). Interest in learning the English language was noticed to be rising to the extent

that both French and English were in a competition to dominate in the Algerian

educational system.

In fact, English is a language that is dominant and is widely spoken in the world

nowadays. It was introduced to be taught in the Algerian middle schools at the first

level (Chemami, 2011). In the 70s, English was introduced side by side with the

French language and it was given the status of a second foreign language (Benrabeh,

2007). In September 1993, primary school children, by grade four, were, however,

given the opportunity to choose between the French or the English language to be the

first mandatory foreign language to be learnt (Bennoune,2000,as cited in Benrabeh,

2007). Recently, English started to receive much importance and started to show

ongoing dominance. This point was clearly expressed by stating that, “…today’s

younger generations show positive attitudes towards English for its association with

progress and modernity as well as its consideration as an important means of communication

with the external world”(Ouahmiche et al., 2017, as cited in Hamzaoui, 2017, p. 6).
 11

Conclusion

The focus of the present theoretical section is on providing a description as well an

explanation of the foreign language situation in the Algerian educational context. The

situation is characterized by the presence of two main foreign languages, namely the

French and the English language. The presence of these two foreign languages, besides

the first language (s): Algerian Arabic and Tamazight, makes the Algerian linguistic

situation a multilingual one. The relationship between the two foreign languages,

French and English, is that of dominance and influence, especially in the Algerian

educational context.
 12

Section Two: The French and the English Language Systems: Focus on Lexis

Introduction

Lexis is considered as one of the most important aspects of language. Given its

centrality, it is very important to learn it, especially in a second or a foreign

language. In the learning process, a good deal of learners may face obstacles in the

language in question. One central language level where students may have serious

difficulties is that of lexis (vocabulary mastery). Inability to adequately master a given

language, English in this case, may oblige students to rely on the lexis of another

language, French in this case, just to cover a weakness in a given language. One way

of how learners may make use of one foreign language to cover deficiency in another

foreign language is through the use of borrowing. This process can be intentional or

non-intentional.

1. Definition of Lexis

Lexis or language vocabulary is seen as an important aspect of language learning.

Actually, the more vocabulary learners learn, the more they master the language and

become proficient, and the less ambiguities and linguistic gaps will occur in their

language productions. Llach (2014)supported this point by stating that, “vocabulary is

considered to be central part of language learning and also an essential component in

communication”(p. 12).
 13

Jackson and Amvela (2000) argued that vocabulary, lexis, and lexicon are equivalent

in meaning (Cited in Caro, 2017). Actually, various definitions have been given to

lexis/vocabulary. Cambridge Online Dictionary (2016) defined it as “ the words that are

known or used by a particular person, or that are used in language or subject.” Also,

Oxford Online Dictionary (para. 1) defined lexis/vocabulary as “the total stock of words

in a language.” Similarly, Caro (2017, p. 206) explained it by stating that it refers to

the “ the collection of words that an individual knows.”

Caro (2017) explained that the lexical knowledge is the process of knowing the

word, its form, its meaning, and how to use it appropriately in a communicative

context. In line with this, Schmitt (2000, p. 55) also emphasized the importance of

lexis for communication by stating that, “lexical knowledge is central to

communicative competence and the acquisition of a second language.”

2. Types of Vocabulary/Lexis

Maskor and Baharudin (2016) stated that researchers divided vocabulary into two

types, mainly receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge. On one hand, receptive

vocabulary refers to the words that language learners know and understand while

reading or listening. This type of vocabulary is also known as “passive” vocabulary

since learners know the words and expressions, but they do not use them during their

learning process.

On the other hand, productive vocabulary refers to the words that are recognized

and understood, and used in language production and communication both in speaking
 14

and writing. This type of vocabulary is known also as “active” vocabulary since

language learners use the words they know to express themselves and communicate.

3. Similarities and Differences between the French and the English Lexis

The French language and the English language do not have the same origins. For

that reason, they have certain linguistic differences at different levels, especially at the

lexical one. This does not, however, mean that they do not share common linguistic

features. To start with, in terms of similarities, both English and French have the

same number of letters )26), and both languages have similar sentence structure

)Subject -Verb -Object(. In addition to that, both languages have similar tenses (present,

past, future simple, and so on), auxiliaries and participles, passive and active forms,

direct and indirect speech, and so forth.

However, the two languages also have certain differences at different language

levels, including the lexical one. Since it is not the main focus of the present research

to mention the language differences between French and English at all language levels,

discussion of differences is placed mainly on the lexis of both foreign languages under

discussion, French and English.

As far as lexis is concerned, it can be said that French and English share several

lexical aspects. We can have cognate, for instance. Cognates (true friends) are words

that are similar in spelling and have the same meaning. Frunza and Inkpen (2007)

defined them “pairs of words that are perceived as similar and are mutual translations.

The spelling can be identical or not, e.g. nature - nature, reconnaissance – recognition”(p.

03). Similarities between French and English, as in the case of cognates, are said to

facilitate the acquisition of the target language (English).

 15

On the other hand, French and English have serious differences as well. Partial

cognates, for instance, are those words which are similar to cognate words but their

meanings are varied according to the context. Frunza and Inkpen(2007) gave the

example of “facteur”, which means not only factor, but also mailman, and “étiquette”,

which can mean label or sticker. In terms of lexis, we can also have false friends

between French and English. False friends are words that are similar in spelling but

differ in meaning. For instance, in French, we have ‘main’, which means “hand” in

English. Actually, both partial cognates and false friends may push foreign language

learners to make/commit mistakes/errors in the learning process.

4. Types of Lexical Transfer

At the level of lexis, language transfer takes place when learners have problems

at the level of English lexis. When it comes to expressing themselves in English

and do not find appropriate vocabulary, they refer to another most mastered language,

mostly the French language, to fill a given linguistic gap.

Nation (2000) offered a framework that is concerned mainly with the lexical

knowledge. He (2000) divided it into three types. First, we have knowledge of word

form, which is based on how the word and its different parts (noun, verb, adjective)

have been written. Second, we have knowledge of word meaning, which is about

using the appropriate word in the appropriate context. Third and last, we have

knowledge of word use, which is concerned with the grammar rules that are

overlapped with the word’s use.

In the same line of thought, Meriläinen (2010) discussed the idea of lexical

knowledge and transfer by further detailing the three types of lexical transfer that were
 16

suggested in Nation’s (2000) framework. Meriläinen (2010) divided word knowledge

into three categories, whereby each category contains, in turn, subcategories. This

categorization is explained in Table 01(Meriläinen, 2010, p. 70).

Table 01: Categories and Subcategories of Lexical Transfer

Word Knowledge Transfer Categories

1. Substitutions

2. Relexifications

Word Form (transfer) 3. Orthographic transfer

4. Phonetic transfer

5. Morphological transfer

1. Loan translations
Word Meaning (semantic)
2. Semantic extensions

1. Collocations
Word Use (function)
2. Functional transfer

4.1. Word Form (Borrowing)

In the present research, focus is placed on the category of word form, and mainly

on substitution and relexification. Saurio (2014, p. 25) stated that “word form related

transfer refers for instances where a speaker will transfer word form related

conventions from his or her native language to the target language.”

It is worth noting, here, that both substitution and relexification belong also to the

category of borrowing. This point was mentioned and emphasized by (Ringbom, 1983,
 17

as quoted in Saurio,2014, p. 25), when he said that “substitutions and relexifications

each constitute a form of borrowing.”

At the lexical level, Ringbom (1986, as cited in Dewaele, 1998) extricated “false

friends” as an extra type of lexical borrowing. This was part of results in a study he

(1986, as cited in Dewaele, 1998) conducted about the cross-linguistic influence of the

Finnish language in the students’ English written productions

4.1.1. Substitution

Substitution is a type of lexical transfer. It is also known as “complete shift”.

Substitution means that the missing lexical item in the target language is replaced by

its synonym in the mastered language (Ringbom, 2007).

Haugen (1950) offered a taxonomy of several types of linguistic borrowing(Cited in

Dewaele, 1998). First, we have loanwords (without morphemic substitution). Kouega

(2005, p. 1203) illustrated it through the word concour: “some university graduates

write more than five concours in a year and of course they keep on failing.” As we

can notice, the term “concours” is equivalent to “competitive examination”. Also, King

(1954) gave another example to illustrate the point: “il est venu back” meaning “he

came back”. The second one is loan blend (partial morphemic substitution). Haugen

(1950) exemplified this type by the American’s Puerto Rican words “bordo” which

means “boarder” (Cited in Dewaele, 1998, p. 472).

4.1.2. Relexification

Relexification is similar to substitution. It happens when the language learner refers

to her/his mastered language by making some modification to the needed word in

 18

order to sound like the target language word (Ringbom, 2007). In line with this,

Meriläinen (2010, p. 72)explained learners’ use of relexification by stating that,

“… using it in unmodified form, they have tailored it to look like an English word.”

Deweale (1998) conducted a research to investigate cross-linguistic influence with

regard to lexical invention. He (1998) took 39 DutchL1 learners; the first group was

composed of 32 learners who had French as a second language and English as third

language, while the second group was composed of 7 learners who had English as

their second language and French as their third one. Through the analysis, Deweale

(1998) found that students who had French as L2 rely on their Dutch L1 language,

while the ones who had French as L3 rely on their English L2. He (1998), then,

concluded that the L1 had no influence on L3 at the level of lexical invention. In

addition to that, Deweale (1998) added that lexical invention may have resulted due

either to the incomplete mastery of the target language or due to the cross-linguistic

influence.

In the same line of thought, De Houwer (1995, as cited in Deweale, 1998) gave

an example of the word “looken” which is a composition of the Dutch morpheme “en”

and the English word “look”. And, “Elchother” which is a composition of Dutch word

“elkaar” and English word “other”. Also, Hanafi (2014) presented another example

between French and English which is “langues” which means “languages”.

 19

Conclusion

One way to develop language competence and achieve proficiency in a foreign

language is through the good mastery of its vocabulary. In the process of learning the

lexis of a foreign language (English, in this case), language students may face serious

difficulties in which they feel more inclined and/or obliged to use the words of

another foreign language (French, in this case) because of the interference between the

two languages. This may lead to the occurrence of lexical transfer of different types,

including word form lexical transfer. Word form transfer is one type of lexical transfer

that EFL students may use when learning and using the English language, especially

in writing. It can take two forms, namely substitution and relexification. The latter are

also part of or come under the heading of what is known as “lexical borrowing”.
Chapter Two : Lexis and Writing in EFL Contexts

Section One : Lexical Competence and Writing in EFL Contexts

Introduction

2.1.1. The Nature of the Skill of English Writing in EFL Contexts

2.1.2. The Importance of Lexis/Vocabulary in English Writing

2.1.3. The Influence of French Vocabulary Use on the Quality of the English

Writing of Algerian EFL Students

Conclusion

Section Two : Lexical Errors in EFL Writing Contexts

Introduction

2.2.1. Error Versus Mistake in EFL Students’ Writing

2.2.2. Definition of Lexical Errors

2.2.3. Lexical Errors’ Taxonomies

2.2.4. Sources of Lexical Errors in EFL Students’ Writing

2.2.4.1. Language Transfer/Interference at the Level of Lexis

2.2.4.1.1. Positive Language Transfer

2.2.4.1.2. Negative Language Transfer

2.2.4.2.Intralingual Errors and Developmental Errors

2.2.4.2.1. False Analogy

2.2.4.2.2. Overgeneralization

2.2.4.2.3. Hypercorrection

2.2.4.2.4. Faulty Categorization

2.2.4.3. Interlingual Errors

2.2.4.4. Proficiency Level

 2.2.4.5. Vocabulary Size

Conclusion
 20

Section One : Lexical Competence and Writing in EFL Contexts

Introduction

Language learning/acquisition is not a straightforward process. Actually, many

foreign language students face difficulties to reach an adequate proficiency level in the

different language skills (writing, in this case), especially when it comes to

lexis/vocabulary. In this section, focus is placed on the importance of developing EFL

students’ competence/proficiency in English writing through highlighting the central

importance of lexis/vocabulary in writing. Of central importance in this section is the

discussion of the influence of French vocabulary use, through the act of borrowing, on

the quality of Algerian EFL students’ English written productions.

1. The Nature of the Skill of English Writing in EFL Contexts

Writing is considered as a medium by which people express their ideas. It has been

defined by different scholars. Kellogg (2001), for instance, stated that writing is “a

cognitive process that tests memory, thinking ability and verbal command to successfully

express the ideas” (Quoted in Ramya, 2017, p. 782). Rivers (1981) explained the nature

and the complexity of the writing skill by claiming that “writing in the language

becomes a complicated activity because writing involves meaningful segments of language :

words, sentences, grammar, and how to transfer those segments in written form” (p.

294) (Quoted in Ramya, 2017, p. 782). In a similar vein, Brown (2001) stated that “

writing is a thinking process and it can be planned and revised” (Quoted in Ramya,

2017, p. 782).
 21

Nation (2001) stated that “writing skills are not skills acquired naturally, but

involves coordination of other senses to stimulate metacognitive. Therefore, to master

the writing skills vocabulary selection is one of an important skill.” (Quoted in

Maskur and Baharudin, 2016, p. 265). Vocabulary knowledge is, then, a key factor to

ensure that written production is understandable and meaningful. If there is no

appropriate vocabulary, written messages will not be understood (Maskur and

Baharudin, 2016, p. 265).

2. The Importance of Lexis/Vocabulary in English Writing

Vocabulary is one of the essential aspects in foreign language learning, especially

in writing, due to the fact that without vocabulary learners cannot express themselves

or understand each other. Viera (2016), for instance, pointed out that lexis gain more

importance than grammar does. In the same line of thought, Wilkins (1972) emphasized

this point by stating that,

There is not much value in being able to produce grammatical sentences if

one has not got the vocabulary that is needed to convey what one wishes to

say…While without grammar very little can be conveyed, without vocabulary

nothing can be conveyed (Wilkins, 1972, as quoted in Elquahtani, 2015, p.

