DEDICATION Isaac Orina: My husband who stood by me and encouraged me to pursue the masters degree and tirelessly assisted

me financially through the course. Cynthia, Brian and Kelly: My children, who endured my continuous absence from home in the course of my study. Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Barasa and Mrs. Teresa Nyakerario: My parents who served as pillars of support and strength during my study. May their sincere efforts be rewarded in my plans.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The impetus of this study came from students of St. Josephs Junior Seminary Molo during the years I taught there. The first time was during teaching practice, and secondly upon employment. This is when I came face to face with a serious problem learners had in the use of prepositions. Mr. Isaac Orina, who was an experienced teacher in that school, cajoled me many times to take a study on preposition difficulties.

The other great encouragement came from my thesis supervisors; Dr. Kitetu, Dr. Kimani Njoroge and Dr. Mutiti from Language and Linguistics Department (Egerton University). They consistently supervised my work; guiding me intellectually and morally up to the end of my course. It is clear that without their intellectual input, this thesis would not have been written.

Special thanks go to my parents for encouraging me to pursue a Masters degree and for funding the venture. Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Barasa and Mrs. Teresa Nyakerario. Special thanks also go to my relatives Mr. and Mrs. Murumba, Mr. Julius Motaroki and Robert Kombo for standing by me morally and materially. I also thank the administration, teachers and students of Getuki Secondary School, Bombaba Secondary School, St. Angel Sengera Girls High School and Nyamagwa Girls Secondary School for participating in this study.

Finally, I wish to thank little angels Cynthia, Brian and Kelly for persevering my occasional absence from home during the study.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication..........................................................................................

Acknowledgements............................................................................ ...................... Tableof contents.............................................................................................. ...... List of

Tables................................................................................................. List of

figures................................................................................................ ........ Abbreviations symbols.................................................................................. Definition terms.............................................................................................. of and

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION Introduction Background to the study

.................................................................................. Statement of the problem

................................................................................. Objectives of the study

..................................................................................... Hypotheses of the

study....................................................................................

Justification

of

the

study

................................................................................... Scope andLimitations

...................................................................................... Scope ............................................................................................................

Limitations

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW Literature review................................................................................................. .. Introduction ........................................................................................................... Studies on classification of

prepositions................................................................ Meanings of prepositions under study................................................................ Studies on the Theory of Markedness and Core Grammar .......................... Frequency of use and

markedness Organisation and teaching of English preposition in the secondary school

Curriculum .. Studies conducted locally on the learning of English

prepositions. Theoretical .................................................................................... framework

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY Methodology ........................................................................................................ Introduction .......................................................................................................... Population ............................................................................................................ Sample and Sampling method

............................................................................. Location of study

................................................................................................. Instrumentation .................................................................................................... Data collection phases

......................................................................................... Data collection

procedure.................................................................................

Scoring

procedure

and

Data

analysis................................................................ Interpretation scores.................................................................................. of

CHAPTER

FOUR:

DATA

ANALYSIS

AND

INTERPRETATION Data analysis and interpretation

............................................................................

Introduction........................................................................................ ................... Preposition continuum......................................................................................... Preposition learning in Form 1 class

.................................................................. Preposition learning in Form 2

class............................................................... Preposition learning in Form 3 class

.................................................................. Preposition Continuum from Form 1 to Form 3 .............................................. Preposition performance with untargeted semantic function .. Preposition learning and

markedness...................................................................

Preposition

acquisition

and

frequency

of

semantic

functions.... Summary

CHAPTER

FIVE:

FINDINGS,

CONCLUSIONS

AND

RECOMMENDATION Findings, conclusions and

recommendations. Introduction ......................................................................................................... Findings................ .............................................................................................. Conclusions ........................................................................................................ Recommendations .............................................................................................. Further research

.................................................................................................

Summary . References ............................................................................................................ ...

Appendices ............................................................................................................ .. Written test.. Map of Gucha

District..

ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS

K.I.E: Kenya Institute of Education K.N.E.C: Kenya National Examination Council M.O.E: Ministry of Education F: Form F1: Form one F2: Form two F3: Form three L1: Language one (first language) L2: Language two (second language)

X: Raw score X: Sum scores N: Number of students under study +: In addition to IL: Inter Language SLA: Second Language Acquisition

: Correct preposition and targeted meaning. (high accuracy of

use)

: Incorrect preposition use (no accuracy)

: Correct preposition but untargeted meaning.

DEFINITION OF TERMS First Language This term is used to refer to the first language acquired by a child (Selinker 1972).