22).

Viera (2016) explained that vocabulary does not mean knowing new words only;

rather, it also means knowing their functions and how to use them in different

contexts and situations. In language production (writing), and when it comes to

expressing a message or an idea, learners need to have a good store of words

 22

(vocabulary), from which they can select to express a given message or idea

(Elquahtani, 2015). Many researchers, such as Laufer and Nation (1999), Marion (2008)

and Nation (2011), maintained that vocabulary/lexis has an important role in forming

complete and meaningful written texts. Thus, vocabulary is considered as an essential

aspect to the successful use of the target language in written productions (Cited in

Elquahtani, 2015).

3. The Influence of French Vocabulary on the Quality of the English

Writing of Algerian EFL Students

The English language has witnessed many changes over periods of time in its

history of development. This is a natural process that any language can go through;

changes usually occur due to the influence of some languages. One of the languages

that has had a big influence on the English language is the French language. After the

Norman Conquest, a good deal of French words has been introduced into the English

language system, especially words related to administration, religion, army, art, and

government. Vocabulary has been the major influence of the French language on the

English language (Tabari, 1968).

It is worth to note, here, that nowadays, the French introduced words into the

English language have become an integral part of the English language despite the fact

that their origins are not English. They are widely accepted as belonging to the

English, but these words are already known and can be listed easily.

As it has been stated earlier in this research, there are many similarities and

differences between the French and the English language. As far as orthography is

concerned, for instance, we may notice the influence or interference of French at the

level of adding “e” like in: “groupe” (French, henceforth Fr) and “group” (English,
 23

henceforth, Eng). Also, there is the use of some suffixes (ique, eur, & oire ) like in

“electrique” as an alternative to “electric” (Hanafi, 2014). Hanafi (2014) pointed out that

it is usually English students with French background who have a great tendency to

use French lexis whenever they face vocabulary problems or whenever they do not

find words in a given context, such as the use of “langues” in the place of

“languages”.

As far as lexical borrowing is concerned, borrowing refers to “a word adopted from

a source language and incorporated into a recipient language without translation” (Li-na,

2016, p. 209). Likewise, Ariyati (2014) claimed that borrowing refers to the linguistic

items that are transferred from one language to another and found naturally in the

monolingual discourse. In the same line of thought, Armistrong (2005) explained

borrowing by stating that it is “one of the ways in which a language renew its

lexicon” (p. 143). Besides that, Russel and Beaudet (1999) stated that “lexical borrowing

can be perceived and described as both parts of the language code shared by a

community and as component of individual discourse in language use” (p.21). They

(1999) also added that borrowing, in general, reflects the lack of competence and the

existence of a linguistic gaps in the target language.

According to Sadotnon (2014, as cited in Ariyati, 2014), there are different types of

lexical borrowing. They are explained in Table 02 below.

Table 02: Types of Lexical Borrowing

Type of Borrowing Explanation

Total Borrowing Taking the word as it is without changing its form, but in

some case the meaning may change.

 24

Partial Borrowing There is a change i.e. the word’s spelling was modified, for

instance, “modulation”, “modulasi”

Total Modification The word changed definitely such as, “case”, “kasus”

Newly Created Words Like in the following example “university”, “universitas”

In order to understand the nature of lexical borrowing from French lexis to English

lexis, we need to mention some studies which have focused on that. Many English

words have been taken from the French language, and here are some studies which

have emphasized this point of lexical borrowing. To begin with, Li-na (2016) gave a

list of French lexical items that are used/shared with the English language as a result

of language influence.

 Fromage-blanc, extraordinary, chef d’équipe, dossier, déjà vu, vis à vis, collage,

répertoire, entrée, entourage, elite, tranche, ambiance.

In addition to that, Tarev (2012) also conducted a research and found the use of the

following French words:

 Arbitrage, deport, borderaw, bonification, allonge.

He (2012) also found some words that have been modified as it is shown in Table 03

below:

Table 03: Examples of Partial Lexical Borrowing

French English

Assortiment Assortment
 25

Compagnon Companion

Portfeuille Portfolio

Besides that, Hoffer (2005) argued that most of the English government and social

status words are related to French. These words are claimed now to be a part of both

the French language and the English language. They have been introduced to English

and have become a part of its language system. The following words are concrete

examples of this:

 Govern, reign, country, state, duke, marquise, baron, countess, court, noble.

In the Algerian context, Keffous (2011) made a research by analysing 20

compositions which were written by third year Algerian learners at a secondary school

to see the influence of the French language on the Algerian learners’ written

productions in English. She (2011) found about approximately 480 lexical errors in

Algerian learners’ compositions; 275 were formal errors, and 205 were semantic ones.

In light of this, Keffous (2011) claimed that Algerian learners committed all types of

formal errors.

Keffous (2011) also found that, in formal errors, misformation occupied 41%

(“exemple” instead of “example”), formal misselection 33% (the use of the word

“importance” instead of “important”) and distortion 25% (“tilivision” instead of

“television”). Misformation errors are words which are borrowed from French, for

instance “théorie, petit, and météo”. These words are generated from French but

sometimes in different spelling due to the similar way of spelling between both
 26

languages, such as “cominic” from “communiquer” instead of the English word

“communicate”. After this analysis, Keffous (2011) concluded that these lexical errors

in Algerian learners’ English language production are due to the influence (interference)

of the French language.

Conclusion

The focus of the present section is on explaining the nature and the complexity of

the writing skill. Focus is also placed on discussing the necessity for EFL students to

master the vocabulary aspect of the foreign language, English, to be able to express

themselves in writing and to achieve successful communication. Discussion of the

importance of lexis in language learning and the problems that language learners face,

especially in writing, is made in light of certain research studies that focused on the

influence (interference) and the presence of the French vocabulary in the English texts

of students.
 27

Section Two : Lexical Errors in EFL Writing Contexts

Introduction

In the process of writing, a good deal of Algerian EFL students may encounter a

variety of writing difficulties. These difficulties may lead them to (make mistakes)

commit errors at different levels of language. One such language level where EFL

students might face problems in is that of lexis. Lack of vocabulary mastery or

knowledge is said to push the EFL learner to seek help in another, intermediary,

language that is, in one way or another, similar in its language system to English.

In this section, focus is placed on discussing the concept of error with focus on

lexical errors, in particular. To begin with, the difference between error and mistake is

highlighted. Focus is, then, placed on lexis and the sources of lexical errors in light

of discussing the phenomenon of interference of one language in another one (French

and English). Language interference is believed to be one of the main sources of

lexical problems (errors), where both positive and negative transfer can take place.

1. Error Versus Mistake in EFL Students’ Writing

Differentiating between mistake and error is of great importance in the field of

language teaching/learning. As far as mistakes are concerned, it can be said that they

reflect the arbitrary deviation from a particular language system. They can be made

with or without awareness, where the learner may sense that there is something wrong

but, s/he fails to detect the problem until s/he gets feedback to be able to do ‘self-

correction’. According to Corder (1967, p. 197), “mistakes are of no significance to

the process of language learning since they do not reflect a defect in our knowledge
 28

but are traceable to performance failure.” In addition to that, both native and non-

native speakers may make mistakes due to the misuse of the right system because of

the state of the learner such as: fatigue, anxiety, lack of concentration and attention

and so on. In this case, the mistake is associated more with language performance

rather than with language competence.

As far as error is concerned, Corder (1967) explained the concept of error by

stating that “a noticeable deviation from the adult grammar of a native speaker reflects

the competence of the learner.” The foreign language learner normally commits errors

unconsciously, and it is impossible that s/he correct herself/himself because of faulty

or incomplete learning. Norrish (1983, as quoted in Khansir, 2012, p. 1027) defined

error as “a systematic deviation, when learner has not learnt something and

consistently gets it wrong.” Also, Richard and Schmitt (2010, p. 184) explained the

concept of error by saying that “an error is the use of a word, speech act or grammatical

items in such a way it seems imperfect and significant of an incomplete learning.”

Corder (1986, as quoted in Wood, 2017) identified three categories of errors:

 Pre-systematic error, in which the learner has no idea about the language

rules of the target language.

 Systematic error, in which the learner has an idea about the rules but s/he

fails to use them correctly.

 Post-systematic error, in which the learner recognizes the rules but is still

unable to apply them.

In a similar vein, Keshavarz (2011, p. 60) stated that “Errors are regarded as rule-

governed since they follow the rules of the learner's interlanguage.” In other words,
 29

the learner’s previous knowledge of language rule’s is said to influence the

application/use of the new rules. Also, Keshavarz (2011) identified five categories of

error, which are orthographic, phonological, morphological, syntactic and lexical errors.

Krashen (1982, as cited in James, 1998, p. 85), differentiated between mistakes and

errors by providing an explanation of both concepts. This is clearly shown in Table

04 below.

Table 04: The Differences between Error and Mistake

Language Learning Mistake/Error Explanation

(-) acquired (-) The learner commits an error because s/he has neither acquired

learnt nor learnt the target language.

(+) acquired (-) The learner produces/makes a mistake because s/he acquired the

learnt rules but for some reasons still faces difficulties.

(-) acquired (+) The learner makes an error, but with the explicit

learnt teaching/correction, s/he may avoid it.

(+) acquired (+) The learner masters the language but for some reasons s/he may

learnt make some mistakes.

2. Definition of Lexical Errors

Generally, language errors can be studied according to their linguistic levels

(pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and so on). Specifically, lexical errors can be

studied in terms of their form (omission, insertion, and substitution), and their cause

(interference, inter-language) (Hanafi, 2014).

 30

According to Shalaby et al. (2009), the building block of any language is constituted

by words because their appropriate application ensures the effectiveness of the

communicative process. If there is any lexical problem, this may affect the quality of

the message, and thus, may create a sort of confusion in understanding and distortion

in the meaning. In a review of some studies, Hemchua and Schmitt (2006) emphasized

the same claim. In fact, the occurrence of a lexical error reflects a problem in the

learning process. In addition to that, Zughoul (1991)also supported this claim by stating

that “the wrong lexical choice after leads to the production of funny utterances, they

are not easily comprehensible” (Quoted in Shalaby et al., 2009, p. 66).

In the same line of thought, Grauberg (1971) claimed that the most frequent type of

errors committed by learners is the lexical one. In a study, he (1971) found that 102

out of 193 of the German students committed lexical errors in their English written

production. This latter is claimed to have minimized the quality of the academic

writing (Cited in James, 1988).

3. Lexical Errors’ Taxonomies

In order to study or investigate lexical errors in language production (writing, in this

case), a set of taxonomies were advanced by several scholars. To begin with, Sheshsha

(1993), introduced five categories of lexical errors, namely, confusion of words with

formal similarities, confusion of words with similarity in meaning, inappropriate

collocation, literal translation, and divergence. Later on, Sheshsha (1993) combined the

five categories in two types: inter-lingual and intra-lingual (Cited in Shalaby et al.,

2009).
 31

On the other hand, Hemshua & Schmidt(2006) provided a taxonomy which has

twenty four (24) types of lexical errors (Cited in Shalaby et al., 2009). Hemshua &

Schmidt (2006, as cited in Shalaby et al., 2009) grouped lexical errors under “formal

errors” and “semantic errors” based on James’ (1998, as cited in Llach, 2012)

taxonomy. In the same line of thought, James (1998, as cited in Llach, 2012)

introduced a taxonomy in which he (1998, as cited in Llach, 2012) divided lexical

errors into two types: “formal” and “semantic”, each of which has subcategories.

It is worth to mention, here, that in the present research, we are concerned only

with the “formal” type of lexical category of errors. More specifically, the focus of

present research is on the formal lexical type referred to as “misformation”. In the

formal category, we find formal misselection, which means the type of errors that are

similar in spelling but different in meaning. The second type of formal lexical errors

is referred to as misformation, also known as inter-lingual errors. In misformation,

there are three subcategories, namely, borrowing, claque, and coinage. The third type

is distortion, also known as intra-lingual errors. There are five subcategories of

distortion and they involve: overinclusion, omission, misordering, miselection, and

blendig (James, 1998, as cited in Llach, 2012).

4. Sources of Lexical Errors in EFL Students’ Writing

Research has been conducted in different languages in order to investigate and

discover the sources of lexical errors, especially in the English writing of learners. In

a study conducted by Andre & Jurianto(2015), thirty nine (39) essays of senior high

school students were analyzed. Students’ writings have been analyzed using

James’(1998) classification of lexical errors. Andre & Jurinato(2015) found that the most
 32

frequent errors committed by those senior high school students were formal errors

with a total of 295 errors. Andre & Jurinato (2015) found 36 formal misselection

errors (Malin became a “succed man” instead of a “successful man”), 111 formal

misformation errors (“capten” instead of “captain”), and 148 distortion errors

(“beautifull” instead of “beautiful”). In light of this, Andre & Jurinato(2015) concluded

that the lexical errors in senior high school students’ writing were intralingual errors.

In another study conducted by Li (2015), sixty two (62) second term exam papers

of second year Mangolian English majors have been analyzed. The analysis was based

on James’ (1998) taxonomy of lexical errors, which involves formal errors and

semantic errors. Li (2015) found that formal errors are the type of lexical errors that

were mostly committed, with a total number of 268 errors. The number of formal

misselection errors is 140 (“in spide of” instead of “in spite of”), the number of

formal misformation errors is 56 (“unconvenient” instead of “inconvenient”), and the

number of distortion errors is 72 (“restrant” instead of “restaurant”). In light of this,

Li (2015) concluded that the formal lexical errors are due to the influence (interference)

of mother tongue.

4.1.Language Transfer/Interference

Cross linguistic influence, or what is also known as ‘language transfer’, is

considered as an important factor in foreign language learning problems (Mazur, 2014).