Second Language Acquisition (L2) In this thesis, Second language (L2) acquisition was defined as the process of learning another language after the basics of the first language have been acquired, starting at about five years of age and thereafter. (Dulay, H et al (1982)) Prepositions

10

These are invariable forms that fall under phrase level category and function within a Noun Phrase or a Prepositional Phrase in showing relationship between things, people or events.(Radford 1988) Error This refers to a systematic deviation made by learners who have not mastered the rules of the second language (Corder 1974). Performance, Competence In this study, performance referred to the students actual use of their knowledge of the target language in communicating effectively. Competence referred to the knowledge a learner has about the rules of language.

Communicative Competence These terms were used to refer to the ability of learners to start and end conversations using the target language prepositions correctly.

Learning and acquisition In this study, these two terms were used interchangeably to refer to the process by which a learner develops proficiency specifically in the use of prepositions.

Semantic Loading

11

In this study, semantic loading refers to the number of meanings attached to a given preposition. For example, a preposition which conveys fifteen different meanings is more semantically loaded than the one which conveys only two.

Markedness versus Unmarkedness In this thesis, these terms were defined and used in relation to the various major senses of markedness posited by salient linguistics such as Greenberg (1966), Trubetzkoy (1939), Jakobson (1963), Chomsky (1981) and Radford (1988). Thus markedness referred to structures that are peripheral (not governed by general tendencies of a language), restricted in their distribution and rare/uncommon. While unmarkedness referred to structures that are core (accord with general tendencies of a language), widely distributed and more frequent/common in texts. In relation to semantic loading parameter, prepositions that conveyed many meanings were considered more loaded hence unmarked. Whereas those that conveyed few meanings were considered to be less loaded therefore rare hence marked. Easy This term was used to refer to prepositions, which secondary school learners acquire with ease. Greenberg (1966) says that unmarked structures are easier to produce than marked ones.

Difficult

12

This term referred to prepositions that secondary school learners acquired with difficulty. Greenberg (1966).

Interlanguage The term was used to refer to the structured system, which the learner constructs at any given time in his/her L2 development (Selinker 1972).

Frequency This term was used to refer to structures that occurred in a wider range of contexts. (Lehrer 1985). In this thesis, prepositions that conveyed many semantic functions were considered to be more frequent than those that conveyed few meanings.

13

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION English language is the medium of instruction in most institutions of learning in Kenya. The learners are guided through the use of correct elements of speaking and writing in order to communicate effectively. Towards achieving the communicative competence in learners, the use of appropriate prepositions becomes crucial. This is because prepositions control all the circumstantial relations in any given utterance. Due to this importance of prepositions, this study was carried out with an aim of establishing the perceived difficulties in the use of the English prepositions and further finding out whether the semantic functions of such items determined their acquisition and use.

14

The correct use of the English prepositions is vital because inability to use these items, impacts negatively on the learners ability to communicate. In this thesis, chapter one was an introductory chapter and outlined the nature of the problem in this study, the objectives and hypotheses that guided the researcher. The chapter underscored the various theoretical frameworks that gave an impetus to the study of the problem; especially the Theory of Markedness in Universal Grammar and Second Language Acquisition.

Chapter two was a review on the work of scholars on second language acquisition to establish the source and cause of difficulty in mastering the English language. Specifically, the study dealt with categorization of prepositions and their circumstantial roles and the general organization of the secondary school curriculum in the teaching of English prepositions. It also highlighted the scholarly work on issues of Markedness in relation to second language acquisition. Also the findings of scholars both from within and outside Kenya were reviewed.

Chapter three covered the methodology of the research. Mainly the sample, location of study and data collection phases and analysis.

Chapter four presented an actual analysis and the interpretation of the raw data through descriptive and inferential analysis.

15

Finally, Chapter five outlined the use of the findings from the study and the recommendations given.

1.1

Background to the study

The background to this study was the growing interest that had attracted many language teachers, educationists and linguists on the use of prepositions as a part of speech. The main aim of this research was to establish the perceived difficulties in the use of prepositions and to ascertain whether these difficulties are caused by unmarkedness/ markedness relations. To begin with,

prepositions are defined as invariable forms that fall under the phrase level category and function within a noun phrase or prepositional phrase. For example: The ball is on the grass. (on the grass is a preposition showing surface). The area of prepositions has been of interest especially to various stakeholders in the field of education in Kenya due to poor performance by students in the national examinations. Similarly, language teachers have also been alarmed by the incompetence of students to use prepositions. The Ministry of Education (M.O.E) in conjunction with the Kenya National Examination Council (K.N.E.C) (1999) reports cite the fact that prepositions are very complex parts of speech to be handled by learners, as quoted below: One of the difficulties of the English language is in use of prepositions (K.N.E.C, 1989:40).

16

In addition to this observation, poor performance in the area of prepositions has been observed in the consequent years as noted in the report written by the M.O.E, K.I.E and K.N.E.C in 1999.