According to Odlin (1989), transfer refers to “the influence resulting from the

similarities and the differences between the target language and any other languages

that have been previously (and perhaps imperfectly) acquired” (Quoted in Wang &

Xiang, 2016, p. 2209). Arabski (2006) stated that “Language transfer appears with
 33

greater intensity when the two systems are genetically closer and thus when there are

more points of reference for the transfer to occur” (p. 13).

Transfer is not always due to the first language. Actually, it may also be due to

other learned languages, especially if the learner knows two, three, or even more

languages (Mazur, 2014). In certain studies conducted in the Asian context, it was

found that learners relied more on other foreign languages rather than on their first

language or L1 (Ringbom, 2001). Ringbom (2001)claimed that L2 transfer in L3 written

productions occurred much more at the level of lexis. In the written productions of L3

learners, it was found that learners use words from L2, especially if the L2 and the

L3 share some lexical similarities (Ringbom, 2001).

Language transfer is classified into two sorts, positive language transfer and

negative language transfer. Positive transfer (similarities between the two languages) is

claimed to facilitate the learning process. Negative transfer (differences between the two

languages) is, on the other hand, claimed to make it difficult.

4.1.1. Positive Transfer

Positive transfer occurs when the first language and the target language, for

instance, share many language similarities. This means that the use of previously

acquired aspects of the first language helps in the comprehension and the

acquisition/learning of the target language. In other words, positive transfer refers to

any facilitative process of acquiring/learning the L2/L3. In other words, when the L1

and L2 have a good deal of similarities, the process of learning the L2 will be easy

(Wang & Xiang, 2016). Targonska (2004) claimed, for instance, that L2 English can
 34

facilitate the learning of L3 German; this is mainly due to the fact that English and

German share some similarities (Cited in Grymska, n. d., para. 13).

4.1.2. Negative Transfer

Negative transfer, also known also as the interference of the mother tongue (MT)or

simply language interference, refers to the errors that are found in the target language

(TL). These errors are claimed to be the result of L1 rules’ use in the target

language (Wang & Xiang, 2016). Yang (2013) argued that different patterns lead to

errors and make the learning process a difficult one, and one of these patterns is

language interference. Al-Khresheh (2006) also claimed that the errors revealed from

the influence of the MT in the second/foreign language are called ‘interlingual errors’.

For instance, in the case of French speakers who learn the English language as a new

language, they often face many difficulties in acquiring the language in a correct

manner (Bardovi-harlig & Sprouse, 2018). Hence, if these learners commit errors in

English due to French, the errors are referred to as inter-lingual errors.

4.2.Intralingual and Developmental Errors

Ngonkum (2016) stated that

Intralingual errors refer to the difficulty of the target language learning. It usually

occurs when L2 learners have difficulties in using the target language. Such

difficulties result from faulty or partial knowledge of the target language or

because learners do not know the target language very well (p. 40).
 35

According to Keshavarz (2011), intralingual and developmental errors are divided

into six subcategories. They include: Overgeneralization, False Analogy,

Hypercorrection, and Faulty Categorization.

2.2.1.5.1. False Analogy

Keshavarz (2011) explained that it is similar to overgeneralization, and it can be

considered as its sub category. False analogy refers to the use of a specific element in

an inappropriate contexts. For instance, we have the example: “I think that women

should stay home and grow up children”. In this example, the learner thought that the

meaning of “grow up children” is the same when saying “children grow up quickly”.

2.2.1.5.2. Overgeneralization

It refers to the application of specific rules in situations which need different rules.

For example, we have instances like “boy boys”, “child childs” instead of “children”.

Overgeneralization was defined by Jakobovits (1967, as quoted in Richards, 1974, p. 174)

as “the use of previously available strategies in a new situation.”

2.2.1.5.3. Hypercorrection

Keshavarz (2011, p. 127) stated that “Hypercorrection is a phenomenon that normally

takes place when the speaker of a non-standard variety attempts to use the standard

variety.” For instance, we have the example “he is not afraid of anything’ instead of

‘he is not afraid from anything.”

 36

2.2.1.5.4. Faulty Categorization

It refers to the incorrect classification of items in the target language. For instance,

when it comes to verbs in English, there are verbs that are followed by infinitives and

others by gerunds and so on. Learners may use this classification in a wrong way

(Keshavarz, 2011). As an example, we have “I hate to study” instead of “I hate

studying”, “I want learn Turkish” instead of “I want to learn Turkish”.

4.3.Interlingual Errors

According to Schachter & Celce-Murcia (1977), interlingual errors refer to “those

caused by the influence of the learner’s MT on production of the TL in presumably

those areas where languages clearly differ” (Quoted in Al-Khresheh, 2006, p. 53).

Keshavarz (1993) argued that interlingual errors result from the transfer of phonology,

morphology, grammar, and lexico-semantic aspects. In the lexico-semantic transfer, for

instance, it was found that there are two subcategories: cross association and false

cognates. Cross association refers to the existence of two words in the target language

and only one word in the mother tongue which leads the leaner to make use of that

word in the target language in two senses (for example in English language they say

turn on the radio and open the door, while in Persian language the word ‘open’ is

used in both situations ‘opening the door’ and ‘opening the radio’. False cognates are

words that have the same form in two languages, but they differ in terms of meaning.

4.4.Proficiency Level

Navas et al. (2005) claimed that whenever EFL learners get older, they will develop

their language and become more proficient. Llach (2009) pointed out, for instance, that
 37

when learners get more experienced in the target language, their use of the mother

tongue will be decreased (Cited in Llach, 2012), because “the greater the linguistic

competence of the learners, the better the quality of their L2 written production will

be’’ (Wang, 2003 as quoted in Llach, 2012).

It was claimed that lexical problems in L2 or L3 are the most frequent ones, and

as a solution learners can refer back to their mother tongue knowledge. In other

words, learners with less proficient level in the foreign language refer to their native

language in order to fill their lexical gaps (Berg, 1999, as cited in Llach, 2012).

Llach (2012, p. 25) stated that “two main claims can be made regarding the

relationship between error production and proficiency level : (1) as proficiency

increases, error production decreases and (2) as proficiency increases, the type of

errors produced changes.” To begin with the first claim, it is claimed that even

advanced learners continue to commit errors during the use of L2. As for the second

claim, Lasagabaster & Doiz (2003) focused on the point that errors’ types and frequency

are more noticed in learners’ written productions, and the occurrence of these errors

depends on students’ competence level. In a similar vein, Alvarez (2004) pointed out

to the fact that low proficient learners make use of their L1 words in their L2

productions as they are without any change (Cited in Llach, 2012).

4.5. Vocabulary Size

A difference was also made between the depth and the breadth of vocabulary

knowledge in the field of lexical errors’ studies. On one hand, depth vocabulary refers

to “the quality of the lexical knowledge; in other words, how well learners know the

words they know” (Llach, 2012, p. 36). On the other hand, breadth vocabulary
 38

knowledge refers to “the size of the lexical store of learners, that is how many words

learners know” (Llach, 2012, p. 36).

Vocabulary size differs each time the experience with language increases.

“Vocabulary size deals with the number of words that a native speaker knows” (Llach,

2012, p. 36). Llach (2012) also argued that the number of the needed words differ

from one task to another. Laufer (1992, 1997), for instance, conducted a study to

investigate the vocabulary size needed to read a general texts. He (1992, 1997) argued

that “in order to be able to understand 95% of a text in English, the learner should

know around 5000 words, which make up 3000 word families. In short, for every 20

words in a text, just one could be unknown” (Quoted in Llach, 2012, p. 36).

Conclusion

This section is mainly concerned with the discussion of lexical errors and the main

sources behind their presence in EFL students’ writing. Focus is placed on the

concept of interference, especially the interference of L2 (French) language on L3

(English), in light of some studies conducted in different language contexts. Discussion

is directed to the concept of negative transfer or language interference, which is

considered as one of the main sources of lexical errors. Both types of intra-lingual

and inter-lingual lexical errors are also highlighted, in addition to the factors of

proficiency level and vocabulary size since they are all claimed to be major sources of

lexical errors in learning the foreign language, English.

Chapter Three: Date Collection, Data Analysis and Discussion of the Results

Introduction

3.1. Research Questions

3.2. Research Hypotheses

3.3. Research Tools

3.3.1. Questionnaire

3.3.1.1. Description of the Teachers’ Questionnaire

3.3.1.2. Aims of the Teachers’ Questionnaire

3.3.1.3. Administration of the Teachers’ Questionnaire

3.4. Teachers’ Questionnaire Analysis and Discussion of the Results

General Conclusion

Recommendations

Research Limitations
 39

Chapter Three: Data Collection, Data Analysis and Discussion of the Results

Introduction

Learning a new language is not an easy or straightforward process. EFL learners

face many problems in their learning process, especially when it comes to productive

language skills like that of writing. In the Algerian context, Algerian EFL students

commit different language errors in their English writing. Lexical errors are the major

type of errors in writing, and they can take the form of lexical borrowing from

French. Some EFL students borrow words from French and use them in their English

texts.

The present practical chapter focuses on providing details related to data collection,

sampling, administration of the questionnaire, analysis and discussion of data. The

research questions are answered and the research hypotheses are confirmed/rejected in

light of data analysis and discussion of the results. The chapter concludes with the

certain recommendations.

1. Research Questions

This research investigation seeks to explore the influence of French lexical

borrowing in Algerian EFL students’ written productions. The present research seeks to

answer the following questions:

 Do Algerian EFL students have lexical problems in their English writing?

 What are the major types of lexical problems (mistakes/errors) faced by

Algerian EFL students’ in their English writing?

 40

 What are the sources of lexical problems in Algerian EFL students’ written

productions?

 Do Algerian EFL students use lexical borrowings from French in their

English writing?

 Does the use of lexical borrowing from French affect, negatively, the quality

of the English texts of Algerian EFL students?

2. Research Hypotheses

The hypotheses that have been raised in this study are the following :

 Algerian EFL students’ lexical errors in English writing are mainly due to the

interference of the French language in EFL students’ English writing.

 If Algerian EFL students use lexical borrowing from French, this will

negatively influence the quality of their English written productions.

3. Research Tools

The research tool that is used in this research is a questionnaire. It is administered

to ten teachers of written expression Larbi Ben M’hidi University in the academic year

2018-2019. Its main aim is to investigate Algerian EFL students’ borrowing of French

words in their English writing and whether doing that has a negative effect on the

quality of the English text or not.

3.1.Questionnaire

3.1.1. Description of the Teachers’ Questionnaire

The research tool that is used in the present research is a questionnaire

administered to ten written expression teachers. The teachers’ questionnaire includes

twenty nine questions. The type of questions ranged between open-ended, multiple-
 41

choice- questions, and rating-scale questions. The questionnaire was divided into four

sections. The first section focuses on getting the teachers’ background information. The

second sections focuses on Algerian teachers’ point of view vis-à-vis Algerian EFL

students’ difficulties in writing. The third section of the questionnaire centers around

getting information about the use of the French language (Lexis) in English writing.

The fourth section places focus on the influence of the use of French lexis (borrowing)

on the quality of Algerian EFL students’ writing.

3.1.1.1.Section One: Background Information (Q1-Q3)

The first section of the teachers’ questionnaire consists of three questions. The

questions center around getting more informed about teachers’ information. The

information is mainly related to their gender, their experience in teaching at the level

of university, and their experience in teaching the subject of written expression.

3.1.1.2.Section Two: Teachers’ Opinion with regard to Algerian EFL Students’

Difficulties in Writing (Q4-Q9)

This second section of the teachers’ questionnaire consists of six questions. The

reason behind asking teachers these questions is to get more informed about Algerian

EFL students’ level and difficulties in EFL writing. Focus is placed on whether, or

not, students face difficulties in English writing and at what level of language

(grammar, lexis, and so on). Teachers are also asked questions related to EFL

students’ tendency to make mistakes or commit errors in writing. The questions focus

more precisely on whether, or not, Algerian EFL students face difficulties at the level

of lexis.
 42

3.1.1.3.Section Three: The Use of the French Language (Lexis) in English

Writing (Q10- Q22)

The third section consists of thirteen questions. This section is a central part of the

teachers’ questionnaire since it focuses on central aspects of the present research

investigation. The questions focus mainly on getting informed about whether, or not,

Algerian EFL students use the French language in the learning process of another

foreign language, namely, the English language, especially in writing. In addition to

that, the questions center around the errors committed at the level of lexis in English

writing. Focus is also placed on the reasons that push students to resort to the French

lexis, through lexical borrowings, in their English writing.

It is also important in this section to explore if EFL students’ borrow words from

French and whether the borrowing of French lexis and using it in English writing is

considered a mistake or a problem in EFL writing. In other words, it is of central

importance to the present research to investigate the nature of the borrowing and

whether it is of an intra-lingual (lack of English language competence) or an inter-

lingual (negative interference from French) nature.

3.1.1.4.Section Four: The Influence of French Lexis (borrowing) Use on the

Quality of Algerian EFL Students’ Writing (Q23-Q29)

The last section of the teachers’ questionnaire consists of seven questions. They are

asked in order to investigate Algerian EFL teachers’ attitudes towards Algerian EFL

students’ use of French lexis in English writing. The teachers are also asked to say

and explain how they deal with their students’ use of French lexis in writing. In

addition to this, it is worth to mention that the questions that are asked in this section

are of central importance to the research, especially the research hypotheses, because
 43

they aim at investigating the negative influence of French lexis’ use on Algerian EFL

students’ English writing quality. The last questions in the fourth section requires

Algerian EFL teachers of writing at Larbi Ben M’Hidi University to provide insightful

suggestions to help Algerian EFL students to avoid the use of French lexis in their

English writing.

3.1.2. Aims of the Teachers’ Questionnaire

The teachers’ questionnaire is designed in order to investigate a number research

questions that reflect various related aims that are important in the present research.