Schmied (1996) found out that some grammatical areas were problematic even for advanced students. These are; conjunctions, relative constructions, function words, prepositions and tenses. For example; [GRPREP1] The spirits of the ancestors were called upon to _________ the ritual. (join in/ join with/ join at) (Schmied. (1996: 6) In addition,Pemagbi, Jibril, P (1990) says that idiomatic expressions and prepositions are the most difficult grammatical areas.

Similarly, K.I.E (1987) in their handbook for English teachers, strongly indicated prepositions as one of the intricate areas handled by learners. Despite the above observation s, very few studies have been done to establish the possible causes and this is how the present research came in.

17

It is not only the educationists who had observed the difficulties in the use of prepositions but also scholars. Mutiti (2000) ascertained preposition problems among L1 (source) language speakers. He said that L1 interfered with the preposition acquisition in the second language. Mutiti (ibid) did not specifically establish the learnability problems as indicated in his work.

Furthermore, Fitikides (1963) observed the general difficulties that prepositions posed to source learners of English as a second language. This was discussed in detail in section 2.4. In studying the common errors in English, Jowitt D, and Nnamonu, M (1985: 87) say that, the preposition difficulties are real and the various examples given are the representation of errors commonly made by foreign students. Nevertheless, they did not look into the possible reasons underlying such predicted difficulties. Besides Fitikides (ibid), another study in the area of prepositions was done by White (1986) who after carrying out a research on stranding, earlier done by Goodluck and Gullici (1986) exclusively using English speaking children, recommended another investigation about preposition stranding in relation to the issues of markedness/unmarkedness. The present research particularly looked at the general use of prepositions by secondary school students in relation to markedness and unmarkedness relations.

18

Apart from preposition stranding, Goodluck et al, found out that prepositions generally posed problems among foreign learners of English. A foreign student has to know: (a) Whether in any construction a preposition is required or not, and (b) Which preposition to use when one is required. Many words used as prepositions can also be used as conjunctions and adverb. For example, when referring to temporal situations like He arrived on Saturday ON is expressing adverb of time. (We cooked) before (the guest arrived.) (before independent clauses (we cooked) and (the guests arrived) Mwangi, H (2004:127) a co-ordinating conjunction joining the

According to Eckman (1977), language is only difficult to learn due to the issue of markedness and unmarkedness. Despite the observations made by various scholars, linguists and local bodies responsible for education in Kenya like MOE, KIE, KNEC, concerning preposition difficulties, few have carried out research to establish the difficulties. Thus, the researcher found it necessary to go to the field and carry out a research to establish the cause of preposition difficulties and consequently investigate whether the issues of markedness/unmarkedness are the

predicators of such difficulties.

19

Statement of the problem Learners conceptualization of prepositions in second language acquisition of English is problematic given that prepositions encode several semantic functions. This research is aimed at ascertaining whether there is an order of difficulty that may be correlated with markedness issues. Objectives of the study The following were the main objectives of the research: 1. To establish the relationship between semantic functions and acquisition of English prepositions. 2. To find out whether markedness/unmarkedness determine the acquisition of English prepositions. 3. To investigate the continuum in the acquisition of English prepositions. RESEARCH QUESTIONS 1. Is there a relationship between semantic functions and the acquisition of prepositions? 2. Do Markedness/Unmarkedness relations determine the acquisition of prepositions? 3. Does the acquisition of English prepositions follow a specific

20

Continuum?

Justification of the study A poor command in the use of prepositions affects the students ability to communicate the intended meaning. The correct communicative situation of a given utterance is pegged on the meaning conveyed by a preposition. The research findings of this study were crucial in highlighting the nature of the learning order of the English prepositions by secondary schools students. This would help the language teacher and the learner to reflect on the observed areas of difficulty in the use of prepositions and come up with strategies on how to improve on their mastery. Corder (1981) says that the language teachers decisions about the teaching process should, to a large extent, be informed by knowledge of the subject matter they are teaching, (that is, the target language) and by the knowledge of a unique group of learners with whom they are working and of the language learning process. Thus, the findings of this study would help the English language teacher understand the learning order of the English prepositions. This would in turn serve as feedback to the language teacher in focusing on the difficult prepositions by integrating learning procedures in order to facilitate correct preposition use. The findings would lead to

21

greater teacher awareness of the acquisition of prepositions and thus become sensitive to the specific learners preposition needs.

In the field of Second Language Acquisition, the findings were valuable in predicting the development of SLA in the area of prepositions, White (1977). In addition, the acquisition order of the English prepositions is also valuable in Error Analysis. The findings are expected to be used by researchers in investigating prepositional errors. That is, learners may tend to have many errors in prepositions which are difficult for them to acquire.