They are important because they help the researchers to answer the stated research

questions and to confirm or reject the research hypotheses stated at the beginning of

this research paper. There are many aims behind asking any individual question in the

questionnaire, especially in the teachers’ questionnaire, but, here, it is also worth to

mention just two of the most important research aims since they are deeply rooted in

the research questions and the research hypotheses of the present study.

One of the main aims of the teachers’ questionnaire is to investigate if Algerian

EFL students at the university of Larbi Ben M’Hidi use lexical borrowings from

French. The second most important aim of this questionnaire is to investigate if the

use of French lexis, namely borrowing, in the English writing of Algerian students

influences negatively the overall quality of the English text. All in all, we can say

that the teachers’ questionnaire is of central importance as a research instrument since,

through it, we can answer the stated research questions and confirm/reject the research

hypotheses.
 44

3.1.3. Administration of the Teachers’ Questionnaire

The teachers’ questionnaire is administered to ten teachers of written expression

from the English Department at Larbi Ben M’hidi University in Oum El Bouaghi. The

questionnaire is administered in the second semester (May) of the academic year 2018-

2019. The teachers’ questionnaire is given hand by hand, and it was returned to the

researchers after filling it, mostly, in one hour and a half.

It is worth to note here that when administering the questionnaire to the ten

teachers involved in the present research, they are not required to fill in the

questionnaire in a short period. Teachers have the complete freedom to fill in the

questionnaire in 45 minutes or more. In fact, this is a positive point since reading the

questionnaire and providing important and reliable information is a valued matter in

research.

4. Questionnaire Analysis and Discussion of the Results

4.1.Section 01: Background Information

Question Item Number 01: Algerian EFL Teachers’ Gender

The first question item in the teachers’ research focuses on teachers’ gender.

Despite the fact that this information is not of central significance to the aims,

questions and hypothesis of the present research, but we believe that including the

gender aspect can provide insightful information for the current research or for further

future research by the researchers themselves or by other researchers in the area of

English writing research.

 45

Table 05: Algerian EFL Teachers’ Gender

Gender Frequency Percentage %

Male 2 20 %

Female 8 80 %

Total 10 100 %

When we asked teachers about their gender, we found that the majority of written

expression teachers were females, and the minority were males. In terms of

percentages, Table 05 above shows that 80% of participants were females, while the

remaining 20% were males. It is quite clear from the data to notice the women’s

dominance in teaching the subject of writing compared to that of men.

As it was claimed earlier, teachers’ gender information is not of major significance

to the present research, but the information can have implications for future research

in discourse analysis and composition teaching in the EFL context. As far as this

research is concerned, we can say that teachers’ gender information can be a first

necessary step to know better the informants involved in the present research.

Question Item Number 02: Teachers’ Years of Experience in Teaching at the

Level of University

Algerian EFL teachers of writing from the English department at Larbi Ben M’Hidi

University were asked a question related to their experience in teaching at the level of

university in order to come to a better understanding to the fact of whether, or not,

they were already accustomed to teaching in the context of university. This

information is of central importance since it helps us in grouping teachers according to

 46

their university teaching experience. In other words, it is important to know the

percentage of teachers who were novice and those who were experienced.

Table 06: Teachers’ Years of Experience in Teaching at the Level of University

Teacher Number

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

Years of 8 1 8 5 11 9 10 14 30 8

Teaching Semester Months

When we asked written expression teachers about their experience in teaching at

university, we found that their experience varied from one teacher to another. In terms

of percentage, we observed that 40% of teachers’ teaching experience at the level of

university ranged between 5 to 9 years, 30 % ranged between 10 and 14 years, 10%

had 30 years of teaching experience, and the remaining 20% were novice teachers.

The last category mentioned that is was their first year experience of teaching at

university. As Table 06 shows, out of 10 teachers, 8 were experienced teachers but

with noticeable varying degrees of experience, and only 2 were novice teachers.

The results, here, reveal an important information, which is that most of the

English teachers involved in the present research were experienced enough. They were

in contact with university students for several years.

Question Item Number 03: Algerian EFL Teachers’ Experience in Teaching the

Subject of Writing at University

The focus of this question item is of major significance to the research. The

purpose behind asking about teachers’ experience in teaching the subject of writing is
 47

to know whether, or not, they have enough experience in teaching the subject of

writing to undergraduate students. The importance of the questions is reflected by the

fact that when gaining enough teaching experience, teachers can be claimed to have

gained more knowledge vis-à-vis undergraduate students’ level in writing, their writing

abilities, the problems they constantly face, their weaknesses and so on. Knowing that

teachers have the required experience in teaching writing can also be central to the

research since teachers’ replies to the questions are believed to be based, not only on

theoretical knowledge and assumptions, but they are also based on practical

experiences with writing.

Table 07: Algerian EFL Teachers’ Experience in Teaching the Subject of Writing
at University
Teacher Number

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

Years of 4 1 8 5 8 5 9 7 30 First

Teaching Semester Months time

Written

Expression

When we asked the respondents about their years of experience in teaching the

subject of writing at the level of university, and in light of their replies, we noticed

that the informants’ years of experience varied. A good deal of them, 60 %, taught

the subject for a quite average period (4-9 years), while only one teacher taught writing

for about 30 years (10 %). The remaining 30 % of teachers taught the subject for the
 48

first time and their period of experience ranged between one to two academic

semesters (4-8 months).

The results communicate a very important message, which is the fact that most of

the teachers were experienced enough to teach the subject of writing. This was mainly

due to spending many years in teaching the subject. On the other hand, novice

teachers, those who had only one year, or less, of teaching experience, had not yet

developed the required teaching skills and gained sufficient experience to fully master

teaching this central language skill. In light of this, we can say that teachers who had

little experience in teaching the subject of writing might not have enough information

vis-à-vis every single aspect of EFL students’ writings and EFL writing classes.

4.2.Section 02: Teachers’ Point of View with regard to Algerian EFL

Students’ Difficulties in Writing

Question Item Number 04: Teachers’ Opinion about Algerian EFL Students’ Level

in Writing

This question is important to the present research. The aim behind asking this

question is to get informed about the level of Algerian EFL students in writing. The

teachers’ replies are informative and insightful since they uncover realities related to

students’ strengths or weaknesses in writing, and they can also provide explanatory

reasons behind students’ weaknesses.

 49

Table 08: Teachers’ Opinion about Algerian EFL Students’ Level in Writing

Level Frequency Percentage %

Weak 2 20 %

Average 8 80 %

Total 10 100 %

When we asked the teachers of writing about their opinion with regard to their

EFL students’ level in writing, and in light of their replies, we noticed that all

teachers reflected a kind of dissatisfaction to their students’ writing level. In terms of

percentage, the analysis of the results revealed that 80% of teachers claimed that their

students’ level was average, while 20% said that students’ writing level was weak.

The option “average”, that most teachers chose, means that they are not yet

satisfied with their EFL students’ written productions and their writing skills. In

addition to this, the reply of the two other teachers with regard to their students’ level

in writing by judging it as “weak” reflects again that the situation is very serious

since this means that EFL students have serious writing problems that hinder them

from being good writers. All in all, all teachers of writing who are involved in the

present research seem to have a general agreement about EFL students’ writing

weaknesses and lack of language skill mastery.

Question Item Number 05: Algerian EFL Students’ Difficulties in Writing

The purpose behind asking this question is to know whether, or not, Algerian EFL

students have problems and face difficulties in English writing. This is of central
 50

importance because knowing that students have problems in writing means that

teachers’ teach

ing intervention should always take place. This also means that EFL students should

make great efforts to develop their writing skills and competence since the skill of

writing is claimed to be a central means of communication and a central skill for

university success.

Table 09: Algerian EFL Students’ Difficulties in Writing

Option Frequency Percentage %

No 1 10%

Yes 9 90%

Total 10 100%

When we asked the respondents about whether EFL students face serious difficulties

in writing or not, we noticed that 9 out of 10 teachers confirmed that their students

have serious problems and difficulties in writing. Only one teacher said that students

do not face difficulties in writing. The latter is a novice teacher, and it is the first

time that she teaches the written expression subject. This teacher is in her first year

of experience, which means that she is not yet well-acquainted with the problems that

students actually face in the learning process.

 51

Question Item Number 06: Levels/Aspects of Language Difficulty in English

Writing

This question item is of central importance to the present research. The aim behind

focusing on it is to investigate which aspects of writing is the most problematic one

where EFL students face serious difficulties and commit errors in.

Table 10: Levels/Aspects of Language Difficulty in English Writing

Lexis Semantic Syntax Grammar

Percentage

Percentage

Percentage

Percentage
Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency
Difficult

1 1 10 % 2 20 % 7 70 %

2 7 70 % 2 20 % 2 20 %

3 8 80 % 1 10 %

4 2 20 % 2 20 % 30 % 1 10 %

When we asked the informants to order the aspects of writing that EFL students

face more difficulties in (1 most difficult, 2 difficult, 3 less difficult, 4 not difficult),

70% of respondents ranked grammar as the most difficult area where students face

difficulties in; 20% ranked it as difficult, and 10% ranked it as less difficult. When

it comes to syntax, 20% ranked it as the most difficult area, 20 % ranked it as

difficult, 10 % ranked it as less difficult, and the remaining 30 % ranked as not

difficult. As far as the aspect of semantics is concerned, 80% of teachers agreed that
 52

semantic is a less difficult aspect when it comes to students’ writing, while 20% said

that semantic is not a difficult aspect that causes difficulties for students in writing. At

the level of lexis, 10% of teachers said that it is the most difficult aspect where

students can face problems in. 70% of teacher said, however, that lexis is a difficult

aspect that causes EFL students’ difficulties in writing. The remaining 20% ranked it

as not difficult.

From the results in Table 10, we notice that written expression teachers ranked the

two areas as the difficult ones for students in writing: the area of grammar and the

area of lexis. This result displays a very important information; it is the fact that

students’ weak performance in English writing might be due to grammatical and

lexical problems. This is a reasonable fact since the aspects of grammar and

vocabulary are central aspects in the skill of writing. EFL learners communicate their

messages through language, mainly through vocabulary. Lack of vocabulary mastery

can mean that students will have serious problems in communication.

Question Item Number 07: Mistakes/Errors in Algerian EFL Students’ Writing

The purpose behind asking this question is to see if EFL students make mistakes,

or mainly commit errors, in their English writing. Since mistakes and errors mean

different things and can have different influences on EFL students’ learning, it is

important to know the type of problems that EFL students face in writing.

Table 11: Mistakes/Errors in EFL Students’ Writing

Option Frequency Percentage %

Both 10 100 %
 53

When we take a look at written expression teachers’ replies in Table 11, we notice

that 100 % agreed about the fact that students make/commit both mistakes/errors in

their writing. This result demonstrates the fact that EFL students have problems in

English writing. The result also discusses the fact that students’ output is weak

because the input is not enough. This highlights a very important point which is

related to the teachers’ teaching focus and constant intervention.

Question Item Number 08: The Frequency of Mistakes/Errors in Algerian EFL

Students’ Writing

The aim behind asking this question is to see the frequency of committing

errors/mistakes in students’ writing. Since they face several difficulties while writing.

Table 12: The Frequency of Errors/Mistakes in Algerian EFL Students’ Writing

Options Frequency Percentage %

Always 3 30%

Often 7 70%

Total 10 100%

In terms of frequency of making/committing mistakes/errors in writing, and when

we asked the teachers about this point, the majority said that students make/commit

mistakes/errors often, while the minority said that they do that always. The results in

Table 12 show that 70% of teachers said that students often make/commit

mistakes/errors, and the remaining 30% said that they always do both of them. If this

is to communicate something, it is the fact that EFL students usually have problems
 54

in their writing and their weaknesses can be reflected either by making mistakes or by

committing errors.

Question Item Number 09: Teachers’ Opinion about Whether or not Algerian

EFL Students Have Lexical Difficulties in English Writing

This focus of the question item is very important since it helps us in answering the

research questions asked at the beginning of this research paper, namely question (Do

Algerian EFL students have lexical problems in their English writing?). The reason

behind focusing on the point of whether, or not, EFL students have writing problems

at the level of lexis is to confirm, first, that EFL students have problems in lexis. It

is also of central importance to know the factors behind these difficulties. Since it is

acknowledged that lexical errors are the most committed ones by learners.

Table 13: Teachers’ Opinion about Whether or not Algerian EFL Students Have

Lexical Difficulties in English Writing

Option Frequency Percentage %

Yes 10 100 %

When we asked the informants about the fact of whether, or not, EFL students

have lexical problems in writing, all teachers confirmed that students do face

difficulties at the level of lexis in the process of writing. In terms of percentage, the

results of the analysis in Table 13 show that 100% of written expression teachers

said “yes” to confirm the existence of lexical difficulties in Algerian EFL students’

English writing. Facing writing difficulties in lexis may create serious communication

problems to EFL students since they will not be able to transmit their messages and

communicate their thoughts clearly, appropriately and successfully. From the teachers’
 55

replies, we can say that the first research question, namely (Do Algerian EFL students

have lexical problems in their English writing ) is answered.

4.3.Section 03: The Use of the French Language (Lexis) in English Writing

Question Item Number 10: Algerian EFL Students’ Use of the French Language

in the English Class

The teachers of written expression were asked if their EFL students use the French

language in their English class. The aim behind asking about this point is to see if

Algerian EFL students use or do not use the French language in the course of

learning English in the different subject matters and courses that they take. This point

is of central importance to the present research, since it was mentioned in the

previous theoretical aspects that the Algerian linguistic situation is characterized by the

presence of the French language, first foreign language, in many aspects of our daily

lives, including our education.

It is believed, also, that the presence of the French language can also be significant

in the process of learning any other language, especially the English language. The

importance of the question focus lies in the fact that we can better understand the

situation by knowing if Algerian EFL students are, or are not, influenced by the

French language through its use in the English context, either consciously to express

themselves, or unconsciously to fill given linguistic gaps.

 56

Table 14: Algerian EFL Students’ Use of the French Language in the English

Class

Options Frequency Percentage %

No 4 40 %

Yes 6 60 %

Total 10 100 %

We asked the teachers of writing about whether their EFL students use the French

language in their English written productions. When comparing the written expression

teachers’ replies, we notice that 60 % of the teachers stated that EFL students use the

French language in the English class, while the remaining 40 % said that students do

not use French. The results in Table 14 illustrate the fact that the French language is

still present not only in Algerian students’ speech but also in their English writings.

These students possess a good deal of knowledge about the French language system,

and in a way or another, they cannot prohibit themselves from using the language

consciously or unconsciously.

Question Item Number 11: Algerian EFL Students’ Use of the French Language

in English Writing

It is of central importance to the present research to ask questions related to the

research topic, namely, whether, or not, Algerian EFL students use French lexical

items in their English writing. It is of central importance to the present research to

know if Algerian EFL students use some instances of French lexis in their English

writing. From the analysis of the previous question items, it is now clear that Algerian
 57

EFL students have problems in writing. Some of these problems are due to lexical

difficulties.

Table 15: Algerian EFL Students’ Use of the French Language in English Writing

Options Frequency Percentage %

No 2 20 %

Yes 8 80 %

Total 10 100 %

When we asked the informants about EFL students’ use of French in English

writing, 80 % of written expression teachers stated that EFL students use French in

their English writing, while 20 % said that they do not use it. One teachers explained

that the majority of EFL students do not use the French language in English writing,

but he pointed out to the fact that a given minority does use it. The teachers’ replies

answer partially the fourth research question (Do Algerian EFL students use lexical

borrowing from French in their English writing?).

The results in Table 15 raise an important point, which is the fact that many

Algerian EFL students use French when learning English because of the similarities

that exist between the two languages and the assumptions that students make about the

two languages. Sometimes, the influence of French on English language use is

facilitative, but other times the French language may reflect deficiencies in mastering

the English language, and hence, Algerian EFL students might use the French language
 58

in English writing mainly to fill the gaps and cover the weaknesses they have in

English.

Question Item Number 12: The Amount of Algerian EFL Students’ Use of French

in English Writing

The purpose behind asking this question is to know the approximate amount of

using the French language in the students’ written productions. This is important since

it can help us understand the degree of French language presence in EFL students’

English writing.

Table 16: The Amount of Algerian EFL Students’ Use of French in English

Writing

Options Frequency Percentage %

Never 1 10 %

Rarely 5 50 %

Sometimes 3 30 %

Often 1 10 %

Total 10 100 %

When we asked written expression teachers about the amount of using the French

language in students’ English writing, their replies were different from one teacher to

another. In terms of percentage, 10% of the teachers said that EFL students “never”

use French, 50% said “rarely”, 30% said “sometimes”, and 10% said that EFL

students “often” use French in the English written productions of students. From the

results in Table 16, we can say that, despite differences with regard to written
 59

expression teachers’ replies, it is a confirmed fact that Algerian EFL students use the

French language in their English writing, but with varying degrees.

Question Item Number 13: The Language Level of French Use in English Writing

It is important in the present research to know at what language level Algerian

EFL students use the French language in English writing. It is also important to order

the language levels in order to see exactly at what language level EFL students have

more use of French.

Table 17: The Language Level of French Use in English Writing

Lexis Syntax Grammar

Options Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Most used 10 100%

Used 6 60% 4 40%

Less used 4 40% 6 60%

when asked to rank the language level where Algerian EFL students use the

French language more, we notice that 100% of written expression teachers ranked

lexis as the area where students use the French language more. From the results in

Table 17, we can say that the presence of the French language in Algerian EFL

students’ writing is mainly in the area of lexis.

 60

Question Item Number 14: The Type of Lexical Aspects where EFL Students Use

French in Their English Writing

The aim behind focusing on the type of lexical aspects used in students’ English

writing is to answer one of the present research questions, namely (What are the major

types of lexical problems (mistakes/errors) faced by Algerian EFL students’ in their

English writing?). It is of central importance to investigate the type of lexical aspect

where French is most used. The lexical aspects provided in Table 18 below are

extracted from James’ (1998) taxonomy, which is a tool used to detect areas of lexical

aspects and problems. Two types can be identified: formal and semantic aspects. Since

we are mainly concerned with the formal type of lexical aspects, and mainly

misformation, the semantic type was excluded from the discussion. The formal lexical

aspect contains three subtypes as shown in Table 18 below. The importance of the

question asked in the teachers’ questionnaire lies in knowing in which category of

formal lexical aspects EFL students use French lexis in their English written

productions.

Table 18: The Type of Lexical Aspects where EFL Students Use French in Their

English Writing

Lexical Aspect Percentage %

Formal Misselection False Friends 50 %

Borrowing 80 %

Misformation Claque 70 %

Invention(literal translation) 20 %

Omission 10 %
 61

Distortion Over-inclusion 30 %

Misordering 60 %

When we asked the informants about the types of lexical aspects where EFL

students tend to use French more, their replies were different from one another. In

terms of percentages, the results show that in “formal misselection”, 50% of the

written expression teachers said that students use “false friends”. In “misformation”,

80% of the informants stated that students use “borrowing” from the French

language, 70% said that students use “claque”, and 20% said that EFL students use

“invention”. In the “distortion” type of lexical aspects, the results reveal that 10% of

the teachers said that students use “omission”, 30% use “over-inclusion”, and 60%

use “misordering”.

Teachers’ replies are central to answer the second research question in the present

research, which is: What are the major types of lexical problems faced by Algerian

EFL students in their English writing? From the answers above, misformation is

noticed to be the major type of lexical aspects used by EFL students, and mainly the

aspect of “borrowing”. The replies also answer partially the fourth research question,

namely: Do Algerian EFL students use lexical borrowing from French in their English

writing?

We can say that the majority of written expression teachers (8 out of 10) agreed

about the fact that the lexical aspect of “borrowing” is the most used type of the

“misformation” lexical aspect in Algerian EFL students’ written productions. All in

all, we notice in Table 18 that the aspect of “misformation” was ranked as the

highest type used in Algerian EFL students’ English texts, then comes “distortion”,
 62

then “formal misselection”. The results communicate an important fact which is that,

when facing difficulties in the English language for one reason or another, Algerian

EFL students resort mainly to “borrow” words from the French language for different

reasons.

Question Item Number 15: Reasons Behind Algerian EFL Students’ Use of French

Lexis in English Writing

This question is of significant importance to the present research investigation.

Since the focus of our research is on investigating the presence or the use of the

French vocabulary in the Algerian EFL students’ writing, it is of central importance

also to know the main reasons that push EFL students to use French words instead of

English words in English writing. As far as question item number 15 is concerned, the

informants seem to have different points of view. Their answer and explanations are

provided below. Each individual teacher’s reply was analyzed separately.

 Teacher A said that EFL students resort to the use of French words in their

English writing because they are not aware, though doing so will probably lead

to negative transfer. He argued that they have not yet reached an adequate

level in the target language.

 Teacher B said that the French language is the first foreign language that

Algerians acquire at a young age. In light of that, the influence of the language

is expectable.

 Teacher C said that some Algerian EFL students use French lexis in their

English writing because they are more acquainted with French than with

English.
 63

 Teacher D said that, sometimes, French lexis’ use is due to Algerian EFL

students’ poor lexical repertoire. It is also because, sometimes, students think

that the two languages are similar in their lexical aspects and, hence they can

use words from the French language in the English texts.

 Teacher E said that the reason behind EFL students’ use of French lexis is

because of language similarities between the two.

 Teacher F said that the reason maybe due to the fact that the French language

is students’ second language. EFL students think that they do have more ideas

and vocabulary in French than in English, so they use French words.

 Teacher G said that EFL students are more acquainted with the French lexis.

 Teacher H said that this is because French is students’ first foreign language,

and it has been studied in Algerian school years before the English language.

 Teacher I said that Algerian EFL students use French words in their English

writing because of the interference between the two languages. He pointed out

that it is a natural phenomenon.

 Teacher J said that the input in the foreign language, English in this case, is

insufficient, and French is more used than English in students’ daily life.

From the previous analysis of teacher informants’ replies, we can clearly notice

that most teachers agreed that Algerian EFL students use French in their English

writing because it is their first foreign language and they master it more. Students are

exposed more to French than to English in their daily life. One teacher raised an

important factor which is the special situation of the French language in Algeria.

Teachers’ replies highlight two main factors behind the use of French lexis: first,

the constant presence of the French language in the Algerians’ daily speech, and
 64

second, the influence of French language on English language since they are close to

each other (interference). Another central reason provided by teachers of written

expression is related to Algerian EFL students lack of vocabulary mastery because of

lack of constant exposure to the English language.

The teachers’ replies helped us in answering the third research question which is:

What are the sources of lexical problems in Algerian EFL students’ written

productions? French language interference seems to be a major reason behind the

borrowing of French lexis and using it in English writing. This also confirmed the

first research hypothesis, mainly that: Algerian EFL students’ lexical errors in English

writing are mainly due the influence of the French language in the EFL students’

English writing.

Question Item Number 16: The Presence of French Lexis in Algerian EFL

Students’ English Writing: Focus on the Formal Lexical Aspect of Borrowing

This question item is also of central importance to the present research

investigation. The aim behind focusing on the point of whether, or not, Algerian EFL

students borrow words from French and use them in their English writing is to help

the researchers to answer one main research question stated in the general introduction,

namely question (Do Algerian EFL students use lexical borrowings from French in

their English writing?).

In other words, it is of great significance to the present research to know, first, if

Algerian EFL students borrow words from the French language and use them in their

English written productions. Getting a positive confirmation with regard to the fact that

students borrow French words in their English texts can have many interesting

implications for English language teaching and learning since this can be considered as
 65

a serious deviation from the target language in question. This can also reflect language

knowledge gaps, and should, hence, receive careful attention on the part of teachers

and students. It is very interesting to gain knowledge about the existence of French

language influence at the level of lexis.

Table 19: The Presence of French Lexis in Algerian EFL Students’ English

Writing: Focus on Borrowing

Choice Frequency Percentage %

Yes 10 100 %

When we asked the informants about Algerian EFL students use of borrowing from

French to English writing, 100 % of the written expression teachers agreed that all

students borrow words from French but in varying degrees. Since French is their first

foreign language, students tend to borrow words when they cannot express themselves

in English, when they forget a word in English, or when they know the word only in

French and not in English. As shown in Table 19 above, we can say that Algerian

EFL students borrow words from the French language and use them in the language

skills productions, writing in this case, of another foreign language, English.

The teachers’ replies provided an answer to the fourth research question: Do

Algerian EFL students use borrowing from French in their English writing? All

teachers confirmed Algerian EFL students’ use of lexical borrowing in English texts,

and, hence, the research question was fully answered. Again, this also reflects a partial

confirmation for the first research hypothesis: Algerian EFL students’ lexical errors in

English writing are mainly due the influence of the French language in the EFL

students’ English writing.

 66

Question Item Number 17: The Most Used Type of Borrowing in Algerian EFL

Students’ English Texts

The purpose behind focusing on this point is, again, to help us in answering the

research question (Do Algerian EFL students make lexical borrowings from French in

their English writing?) and to gain more information about specific sub-types of lexical

borrowing. Following the previous question item, when we confirm that Algerian EFL

students borrow words from French, the next focus is to know which specific type of

borrowing, namely substitution or invention, is used vis-à-vis lexis.

Table 20: The Most Used Type of Borrowing in Algerian EFL Students’ English

Texts

Options Frequency Percentage %

Substitution 3 30 %

Invention 1 10 %

Both 6 60 %

Total 10 100 %

When we compare written expression teachers’ replies, we notice that the majority

of teachers, with a percentage of 60 %, said that students make use of both types of

borrowing: substitution and invention. 30 % of the teachers said that students rely

more on the substitution form of borrowing, while 10 % of them said that students

rely on the aspect of invention. All in all, there is a confirmation on the part of

written expression teachers that Algerian EFL students use borrowing in its two forms:

substitution and invention. We can, hence, say that the fourth research question, (Do
 67

Algerian EFL students make lexical borrowings from French in their English writing?),

was answered. Here also, we can say that the first research hypothesis, Algerian EFL

students’ lexical errors in English writing are mainly due the influence of the French

language in the EFL students’ English writing, was partially confirmed.

Question Item Number 18: Written Expression Teachers’ Attitudes towards French

Lexical Borrowing in Algerian EFL Students’ English Texts (whether they consider

it as a problem or not)

The aim behind this question item is to explore EFL teachers’ attitudes towards

French words’ borrowing. It is also important to know if written expression teachers

consider lexical borrowing from French as a “problem” in writing or not.

Table 21: Written Expression Teachers’ Attitudes towards French Lexical

Borrowing in Algerian EFL Students’ English Texts (whether they consider it as a

problem or not)

Options Frequency Percentage %

Yes 9 90%

No 1 10%

Total 10 100%

Written expression teachers were asked about their attitude towards the use of French

words in English writing through borrowing and whether this borrowing is, according to

them, considered as a problem in English writing or not. The majority of teachers, with a

percentage of 90 %, stated that they consider it as a problem in writing. There is an

exception of just one teacher, 10 %, who did not consider lexical borrowing from French
 68

as a problem in writing, and stated that is it a natural phenomenon. From the results in

Table 21 above, we can say that French words’ borrowing, in its two forms substitution

and invention, is considered as a problem in writing by the majority of the written

expression teachers in the present study.