Similarly, to discourse analysts, the research findings are valuable in explaining the reasons for variations in discourse. The findings will also be important in facilitating the learning of English language as an official language and medium of instruction in Kenya.

The results are also expected to be of use to curriculum developers. The findings will help in sequencing preposition structures in the syllabus in accordance with the learners needs. This will in turn help the writers of English textbooks to organise the preposition content that suits the learners needs. This will also lead to an improvement in the language teaching methodologies.

22

Last but not least, currently, in Kenya no studies have been carried out to establish the acquisition order of the English prepositions by secondary school learners. The findings of this study will therefore be important to language teachers, curriculum developers and learners. The results provided an insight on how to facilitate the acquisition of prepositions in secondary schools.

Scope and limitations Scope The study was limited to secondary school learners. The Form 1, Form 2 and Form 3 students were used as the respondents. The secondary school English teaching curriculum organises the teaching of prepositions and their possible meanings in Form 1 and Form 2 classes. One word prepositions are covered in Form 1, while more than one word prepositions are covered in Form 2. The Form 3 preposition content is on distinguishing a preposition from a connector or an adverb. The Form 3 content thus tests the competence of the learner in the mastery of prepositions after learning prepositions in Form 1 and Form 2. Therefore in this research, the selection of Form 1, Form 2 and Form 3 learners was appropriate in investigating the use of prepositions.

In terms of geographical location, the study was carried out in Gucha District in four secondary schools. The selection of this study was appropriate and could be in any school teaching English

23

as a Second Language. This is because the study did not consider L1 as a variable, therefore it could have been in any secondary school in Kenya. In terms of the intellectual area, the study was confined to Second Language Acquisition (SLA) in the area of Grammar; specifically prepositions. The research sought to establish the learning order in the acquisition of English prepositions by using differentials in English preposition meaning. The study also sought to establish whether the learners could use prepositions correctly in various syntactical contexts. Fourteen one word prepositions were tested. These were ON, IN, AT, FOR, FROM, WITH, TO, OVER, BESIDE, DESPITE, BENEATH, BEHIND, AMONG and UNDERNEATH. Two more than one word prepositions were also studied: IN SPITE OF and IN FRONT OF. These prepositions were adapted from secondary school learners English textbooks for example Mwangi, (2005), Bukenya, (2003), Vikiru, (2005) among others.

The researcher used variability of meaning in

the English

preposition to study the use of prepositions. The prepositional meanings considered were related to: (i) PLACE {Locative meanings} (a) Dimension When prepositions are used to indicate place, it is done in relation to the dimensional properties whether subjectively

24

or objectively conceived ,of the location concerned. Prepositions like IN, ON, AT can be used to show dimensionless area, onedimensional area, two-

dimensional area or a three -dimensional area. (b) Positive position and direction. Prepositions such as AT,TO,ON,IN can be used to show positive position and direction in relation to space. Simple position is a static location and direction is movement with respect to a destination ( c) Relative position. Prepositions may express the relative position of two objects or groups of objects. Prepositions like OVER and UNDERNEATH tend to indicate direct vertical relations or spatial proximity. The same case applies to BENEATH. (d) Relative destination This is movement towards a specific destination. For example prepositions such as BENEATH,

UNDERNEATH, TO, IN FRONT OF, BEHIND,OVER express relative destination. (e) Passage With verbs of motion, prepositions may express the idea of PASSAGE (that is movement towards and then away

from a place), as well as destination. for example AMONG,OVER, BEHIND,UNDERNEATH, BENEATH,

25

IN and ON as locative prepositions are also used with a sense of passage to show surface or volume. (f) Direction When prepositions like TO, IN, ON,FROM, IN FRONT OF, OVER , UNDERNEATH, BENEATH and BEHIND are used with verbs of motion, they make a group of prepositions expressing movement with reference to an axis or directional path. When the goal is physical such as destination, such prepositions may imply movement in the direction of goal. (g) Orientation. Prepositions can be used in the static sense of orientation this refers to two things being spatially related : Viz a point of orientation at which the speaker is standing. The preposition OVER can combine the meaning of beyond ( on the far side of) with no specific information of dimension type. Prepositions like ON, BEHIND, IN FRONT OF , BENNEATH, UNDERNEATH , BESIDE are used orientation ally with reference to an axis. (h) Resultative meaning: Prepositions can have a static resultative meaning indicating the state of having reached a destination. For example ON, OVER. (i) Pervasive meaning

26

Pervasive meaning is either static or motional. The axis type of prepositions like OVER, UNDERNEATH,