The teachers’ replies provided a partial answer to the fifth research question: Does the

use of lexical borrowing from French affect, negatively, the quality of the English written

texts of Algerian EFL students? Since the vast majority of teachers consider the presence

of French lexis in English writing as a problem, this implies that it has a negative

influence on the English texts. Teachers’ replies provided also a partial confirmation for

the first research hypothesis. Algerian EFL students’ lexical errors are due to the

influence or interference of the French language.

Question Item Number 19: Teachers’ Opinion about whether or not Borrowing

Words from French Is Considered as Error in English Writing

The focus of this question item is also of central importance to the present

research. This is so because it is important for us to know if the use of lexical

borrowing from French in English writing is considered as a superficial mistake or it

is considered as an error in writing.

Table 22: Teachers’ Opinion about whether or not Borrowing Words from French

Is Considered as Error in English Writing

Options Frequency Percentage %

Yes 7 70%

No 3 30%

Total 10 100%
 69

When we compare written expression teachers’ replies in Table 22 above, we

notice that the majority of them, with a percentage of 70 %, consider lexical

borrowing from French as “error”. The remaining 30 % of written expression teachers

said that borrowing is not considered as error. One of these teachers claimed that EFL

students have poor academic language. It is important to mention here that two of the

teachers who said that using French lexical borrowing in English writing is not error

are novice teachers, and this is their first time of teaching written expression. The

third one is, however, an experienced teacher.

The teachers’ replies provided a partial answer the fifth research question: Does the use

of lexical borrowing from French affect, negatively, the quality of the English written

texts of Algerian EFL students? The majority of teachers consider the use of French

lexical borrowing as error. This, again, implies, that it can have negative effects on the

quality of the English text. Written expression teachers’ replies provided, again, a partial

confirmation for the first research hypothesis. Algerian EFL students’ lexical errors are

due to the influence or interference of the French language.

Question Item Number 20: Types of Lexical Borrowing Error: Intralingual and

Inter-lingual

Question 20: Explanations of the Type of Error

It is of central importance to our research to further know the type of the lexical

borrowing error, namely if it is intralingual or inter-lingual. Asking question number

20 in the teachers’ questionnaire helps us to answer one central research question

(What are the sources of lexical problems in Algerian EFL students’ written

productions?) in the present research. This is important since we can better understand
 70

the main sources of lexical borrowing errors in Algerian EFL students’ written

productions. That is to say, one of the main aims of the present research is to know

if the committed lexical errors are inter-lingual, which result from the influence of one

language on another one, which is the case of French and English here, or are

intralingual, which are errors which result from the foreign language itself.

Table 23: Types of Lexical Borrowing Error: Intralingual and Inter-lingual

Type of Error Frequency Percentage %

Inter-lingual errors 6 60 %

Intra-lingual 4 40 %

Total 10 100 %

We asked the informants about the reasons that lead EFL students to commit errors

in writing when borrowing words from French and what are the main sources behind

this. 60 % of them said that the sources of errors found in EFL students’ written

productions are “inter-lingual” errors. The remaining 40% said that the errors are

“intralingual”.

These results confirmed the hypothesis that a good deal of Algerian EFL students

commit errors in writing, by borrowing words from the French language, due to the

interference between French and English. The teachers’ replies also provided an answer

to the research question (What are the sources of lexical problems in Algerian EFL

students’ written productions?) and confirmed, again, that French language interference

is a major reason behind lexical borrowing errors in EFL students’ written texts.
 71

Question Item Number 21: Teachers’ Justifications of Their Choice about the

Types of Lexical Borrowing Error: Intralingual and Inter-lingual

This part of question focus is closely related to the previous question focus. This is

so because one of the central points that we focus on in the present research is to

understand more the lexical errors and the type of lexical borrowing errors that EFL

students commit in their English writing. As far as question number 21 in the

teachers’ questionnaire is concerned, the teacher informants were asked to explain more

the intralingual or inter-lingual errors that EFL students commit due to French

language lexical borrowing in English writing. Each teacher provided her/his own

explanation. All the explanations were reported and described separately as shown in

what follows.

 Teacher A said that borrowing in general is a natural linguistic phenomenon.

He said, however, that when one borrows because lack of knowledge, this is a

language deficiency.

 Teacher B said that these errors are because French and English belong to the

same language family as they descend from Latin.

 Teacher C did not provide an answer at all.

 Teacher D said that because they use words and expressions from another

language, we can relate this answer to borrowing.

 Teacher E said that French knowledge negatively influences English language

learning.

 Teacher F did not provide an answer.

 Teacher G did not provide an answer.

 72

 Teacher H said that the two languages have a totally different linguistic

system, although they have some similar points.

 Teachers I and J said that errors result from two languages.

From the reported explanations of teacher informants, we can clearly see that some

teachers gave interesting replies, but some did not provide an answer at all. As for

those who provided an explanation, we notice that they link inter-lingual errors to the

influence of the French language on the English language. The teachers’ explanations

confirmed the first research hypothesis that states that Algerian EFL students’ lexical

errors in English texts are mainly due to French language interference.

Question Item Number 22: Types of Intralingual Errors in EFL Students’ English

Writing

It is important to know the specific types of intralingual errors that occur in EFL

students’ English writing, and this is the reason behind asking question number 22 in

the teachers’ questionnaire. Since intralingual errors are a result of the target language

itself, English in this case, we can have different types of intralingual errors as shown

in Table 24 below. Written expression teachers were asked to state which type of

intralingual errors is mostly used by EFL students.

Table 24: Types of Intralingual Errors in EFL Students’ English Writing

Types Frequency Percentage %

Over generalization 3 out 4 teachers 75%

False analogy 2 out 4 teachers 50%

Faulty categorization 2 out 4 teachers 50%

 73

When we asked the informants (the four teachers ) about the types of intralingual

errors that EFL students commonly use, and since, in the previous replies in Table

23, only 40 % of written expression teachers said that the errors are intralingual, their

responses about the types of intralingual error were different somehow. 3 out of 4

teachers said “overgeneralization”, 2 out of 4 said “false analogy”, and 2 out of 4

said “faulty categorization”.

4.4.Section 04: The Influence of the Use of French Lexis (borrowing) on the

Quality of Algerian EFL Students’ Writing

Question Item Number 23: Teachers’ Encouragement for EFL Students to Borrow

French Words in English Writing with Reason Explanation

Written expression teachers were asked about whether or not they encourage their

EFL students to borrow words from French and use them in their English writing. It

is important to know the EFL teachers’ point of view with regard to this point since

this can have some significant impacts on teaching and learning the foreign language.

Table 25: Teachers’ Encouragement for EFL Students to Borrow French Words

in English Writing with Explanation

Options Frequency Percentage %

Yes 1 10%

No 9 90%

Total 10 100%

When we compare written expression teachers’ replies, we notice that all teachers,

with a percentage of 90 %, stated that they do not encourage EFL students to use
 74

French words or to resort to the language in their English writing. There is just one

teacher, with a percentage of 10 %, who said that she encourages EFL students to use

French words in their English written productions. This teacher said, however, that she

encourages students to do so only when the words are technical terms and they are

originally in French. The teachers’ replies provided an interesting implication for the

fifth research question and for the second research hypothesis, which is the fact that

the use of lexical borrowing from French influences the English text in a negative

way.

As far as the justification of question number 23 in the teachers’ questionnaire is

concerned, the teacher informants provided different answers and explanations to the

question. Each individual teacher’s reply was reported and analyzed separately in what

follows.

 Teacher A said that he does not encourage students to use French words. He

explained that this encouragement does not improve their English.

 Teacher B did not provide an answer.

 Teacher C said that she encourages them to do so, and she explained her

point of view by saying that she does this only when it is a case of technical

words.

 Teacher D did not provide an answer.

 Teacher E said that students need to write in English.

 Teacher F did not provide an answer.

 Teacher G said that she does not encourage them. She argued that they need

to write in English because it is the language that they are supposed to use in

writing and this is not a translation course.

 75

 Teacher H argued that it is not logical to ask them to do so.

 Teacher I did not provide an answer.

 Teacher G said that if the word is technical, there will be no problem. If it is

not, then their writing will be informal.

From the previous reporting and analysis of teacher informants’ replies, we can

clearly notice that they all agreed about the fact that encouraging students to borrow

French words is not going to help them in improving their English writing. This is

the reason why a great deal of EFL teachers do not encourage the idea of another

foreign language presence in Algerian EFL students’ English writing.

Question Item Number 24: Teachers’ Tolerance vis-à-vis Algerian EFL Students’

Use of French Words in the English Written Productions

Written expression teachers were asked about the fact of whether or not they

tolerate the use of French lexis in English writing. The purpose behind asking this

question is, again, to know teachers’ opinion about the use of French words in EFL

students’ English texts.

Table 26: Teachers’ Tolerance vis-à-vis Algerian EFL Students’ Use of French

Words in the English Written Productions

Options Frequency Percentage %

No 7 70 %

Yes 3 30 %

Total 10 100 %
 76

When asked if they tolerate the use of French words in their students’ English

writing, 70 % of the teacher informants said that they do not tolerate that at all. The

remaining 30 % said, however, that they tolerate Algerian EFL students’ use of French

words in English texts. From the teachers’ replies, we can clearly notice that teachers

have a disagreement about the French language presence in English writing. Teacher

“I”, who is an experienced teacher of written expression, explained that he tolerates

the use of French lexis only when students borrow words. Here, again we notice that

teachers of writing hold different views with regard to borrowing words from French

and using them in English texts.

However, since the majority of teachers said that they do not tolerate the presence

of French words in English texts, we can say that the fifth research questions was,

again, answered and the second research hypothesis was, again, confirmed. That is to

say, the use of lexical borrowing influences negatively the quality of the English text.

Question Item Number 25: How EFL Teachers Deal with Algerian EFL Students’

Lexical Borrowing from French

The aim behind focusing on this question item is to investigate the way written

expression teachers deal with Algerian EFL students’ use of French, in general, and

borrowing, in particular. As far as question number 25 in the teachers’ questionnaire is

concerned, the teacher informants provided different answers to the question. Their

answer and explanations are provided below. Each individual teacher’s reply is

reported and analyzed separately.

 Teacher A said that he tries to draw EFL students’ attention to the fact that

the words are not English. He gives them the appropriate corresponding word

in English.
 77

 Teacher B said that she gives them remarks and asks them to revise their

pieces of writing.

 Teacher C did not provide an explanation.

 Teacher D di not provide an explanation.

 Teacher E said that she encourages students to find the English words.

 Teacher F said that she explains to students the wrong use of French words,

except if these words are common in English and are suitable to be used.

 Teacher G said that she considers the use of French words in English texts as

mistakes in the sense that EFL students make use of wrong or incorrect

vocabulary or words.

 Teacher H said that she corrects them by providing the students with the

appropriate equivalent in English.

 Teacher I did not provide an explanation.

 Teacher J said that she considers them as mistakes.

From the previous analysis of teacher informants’ replies, we can clearly notice that

many teachers do not tolerate the use of French. Written expression teachers have

different ways of dealing with the presence of French lexis in English texts as

reported in their explanations.

Question Item Number 26: EFL Teachers’ Opinion about the Influence of French

Lexical Borrowing on the Algerian EFL Students’ Writing Quality

Written expression teachers were asked about their opinion about whether, or not,

the borrowing of French words in English writing influences the quality of the

English text. This question focus is of central importance to the research investigation.
 78

Table 27: EFL Teachers’ Opinion about the Influence of French Lexical

Borrowing on the Algerian EFL Students’ Writing Quality

Option Frequency Percentage %

Yes 10 100 %

Written expression teachers provided the same reply, namely that they all think that

the use of French words has an influence on English written productions’ quality.

When we compare teachers’ replies provide in Table 27 above, we notice that all of

them, with a percentage of 100 %, agreed that the use of French lexis has an

influence on Algerian EFL students’ writing quality. The teachers’ replies in Table 27

above provided an answer to the fifth research question (Does the use of lexical

borrowing from French affect, negatively the quality of the English text?).

Question Item Number 27: The Nature of French Lexical Borrowing Influence on

the Quality of the English Text: Negative or Positive Influence

It is of central importance to know the nature of French lexis influence on the

quality of the English text. The purpose behind focusing on this question item is to

investigate whether the influence of French lexis’ borrowing is negative or positive.

This question item goes hand in hand with the previous one, where all written

expression teachers expressed their consent about the point that French words’

borrowing affects the writing quality of EFL students’ writing.

 79

Table 28: The Nature of French Lexical Borrowing Influence on the Quality of

the English Text: Negative or Positive Influence

Options Frequency Percentage %

Negative 8 80 %

Positive 2 20 %

Total 10 100 %

When we asked the informants about the nature of the influence of French lexical

borrowing on the quality of the English writing, we observe that 80% of written

expression teachers said that the French lexical borrowing influences negatively EFL

students’ writing quality. A minority of 20% said, however, that the influence is of a

positive nature. In line with this finding, Llach (2011) stated that “the presence of

borrowing negatively affects the quality of essays” (p. 167).

The data in Table 28 above provided a clear answer to the fifth research question:

Does the use of lexical borrowing from French affect, negatively, the quality of the

English texts of Algerian EFL students. The data also confirmed directly the second

research hypothesis which states that: If Algerian EFL students use lexical borrowing

from French, this will negatively influence the quality of their English written

productions.

Question Item Number 28: The Way and the Extent of French Lexical Borrowing

Influence on the Quality of the English Text

Written expression teachers were asked about the both the way and the extent of

French lexical borrowing influence on the quality of the English text. This question is

also of central importance in the present research.

 80

Table 29: The Extent to French Lexical Borrowing Has an Influence on the

Quality of the English Text

Options Frequency Percentage %

No influence 1 10 %

Little influence 7 70 %

Great influence 2 20 %

Total 10 100 %

When we compare the informants’ replies in Table 29 above, we observe that

written expression teachers have different points of view with regard to the extent of

French lexical borrowing negative influence on the quality of the English text. 70%

said that French has a little influence on the quality of the English writing. This

comes in contradiction with research in the academic writing scope since the opposite

is indicated. Again, Llach (2011, p. 176) stated that “Borrowings may distort

communication to a great extent, because they imply a code switching. A change in

code might impose a greater cognitive demand from the reader and devalue writing.”

On the other hand, 20% of written expression teachers said that French lexical

borrowing negative influence is of a great influence, while the remaining 10% said

that it has no influence on the quality of the English text.

As far as the explanation is concerned, the teacher informants provided different

explanations of how influence takes place. Their explanations are provided below. Each

individual teacher’s reply is reported and analyzed separately.

 Teacher A did not provide an explanation.

 81

 Teacher B said that it affects the quality of words, especially key words on

which the whole paper is based.

 Teacher C did not provide an explanation.

 Teacher D said that if it is not exaggerated, it will not negatively influence

the writing quality especially if learners are conscious about it.

 Teacher E said that most of the time it is at the level of form for instance

spelling.

 Teacher F said that students in such case like to think in French not in

English, and since the rules that govern each language are different, students

will be influenced negatively by such strategy.

 Teacher G said that the use of French lexis negatively influences the students’

writing quality, and she argued that they must write in English and before that

they need to brainstorm ideas in English.

 Teacher H said that it leads to the existence of many French in their writing

or speaking too.

 Teacher I did not provide an explanation.

 Teacher J said that it is because students use French lexis just when they do

not have English lexis.

From the previous teacher informants’ replies, we can clearly notice that many

teachers agreed about the fact that the use of French lexical borrowing does affect

Algerian EFL students’ writing quality negatively. One teacher highlighted an important

point, which is that the use of French, according to her, appear more at the level of

spelling.
 82

Question Item Number 29: Teachers’ Opinion about How to Minimize the

Influence of French Lexical Borrowing and Use In Algerian EFL Students’

English Texts

Teachers of writing were asked about the possible ways that help their EFL

students write better in English by avoiding the use of French lexical borrowing. We

notice that the informants’ suggestions differ from one teacher to another. Below, we

present each teacher’s suggestion.

 Teacher A said that he will raise his EFL students’ awareness of the fact that

the two languages are different in many aspects and that doing so, would have

a negative impact on their language production.

 Teacher B and H said that extensive reading of English books, journals, and

articles will solve this problem.

 Teacher C said that she will raise EFL students’ awareness about the negative

effect that borrowing might have on the quality of their English writing.

 Teacher D said that continuous feedback on their written work is the solution.

 Teachers E and F said that they prefer to explain the differences between

French and English whenever possible.

 Teacher J said that it is important to urge students to express their ideas in

English, and to punish them in terms of scores whenever they use French lexis.

 Teacher G said that using the language extensively will help to eradicate this

problem.

 Teacher I did not provide suggestions.

From the previous teacher informants’ replies, we can clearly notice that teachers

suggest different strategies to eradicate the problem of lexical borrowing from French
 83

in English writing. Their suggestions seem all interesting and beneficial to help EFL

students in improving their English texts. Some of these suggestions involve: reading

extensively, correcting students by providing feedback, raising their awareness towards

the differences between the two languages, practicing English writing a lot and so on.
 84

General Conclusion

The issue of lexical errors in EFL students’ writing, and mainly the use of lexical

borrowing, has been investigated in many studies and in different educational contexts.

Lexical borrowing due to language interference is considered as a serious problem in

EFL students’ written productions. In the present research, and through the analysis of

the teachers’ questionnaire, the results showed that language interference, mainly

French lexical interference via lexical borrowing, is a major source for lexical errors

(lexical borrowing from French into English) in English written texts.

The results of data analysis showed that there are other sources that lead to lexical

errors due to French lexical borrowing and the use of French words in the English

writing of Algerian EFL students. They include factors such as intralingual errors,

vocabulary size, and proficiency level in the English language. The main factor

remains, however, language interference.

In this research, we shed light on the problem of French lexical borrowing in the

English written productions of Algerian EFL students. Focus was, first, placed on

investigating whether lexical borrowing from French is present in Algerian EFL

students’ English writing, and, second, whether or not its presence affects negatively

the quality of students’ writing. Five research questions were asked and two research

hypotheses were formulated. A questionnaire was designed in order for us to answer

the research questions and confirm or reject the research hypotheses.

The data were analyzed quantitatively through frequencies and percentages. They

were also analyzed qualitatively using a descriptive approach. After the analysis of

data (teachers’ questionnaire), all the research questions were answered and the two
 85

research hypotheses were confirmed. Written expression teachers confirmed the fact

that Algerian EFL students borrow words from French, due to language interference,

and use them in their English essays. This is of central importance to the research

since it helped us in answering some research questions and mainly in confirming the

first research hypothesis that states that “Algerian EFL students’ lexical errors in

English writing are mainly due to the interference of the French language in the EFL

students’ English writing”. The majority of teachers’ replies confirmed that the reason

behind lexical errors in Algerian EFL students’ essays is the interference of L2

(French) in L3 (English). The second research hypothesis was also confirmed since the

majority of written expression teachers confirmed the fact that the use of French

lexical borrowing affects negatively the quality of the English text.

The first research question “Do Algerian EFL students have lexical problems in

their English writing?” was answered in questions 05-09. We noticed that all written

expression teachers agreed that Algerian EFL students have problems in writing at the

level of lexis.

The second research question “What are the major types of lexical problems

(mistakes/errors) faced by Algerian EFL students’ in their English writing?” was

answered in question 14. We found that the major type of lexical problems used by

students is that of borrowing; it is the most used one. Besides that, the lexical errors

are mainly inter-lingual due to the interference of the French language.

The third research question “What are the sources of lexical problems in Algerian

EFL students’ written productions?” was answered in questions 15-20-21-22. The

findings showed that the sources of students’ lexical errors are mostly due to the

negative transfer from French to English.

 86

The fourth research question “Do Algerian EFL students make lexical borrowings

from French in their English writing?” was answered in questions 16-17. Written

expression teachers claimed that Algerian EFL students use borrowing with its two

types substitution and invention.

The fifth research question “Does the use of lexical borrowing from French

influence, negatively, the quality of the English texts of Algerian EFL students?” was

answered in questions 26-27-28. Most of the written expression teachers agreed that

the use of French lexical borrowing influences the students’ written productions

negatively and affects the quality of the English text.

In light of the data analysis and discussion of the results, the first research

hypothesis, which states that “Algerian EFL students’ lexical errors in English writing

are mainly due to the interference of the French language in EFL students’ English

writing” was confirmed through the answers of questions 11 to 21. That is to say, the

main source of lexical errors in Algerian EFL students’ writing is the negative transfer

between the two languages: French and English. The second hypothesis, which states

that “If Algerian EFL students use lexical borrowing from French, this will negatively

influence the quality of their English written productions” was through the questions

26-27-28. That is to say, lexical borrowing due to the French language interference

influences negatively the quality of the English text written by Algerian EFL students.

The results of the present research provide us with the following concluding points:

 Algerian EFL students have an average level in writing.

 Algerian EFL students face serious difficulties in English writing.

 Algerian EFL students face difficulties mainly at the level of lexis.

 87

 Algerian EFL students often make mistakes and commit errors at the level of

lexis in English writing.

 Algerian EFL students use French lexical borrowing in their English texts.

 The lexical type of « Misformation » is the major type of lexical aspects used

by Algerian EFL students in their English texts.

 The type of lexical « borrowing » is the major type of « misformation » that is

present or used by Algerian EFL students in English writing.

 The reasons behind the use of lexical borrowing from French in English texts

is mainly due to French language interference.

 Interference occurs because of several reasons including : lack of English

language knowledge or mastery, mis-conceptions with regard to the fact that the

two languages are similar, the strong mastery of the French language compared

to English, and so on.

 French lexical borrowing is considered as a serious problem in English writing.

 French lexical borrowing is considered as error in English writing.

 French lexical borrowing errors are mainly inter-lingual.

 Written expression teachers do not encourage EFL students to use French lexis

in English writing.

 Written expression teachers do not tolerate the presence of French lexis in

English texts.

 French lexical borrowing influences negatively the quality of the English text.

From data analysis and discussion, we can conclude that Algerian EFL students

face difficulties in their English writing, in general, and at the level of lexis, in
 88

particular. EFL students resort to the use of French lexis in their written productions

due to the difficulties they face to find the appropriate word in English. The reason

behind this can be the lack of English vocabulary mastery and assumptions that the

English lexical system is similar to the French one. French language interference is the

major factor that contributes to Algerian EFL students lexical errors in English writing.

The source of lexical borrowing errors is mainly interlingual. Due to the similarities

that exist between French and English, Algerian EFL students ignore the central

difference that also exist and use the French language. They either make a partial shift

or a complete shift towards the use of French lexis in English texts. That is to say,

they can either take just a part of the French word and modify it to sound like

English, or take directly the whole word from French and use it in English. The result

is usually lexical errors at the level of form, and mainly in the type of misformation

(substitution or creation). French lexical borrowing (substitution or creation) influences

the quality of the English text in a negative way.

Recommendations

Lexis is one of the most essential aspects of language. It is the unit which carries

meaning. Lack of lexical knowledge can negatively affect EFL students’ English

productions, especially in writing. Based on the results of the study and written

expression teachers’ replies, we suggest or recommend the following:

 It is important to have a Reading subject in the curriculum.

 It is important for teachers to focus on aspects of English vocabulary in the

different subjects.

 It is important for EFL students to be exposed constantly to English

vocabulary.
 89

 EFL students should be encouraged to read intensively and extensively in-class

and out of the class.

 EFL students should practice writing a lot in-class and out of class.

 Teachers should raise students’ awareness towards French lexical borrowing

errors and explain the difference between French and English lexis to students.

 Teachers should find strategies that may help their students to gain more

English vocabulary and focus on input through reading and listening, so that

students can be able to produce language in speaking or writing.

 Teachers should always encourage students to bring dictionaries and use them in

class. The dictionaries can be bilingual (Arabic-English or French-English).

 Written expression teachers should provide EFL students with reading materials

that contain new vocabulary items and take the aspect of vocabulary into

consideration in their teaching.

Research Limitations

There is one main limitation that we have faced when conducting this research. This

main problem is time constraints. The research main intention was to conduct a corpus

based study at the English Department by taking undergraduate EFL students’ essays

and analyzing them for French lexical borrowing use. However, due to certain serious

circumstances in the academic year 2018-2019, especially in the second semester, we

could not achieve this. We believe that conducting a corpus based study would have

provided us with interesting results vis-à-vis the research problem.

 90

References

Abid-Houcine, S. (2007). Enseignement et éducation en langues étrangères en Algérie

: la compétition entre le français et l’anglais, Droit et Cultures, Paris, 54, (2),

143-156.

Al-Khresheh, H, M. (2016). A review study of error analysis theory. International

Journal of Humanities and Social Science Research, 2, 49–59.

Alqahtani, M. (2015). The importance of vocabulary in language learning and how

to be taught. International Journal of Teaching and Education, III (3), 21–

34. https://doi.org/10.20472/TE.2015.3.3.002

Andre, R. Jurianto. (2015). An analysis of lexical errors in the English narrative writing

produced by the tenth grade students of SMA Negeri 9 Surabaya in EFL

classroom, 04, 69–76. Retrieved from

http://journal.unair.ac.id/download- full papers- anglicistd3e1a5fcb92full.pdf

Arabski, J. (2006). Cross-linguistic Influences in the Second Language Lexicon. Great

Britain : Cromwell Press Ltd.

Ariyati, L. M. (2014). The analysis of English loan and borrowing words used by

information and technology writers in thesis abstracts, Jurnal Sosial

Humaniora,7(1), 226–253.

Armstrong, N. (2005). Translation Linguistics, Culture: A French- English Handbook.

Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.

Benrabah, M. (2007). Language-in-education planning in Algeria: Historical development

and current issues. Journal Policy, 6, 225–252.

 91

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-007-9046-7

Bloomfield, L. (1933). Language. Retrieved from

https://books.google.com/books/about/Language.html?id=LzxsAAAAIAAJ

Caro, K. (2017). Lexis, lexical competence and lexical knowledge : A review.

Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 8(2), 205–213.

https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0802.01

Cenoz, J. (1997). The influence of bilingualism on multilingual acquisition: Some

data from the Basque country, 278–287. Retrieved from

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8b35/3a8473a1f5f1ac620f0a4f76f6a88940f088.pdf.

Chemami, M. (2011). Discussing plurilingualism in Algeria: The status of French and

English languages through the educational policy. International Journal of Arts &

Sciences, 4(18), 227–234.

Corder, P. (1967). The significance of learner’s errors. International Review of Applied

Linguistics, 5, 161–170.

Crystal, D. (1997). English as a Global Language ( 2 ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Dewaele, J. (1998). Lexical inventions : French interlanguage as L2 versus L3. 19(4),

471–490.

Frunza, O. & Inkpen, D. (2007). A tool for detecting French-English cognates and

false friends. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249824426.

Grymska, B. (n. d.). The influence of L2 English on learning of L3 German structures

– different examples of cross-linguistic influence, 1. 54 –67. Retrieved from

http://www.humanitas.edu.pl/resources/upload/dokumenty/Wydawnictwo/English%20Insights

/BEATA%20GRYMSKA.pdf.
 92

Hanafi, A. (2014). The second language influence on foreign language learners’ errors :

The case of the French language for Algerian students learning English as a foreign

language. European Scientific Journal, 2, 1857–7881.

Harlig, B. K., & Sprouse, A. R. (2018). Negative versus positive transfer. The TESOL

Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, 1–6.

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0084

Hemchua, S., & Schmitt, B. N. (2006). An analysis of lexical errors in the English

compositions of Thai learners, 21(3), 3–25. Retrieved from

https://www.academia.edu/32479889/AN_ANALYSIS_OF_LEXICAL_ERRORS_IN_THE_

ENGLISH_COMPOSITIONS_OF_INDONESIAN_EFL_LEARNERS.