BENEATH are used in the pervasive sense. ( j) Metaphorical or abstract use of place prepositions. Place prepositions have abstract meanings which are clearly related through metaphorical connection, to their locative uses for example vertical direction abstract scale BENEATH vertical direction subjection UNDERNEATH stating point / destination originator / recipient FROM/ TO. Relative position- abstract relation between participants AMONG Resultative meaning physical abstract OVER,ON Ratio / comparison TO, FOR Level of ability AT Support FOR Possession / ingredients WITH Reaction, stimulus - TO,AT Accompaniment WITH Subject matter ON

2. TIME (temporal meanings ): Prepositions show two dimension types of time: a. Point of time;

27

AT - is used for points of time and idiomatically for holiday periods. b. Period of time ON,IN are used with phrases referring to days to indicate period of time. c. Duration ; Duration is mainly expressed by FOR which means all through. FROMTo is a pair of prepositions whose locative meaning is transferred to duration. 3. Contingency meanings; PURPOSE, INTENDED DESTINATION, RAESON. The phrases of purpose or destination answer the questions why what , where .for or who for?. The preposition mainly used to show such meanings is FOR. Prepositions like IN SPITE OF and DESPITE show concession and contrast. 4. Process meanings; a. RECIPIENT , GOAL , TARGET: FOR , AT, TO, are used for intended recipient equated with an indirect object. AT is used to express intended goal or target . b. SOURCE, ORIGIN : FROM The converse of to (= goal ) is from (= source) FROM is used with reference to a place of origin. c. MEANS , AGENTIVE , INSTRUMENT

28

d.Preposition like WITH can be used to show manner or like. WITH may also express instrumental meaning . All the above circumstantial roles were captured in the test. (See section 3.5) of this thesis. Limitations One of the limitations of this study is that the researcher focused on the variability of meaning expressed by a preposition and not the form of a preposition. Out of the sixteen prepositions under study, fourteen were simple prepositions, that is, consisting of only one word while two were complex that is consisting of more than one word. Greenberg (1966) says that forms that are shorter are used more frequently than longer ones because they require lower cognitive accessibility. The researcher overcame this limitation by only focusing on the semantic function of the preposition since the objective of the study was how semantic functions of prepositions determine their acquisition.

The other limitation of this research was that the research investigated the difficulty in the acquisition of preposition in relation to markedness theory and Selinkers Interlanguage theory only. Selinkers Interlanguage theory was used because the study focused on establishing if there is a defined continuum in the acquisition of prepositions and how markedness ,universals,

contribute to interlanguage development.

29

Selinkers [1972] Interlanguage theory also had its own limitations as used in this study . The relationship that exists between the input and the learners internal processing mechanisms was ignored .The researcher overcame this limitation by considering the concept of strategy not as hidden mental process but as a device for relating the input to existing knowledge on one hand and relating existing knowledge to output on the other.

The theory used in this research that is, the Markedness Theory in Universal Grammar Chomsky (1981) had one limitation. Kellerman (1984) points out that various criteria have been used to explicate markedness core versus peripheral, typological frequency, complexity, simplicity, explicitness, unmarked by one researcher and marked by another. Ellis R (ibid) says that the criticisms levelled on theory of markedness and Core Grammar suggest that at the moment, its explanatory power may be limited, but it still remains crucial in prediction of SLA order of development.

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction This study focused on the ability of learners to identify the correct use of a given preposition in a sentence. It also looked at

30

markedness and unmarkedness as predictors of correct/incorrect use of the prepositions. Therefore, the literature review that was done in this study was based on the categorisation of prepositions on the basis of their encoded circumstantial roles. It also dealt with a review on scholars work on the parameters of

markedness/unmarkedness.

2.2 Studies on classification of prepositions Leech, G (1975) classified the English prepositions on the basis of form; that is simple (consist of one word for example, about, to, by, after, on, along etc) and complex (consists of more than one word for example, according to, due to, by means of, etc). Within the simple and complex prepositions, Leech (ibid) sub-classifies prepositions on the basis of the functions they play. These functions overlap making mastery of prepositions hard. According to Leech, the following are the sub-groups of prepositions: which are based on function: (a) At type prepositions. In this case, place is seen as a point for example; We went to the hotel. For example to, at, .. (b) On type prepositions: the place is also seen as a surface for example, He fell on (to) the floor. For example on, onto, .. (c) In- type prepositions: the place is seen as an area usually of ground or territory enclosed by boundaries, for example. They crowded into the streets. For example in, onto, ..

31

(d) Inside and outside are sometimes used instead of in (to) of, for example. We went / stayed inside the building.

When overlap arises in the use of prepositions, there are changes in meaning. For example: 1. My car is at cottage. 2. Theres a new roof on the cottage. 3. There is one bed in the cottage. Consider the following 4. (a) There are potholes on the road (b) We sat on the grass short) (c) We sat in the grass (grass is long) Surface (surfacegrass is Point Surface Volume

Clark (1980) hypothesised that the acquisition of the prepositions in, on and under would be in that order because of the influence of such non-linguistic cognitive constraints. This claim was qualified on different accounts by Parlemo (1974) indicated that part of the childs response set was determined by functional relations between nouns (for example, Cars normally go on roads). Slobin (1973) had systematically compared the acquisition of locative expressions in English, Latin, Serbo-Croatian and Turkish. Specifically they found the same general order of development as:

32

IN ON UNDER BESIDE BETWEEN BACK FRONT The above prepositions will be acquired in the above order when learned with featured objects. The above order changed when learners learned the prepositions under study with non-featured objects. The learning order was. IN ON UNDER BESIDE BETWEEN FRONT BACK

Learners will first know how to use the preposition IN than BETWEEN in that order. The nature of the order reveals that prepositions are acquired in the above respective order due to nonlinguistic constraints. The above nature is characterised on the basis of functional locative circumstances which relate to space, position, direction and distance. Prepositions are used to realise nearly all types of circumstances like place and time. The circumstances are usually additional gratuitous information about a situation. Circumstances are subject to constraints of semantic compatibility, that is, prepositions acquire meaning according to the context in which they are found. Prepositions always occur in phrases. They are usually followed by another item, most often a noun/ a pronoun. Since the preposition

33

is the primary realisation of the circumstantial meaning; the following table attempts to classify the various meaning categories in the use of prepositions.

Table 1: Classification of Prepositions By Form Prepositions One-word preposition e.g. IN, ON,TO Two or three-words preposition e.g. IN SPITE OF, IN FRONT OF

34

By Function

PLACE MEANINGS) a) Dimension b) Positive direction

(LOCATIVE

position

and

c) Relative position d) Relative destination e) Passage f) Direction g) Orientation h) Resultative i) Pervasive j) Metaphorical / abstract scale

TIME MEANINGS )

(TEMPORAL

a) Point of time b) Period of time c) Duration CONTINGENCY MEANING purpose , intended destination , reason, concession, contrast. PROCESS MEANINGS

35

a) recipient , goal , target b) source , origin c) means , manner, agentive, instrument.

(Content adapted from Leech, 1975; the table by the researcher) The above classification is discussed below:

In this study, the researcher studied fourteen one-word prepositions ( IN, ON, UNDERNEATH, FOR, FROM, BENEATH, AT, TO, AMONG, OVER, DESPITE, BESIDE, BEHIND, WITH), and two , three - word (IN SPITE OF, and IN FRONT OF). This study focused mainly on whether the learners could supply an appropriate preposition in the sentence given . The appropriateness of the preposition chosen mainly depended on the meaning of the preposition which is largely contextual . In terms of functional classification of prepositions, the semantic label LOCATIVE subsumed circumstances relating to space, position, direction , distance (see table 1). All the sixteen prepositions under study tested the circumstantial roles shown in section 1.6.1 of this thesis.

36

Similarly, the semantic label TEMPORAL enclosed meanings of time, position, duration and PROCESS relate to the question (How?). The how of an event or action may encompass a number of different types of process, namely; manner, means which the question answers By what means? Instrument process answers the specific question With what? while the Agentive process answer to the question By whom?: Finally,

CONTINGENCY circumstance has subtypes that express various kinds of contingent circumstance, including, cause, reason, purpose, result, condition and concession. These contingencies are related but differ only in perspective. That is cause, reason, purpose - all ask the question why?

The use of prepositions is largely depended on the context in which they are used. A single syntactic unit may be used with different prepositions depending on the context or the intended meaning one wishes to express. In this study, the learners were expected to fill in the blank spaces in the sentences with an appropriate preposition while relating to the linguistic rules (i.e. the input ) they have internalized on prepositional meanings which is mainly from instruction. The following section is a detailed description of the meanings each preposition under study conveys.

37

Meanings of Prepositions under Study Markedness as used in this research refers to items which are more semantically loaded hence peripheral.

The more meanings a preposition encodes, the more semantically loaded it is; while the few the meanings it has, the less semantically loaded it becomes. Thus semantic loading has been used as parameter to gauge whether a preposition is marked or unmarked. The following is an explanation of the various possible meanings conveyed by the above sixteen prepositions under study. The meanings are based on function, and not the structure of a preposition.

The following illustrations are from Quirk and GreenBaum (1973:146-165) some are adaptations by the researcher. The prepositional meanings would be identified through the learners use of the preposition in a given test item. A correct preposition would correlate with a given semantic function depending on the context of use. The researcher derived the prepositional meaning from the way the leaner used the preposition in the given test item.