Hoffer, B. L. (2005). Language borrowing and the indices of adaptability and receptivity.

Intercultural Communication Studies, 2, 53–72.

James, C. (1998). Errors in Language Learning and Use. New York : Routledge.

Keffous, C. (2011). The Effect of French Language on the Development of English

Writing on the Development of English Writing A Case Study of Third year

Pupils (Unpublished Dissertation). University of Ferhat Abbas, Setif.

Keshavarz, H. M. (2012). Contrastive Analysis & Error Analysis. Iran : Rahnama

Press.

Khansir, A. A. (2012). Error analysis and second language acquisition. Theory and

Practice in Language Studies 2(5), 1027–1032.

https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.5.1027- 1032

King, R. (1954). The Lexical Basis of Grammatical Borrowing a Prince Edward Island

French case study. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Kouega, J. P. (2005). The effects of French on English L2 in Cameroon. Cascadilla Press,

 93

5, 1201–1210.

Li, X. (2015). Analysis on lexical errors in writings of Mongolian English majors.

Theory and practice in in language studies, 5(12), 2565–2570.

https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0512.18

Li-na, Z. (2016). Loan words in modern English and their features. Sino-US English

Teaching, 13(3), 209–212. https://doi.org/10.17265/1539-8072/2016.03.006.

Llach, A M. P. (2012). Lexical Errors and Accuracy in Foreign Language Writing.

Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Llach, A. M. P. (2014). A critical review of the terminology and taxonomies used in

the literature on lexical errors and taxonomies used in the literature on lexical

errors. Miscelánea: a journal of english and american studies, 31, 11-24.

Mackey, F. W. (1962). The description of bilingualism. Canadian Journal of Linguistics,

7(2), 51-85.

Maskor, M. Z., & Baharudin, H. (2016). Receptive vocabulary knowledge or productive

vocabulary knowledge in writing skill, which one important ? International

Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 6(11), 261–271.

https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v6-i11/2395

Mazur, J. (2014). The influence of English as L2 on Polish learners’ Russian as L3.

Studia Anglica Resoviensia, 11, 44–59.

Meriläinen, L. (2010). Language Transfer in the Written English of Finnish Students.

The University of Eastern Finland: Joensuu.

Nation, I. P. S. (2000). Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. United Kingdom:

Cambridge University Press.

Negadi, M. N. (2015). Learning English in Algeria through French-based background

 94

proficiency. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 199, 496–500.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.537

Ngonkum, S. (2016). An analysis of interlingual errors and intralingual errors in

Thai EFL students’ writing at Khon Kaen University. 4, 35 –51.

Ouahmiche, G., Beddiaf, A. & Beddiaf, A. (2017). Reflections on the linguistic

landscape and the prospects of English language teaching in Algeria. International

Journal of Language and Linguistics, 5, 15–23.

https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.s.2017050301.13

Ramya, D. (2017). Writing – a complex skill. International Journal of English Language,

Literature in Humanities, V ,779–784.

Rezig, N. (2011). Teaching English in Algeria and educational reforms : An overview

on the factors entailing students failure in learning foreign languages at

university. Procedia -Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1327–1333.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.370.

Richards, C. J. (1985). Error Analysis: Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition.

Longman.

Rinborm, H. (2001). Lexical Transfer L3 Production: Cross-linguistic Influence in Third

Language Acquisition. Great Britain : Cromwell Press Ltd.

Ringbom, H. (2007). Cross-linguistic Similarity in Foreign Language Learning. Great

Britain: MPG Books Ltd.

Russell, G. P. & Beaudet C. (1999). Lexical borrowings from French in written Quebec

English Lexical borrowings from French in Written Quebec English.

University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistic, 6(2), 17-32.

Saurio, J. (2014). Lexical and Syntactic Transfer in the English Language Fan Fiction
 95

Texts of Finnish Native Speakers (MA Thesis). University of Tampere, School of

Language, Translation and Literary Studies English Philology.

Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in Language Teaching. Retrieved from

https://books.google.dz/books?isbn=0521669383

Schmidt, R. & Richards, C. J. (2010). Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (4 ed.).

New York: Routledge.

Shalaby, A. N., Yahya, N. & El-komi, M. (2009). Analysis of lexical errors in Saudi

college students’ compositions. Journal of the Saudi Association of Languages and

Translation, 2(3), 65–93.

Tabari, A. T. (1968). The French influence on English education. Retrieved from

ensani.ir/fa/article/download/163992.

Tarev, B. V. (2012). Lexical borrowings : Linguistic and didactic aspects. Journal of

Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences, 7(5), 944–950.

Thawabteh, M. A. (2011). The other side of the coin of lexical borrowing from Arabic

into English, 1(4), 103–122. Retrieved from

http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/TC.

Viera, R. T. (2017). The importance of vocabulary knowledge in the production of

written texts : A case study on EFL language learners. Language Cultural Center,

Revista Tecnológica ESPOL – RTE (30), 89–105.

Wang, R. & Xiang, X. (2016). On the function of mother tongue transfer in English

vocabulary acquisition. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(11), 2208–

2214. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0611.19

Wood, F. J. (2017). Errors in second / foreign language learning and their Interpretations.

Education and Linguistics Research, 3(1), 1–14.

 96

https://doi.org/10.5296/elr.v3i1.10251

Yang, L. (2013). Lexical negative transfer analysis and pedagogic suggestions of

native language in Chinese EFL writing. International Conference on Education

Technology and Management Science, 669–672.

Zohra, L. (2015). Multilingualism in Algeria: The case of appellation of Algerian TV

channels. Traduction et Langues, 14(1), 234–250.

Websites and Online References

https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/lexis

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/es/diccionario/ingles-espanol/vocabulary
 Appendix

Teachers’ Questionnaire

Dear teacher,

This questionnaire is part of a Master research project. It is primarily addressed to

teachers of Written Expression teachers at the university of Larbi Ben M’Hidi, Oum El

Bouaghui, in the academic year 2018-2019. It seeks to investigate the influence of the

French lexis (lexical borrowing) on the quality of English written productions of Algerian

EFL students. You are kindly invited to fill in the present questionnaire. Your reply will

be anonymous and data will be used for research purposes only. Would you, please, tick

(✔) the appropriate box(es) and provide full statement(s) when necessary.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Section One: Background Information

1. Gender

a. Male

b. Female

2. For how long have you been teaching English at the level of university?

……………………………………………………………………………………………….

3. For how long have you been teaching the subject of Written Expression at

university?

………………………………………………………………………………………………
Section Two: Teachers’ Point of View vis-à-vis Algerian EFL Students’ Difficulties in

Writing

4. How do you judge your students’ level in writing ?

Very good Good Average Weak

5. Do your students face serious difficulties in writing?

Yes No

6. At what level of language do they face difficulties in writing? Would you, please,

order your reply from most difficult (1) to less difficult (4).

Lexis Semantic Syntax Grammar

7. Do EFL students make mistakes or errors in their English writing?

Mistake Error Both

8. How often do they make/commit mistakes/errors in their writing?

Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never

9. Do your students face serious difficulties at the level of lexis when writing in

English?

Yes No

Section Three: The Use of the French Language (Lexis) in English Writing

10. Do your students use the French language in the English class?

Yes No

11. Do they use the French language in their English writing?

Yes No

12. If yes, how often do they use it?

Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never

 13. At what level of language do they use the French language in writing? Would

you, please, order your reply from most used (1) to less used (3)

Syntax Lexis Grammar

14. If students use French lexis in their English writing, would you, please, tick (√)

the appropriate type (s) of lexical aspect that EFL students use in their English

writing.

Lexical Aspect Answer

Formal Misselection False Friends

Borrowing

Misformation Claque (literal translation)

Invention

Omission

Distortion Over-inclusion

Misordering

15. According to you, why do Algerian EFL students resort to the use of the French

lexis in their English writing?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………..

16. Do EFL students borrow some French words and use them in their English

writing?

Yes No

17. If yes, which type of borrowing do they use ?

Substitution Invention Both

18. Do you consider borrowing from French as a problem in EFL students’ writing?

Yes No

19. Do you consider borrowed words from French as errors in EFL students’ writing?

Yes No

20. If they are considered as errors, are they:

Inter-lingual errors Intra-lingual errors

21. In either case, would you, please, explain why?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………….

22. If these errors are intra-lingual, they occur because of:

a. Over-generalization

b. False Analogy

c. Hyper-correction

d. Faulty Categorization

e. Other
…………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Section Four: The Influence of the Use of French Lexis (borrowing) on the Quality

of Algerian EFL Students’ Writing

23. Do you encourage students to use French lexis in their English writing? Would

you, please, explain why?

Yes No

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………….

24. Do you tolerate the use/presence of French words in your students’ written

productions?

Yes No

25. If no, how do you deal with Algerian EFL students’ French lexis’ use (borrowing)

in English texts?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………….

26. According to you, does the use of French lexis (borrowing) have an influence on

Algerian EFL students’ writing quality?

Yes No

27. Is this influence positive or negative?

Positive Negative
 28. How and to what extent does the use of French lexis (borrowing) influence

students’ writing quality? Would you, please, explain.

Great influence Little influence No influence

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

29. In your point of view, how can teachers minimize the influence, or even eradicate

the presence, of the French lexis’ use (mainly borrowing) in Algerian EFL

students’ English writing?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Thank you for your collaboration.

 Résumé

Un grand nombre d'étudiants algériens EFL rencontrent plusieurs problèmes d'écriture en

anglais, en particulier au niveau du lexique. Certains problèmes lexicaux sont

principalement dus à l’interférence de la langue française dans l’écriture anglaise de ces

étudiants. Les étudiants EFL empruntent des mots lexicaux français et les utilisent dans

leurs écritures. En raison de l'ingérence lexicale française, les étudiants algériens EFL ont

tendance à commettre des erreurs lexicales dans leurs écriture en anglais. Sur cette base,

nous avons émis l’hypothèse que la connaissance préalable du lexique français est l’une

des principales sources (interférences) d’erreurs lexicales dans l’écriture en anglais des

étudiants algériens EFL. Nous avons également émis l’hypothèse que si les étudiants

algériens utilisent le lexical des emprunts français, cela aurait une influence négative sur

la qualité de leurs productions écrites en anglais. Pour mener la recherche, un

questionnaire a été conçu et administré à dix professeurs d’expression écrite du

département d’anglais-université de Larbi Ben M’hidi, au cours de l’année universitaire

2018-2019. L’analyse du questionnaire a montré que l’interférence lexicale du français est

l’une des principales causes des erreurs lexicales dans l’écriture anglaise. À la lumière de

cela, la première hypothèse de recherche a été confirmée. L’analyse des résultats a

également montré que le recours aux emprunts français influence négativement la qualité

des textes en anglais des étudiants d’EFL. À la lumière de cela, la deuxième hypothèse

de recherche a également été confirmée.

 ‫ملخص‬

‫ال عج ي‬ ‫خ ص عل ال س‬ ‫اللغ‬ ‫مش كل في تعلم ه‬ ‫اانجلي ي الج ائريين ع‬ ‫اللغ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ي اجه ع د ك ير من‬

‫ال‬ ‫بين اللغ الفرنسي‬ ‫بين اللغ اإنجلي ي‬ ‫اللغ‬ ‫ال ش كل ق تع د لل ق‬ ‫بعض ه‬ ‫اث ء ك ب ت م‪ ،‬حيث أ‬

‫ب للغ‬ ‫الفرنسي أث ء ال ب‬ ‫من اللغ‬ ‫ال فردا‬ ‫ي فعه اس ع‬ ‫ال لب م‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ي س ب في ح‬ ‫ب‬

‫ال ي‬ ‫مج ع من الفرضي‬ ‫تأثيره ‪ ،‬تم إد ا‬ ‫م‬ ‫الصع ب‬ ‫ه‬ ‫أس‬ ‫إل‬ ‫ك ح ل لل ص‬ ‫اانجلي ي ‪.‬‬

‫أ ال عرف ال س ق للغ الفرنسي هي أح ال ص د الرئيسي (لل اخل بين اللغ ين) ل اج اأخ ء ال عج ي في‬ ‫ت ص عل‬

‫من اللغ الفرنسي‬ ‫ال ل لل فردا‬ ‫تأثير اس ع‬ ‫عن م‬ ‫اللغ كلغ أج ي‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ال ب ب للغ اإنجلي ي ل ا‬

‫أس ت‬ ‫ل ع لج ه ا ال ش ل‪ ،‬تم تق يم اس ي‬ ‫ان ج م ال بي‪.‬‬ ‫في ال ب ب للغ اانجلي ي عل مس‬ ‫اس ع ل‬

‫ت ص عل‬ ‫ااس ي‬ ‫ال اسي ‪ . 2019\2018‬ك نت ن‬ ‫للس‬ ‫ج مع العربي بن م ي‬ ‫مس‬ ‫ال ع ير ال بي عل‬

‫اللغ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫الرئيسي لأخ ء اللغ ي في ال ب ل‬ ‫اانجلي ي ه أح اأس‬ ‫بين اللغ الفرنسي‬ ‫أ ال اخل اللغ‬

‫من اللغ‬ ‫ال فردا‬ ‫أ اس ع‬ ‫ال ئج أي‬ ‫ض ء لك‪ ،‬تم تأكي فرضي ال حث اأ ل ‪ .‬ك أ ر‬ ‫عل‬ ‫اإنجلي ي ‪.‬‬

‫ب ا تم تأكي فرضي ال حث ال ني‬ ‫اللغ اإنجلي ي ‪،‬‬ ‫الفرنسي إل اللغ اإنجلي ي ي عف من ج د ال ع ير ال بي ل ا‬

‫أي ً ‪.‬‬