Chomsky (1981) points out that the reason why a learner selects item X and not Y is an indicator of the availability of such an item in the learners language data. Consequently a selection of a misinformed / wrong preposition or no preposition at all is also an

38

indicator of the linguistic experience a leaner has at that point in time.

The following is a description of variability in meaning of the prepositions under study .

1. On 1. SUBJECT MATTER: He spoke on Drug Abuse. 2. AREA (two-dimensional): Put a new roof on the house. 3. ATTACHED TO: The fruits are on the trees. 4. ON TOP OF: The cup is on the table. 5. DIRECTION: The stone fell on the ground. 6. AREA (one dimension): Write on this page. 7. POSITION: The chalk is on the floor. 8. SURFACE: He made patterns on the window. 9. TIME (when): The kiosk is closed on Mondays. 10. RELATIVE DESTINATION: She fell on the ground. 11. RECIPIENT: She used her left hand on her maid. 12. REASON: He was congratulated on his success. 13. RESULTATIVE: At last we were on the hill. 14. ORIENTATION: He lives on the rough road. 15. PATRONY: (metaphorical): I will be on you this week.

39

2. In 1 MANNER: He replied in an offensive way. 2. COMPARISON: He is like his brother in one respect. 3. POSITION (the three-dimensional objects): There is a bed in the room. 4. POSITION (two-dimensional objects): The sheep are in the field. 5. DIRECTION: She ran in the opposite direction. 6. AREA: He appeared in the window. 7. IDENTITY: John was born in Kenya. 8. DESTINATION: He dived in the water. 9. METAPHOR: Mary is in difficulties. 10. TIME (duration): He is to come in two months time. 11. REFERENCE: In regard to your letter...... 12. QUASI-AGENT: Salome is interested in English. 13. RESULT: He succeeded in the end. 14. LEVEL OF ABILITY: She is good in games. 15. ACCOMPANIMENT: He went in the company of three. 16. TIME (LENGTH): She completed the work in two minutes.

3. At 1. POINT (LOCATION): My van is at the garage. 2. POSITION: He is at the window. 3. TIME (Point): Mary left at noon. 4. TARGET (Goal): He aimed the gun at him. 5. PLACE (attending): John is at school.

40

6. RESULT: We arrived at last. 7. REACTION (stimulus): The teacher was alarmed at Johns behaviour. 8. LEVEL OF ABILITY: She is bad at remembering faces. 9. DIRECTION: He is pointing at you.

4. To 1. DIRECTION (path): She went to the house. 2. AGAINST: She bent to the wall. 3. RECIPIENT (actual): He gave a gift to his wife. 4. REACTION (emotional): To my annoyance, they rejected the offer. 5. GOAL (intended): She lent the pen to me (recipient). 6. COMPARISON/RATIO: W e won by three goals to nil. 7. TIME (end of a period): The show will start from Monday to Saturday 8. COMPLETION OF ACTION: Jean fell to the floor. 9. MOVEMENT (specific direction): Drive to the city. 10. METAPHORICAL: I may be his daughter, but not to his manners. 11. PERCEPTUAL RESPONSES: It looked to me like a dream.

5. For 1. DURATION: The guests are here for two months. 2. PURPOSE: He does anything for a living.

41

3. DESTINATION (intended): They ran for shelter. 4. RECIPIENT (intended): He made a doll for his daughter. 5. SUPPORT: You are for the plan. I am for the idea. 6. COMPARISON: He is a bit too old for you. 7. RESPECT (STANDARD): She is a bit too old for you. 8. REASON: He was jailed for defiling a minor.

6. From 1. SOURCE: This book is from John. 2. ORIGIN: I come from Kenya. 3. STARTING POINT: From Monday to Friday. 4. MATERIAL CAUSE: They died from lack of food. 5. SEPARATION / DISTINCTION: Can you tell butter from Margarine. 6. METAPHORICAL: From grace to grass. 7. MOVEMENT: The boy came from the village just the other day. 8. PERCEPTION: From the look of things, this child will fail her exam.

7. With 1. Manner: We were received with a smile.

42

2. INSTRUMENT: The screen was broken with a stone. 3. COMPANY: Mary will come with Ben. 4. OPINION: Go with public trend for safety. 5. POSSESSION: I saw a man with long black beard. 6. CONTENTS / INGREDIENTS: The food is filled with water. 7. REFERENCE: With reference to your letter dated 8. REACTION: I am disappointed with you.

8. Beside 1. RELATIVE, POSITION: Sit beside him. 2. ORIENTATION: The house is beside the hill. 3. METAPHORICAL SUPPORT: Go ahead am beside you.

9. Over 1. POSITION: He hid the keys over the door. 2. DESTINATION: The sheet was drawn over him. 3. MOVEMENT/ PASSAGE: Rogers climbed over the fence. 4. ORIENTATION: The man lives over the hill. 5. RESULTATIVE: At least we are over the hill. 6. PERVASIVE (STATIC): The leaves lay thick over the ground. 7. PERVASIVE (MOTION): They splashed water over me.

10. Despite 1. CONCESSION: I like him despite his faults. 2. CONTRAST: Despite the rains we went home.

43

3. IRRESPECTIVE / WITH ALL: He is very weak despite eating good food.

11. In spite of 1. FOR ALL: I admire him in spite of his faults. 2. CONCESSION: I agree with him in spite of the quarrels.

12. Underneath 1. COVERED (COMPLETELY): The victims are underneath the rubble. 2. PASSAGE: The coin rolled underneath the chairs. 3. RELATIVE POSITION: The coin is underneath the tin. 4. RELATIVE DESTINATION: When it rained they rushed underneath the tress. 5. VERTICAL DIRECTION: (Abstract scale): We are underneath you.

13. Beneath 1. ORIENTATION: The shop is beneath the butchery. 2. RELATIVE POSITION: The people are beneath the rubble. 3. VERTICAL DIRECTION: (Abstract scale): Such manners are beneath him.

14. Behind

44

1. RELATIVE DESTINATION: I dashed behind the bush to hide. 2. PASSAGE: John ran behind the bushes. 3. ORIENTATION: The servants live behind the valley. 4. RELATIVE SUPPORT (Metaphorical): Go ahead with the plan I am right behind you.

5. PART AND PARCEL: The head boy is behind the strike.

15. In front of 1. ORIENTATION: The butchery is in front of the hotel. 2. RELATIVE POSITION: There is a van in front of us. 3. DIRECTION (VERTICAL): The teacher is in front of the house.

16. Among 1. PASSAGE: Njeri is dancing among people. 2. RELATIVE POSITION: He is standing among friends. 3. ONE OF THEM: Kenya is among Tanzania, Uganda and Sudan. The table below summarises the above information.

45

Table 2: Description of prepositions according to variability of meaning .

ASPECT

NUMBER OF MEANINGS (SEMANTIC LOADING PARAMETERS)

ASPECT

NUMBER OF MEANINGS (SEMANTIC LOADING PARAMETERS)

IN ON TO AT FOR

16 15 11 9 8

UNDERNEATH BEHIND BESIDE DESPITE BENEATH

5 5 3 3 3

46

WITH FROM OVER

8 8 7

IN FRONT OF AMONG

3 2

It is worth noting that all of the above meanings were captured in the test item in the study. The research used these circumstantial meanings to formulate the test for the respondents with an aim of investigating meaning differentials as a reason towards preposition difficulties. In the test (see appendix (i)), each task tested on a single aspect (preposition) in which the learner had to use a given preposition correctly to show the contextual meaning provided in each sentence.

In each task all the diverse meanings of the same preposition were tested (see section 2.2.1 of this thesis) where the learner was to identify prepositions as expressing either locative, temporal, contingency or process meanings (see table 1)

Studies on the theory of markedness in universal grammar and second language acquisition Several scholars have done research on how the Theory of Markedness and Core Grammar predicts the acquisition in second language. Some of such studies are discussed below.

47

It is worth noting that according to Chomsky (ibid) the core rules are unmarked and thus easy to learn whereas the peripheral rules are marked thus learned with some difficulties. Rutherford (1982) in predicting whether markedness scale is able to predict the order of development; provides a number of examples of unmarked and marked rules for English. The criterion of markedness that he applies is whether one pair of rules or features is more grammatically restricted than the other. Rutherford (ibid) says that the adjectives big, long and fast are unmarked in relation to small, short and slow because they occur in both declarative and interrogative sentences, while the latter occur only in declarative sentences. (they can not be used in interrogative sentences) where syntax is concerned, Rutherford (ibid) gives an example of declarative versus interrogative sentences. The former are considered to be unmarked because they can be used to form both statements and questions. He can run fast. He can run fast? (said with rising intonation) (Ellis 1985: 194). While the latter can be used only to form questions, in general, unmarked rules are thought to be less complex than marked ones. Wode (1976) justifies the claim that markedness scale is able to predict the order of development in Second Language Acquisition as said by Rutherford (1982) and Gass (1989). Wode (ibid) used

48

the acquisition of L2 negation to justify his claim. In his study he established that the unmarked or the less marked items are learned early and the more marked items later. The present study aimed at identifying which prepositions are learned early and which ones are learned late by the secondary school learners.

Rutherford (1982) provides an interesting illustration of how markedness factor can influence SLA. He shows that following acquisitional order for WH-questions reported in Burt and Dulay (1982) can be explained by Markedness Theory. He says simple questions can be considered unmarked in relation to embedded questions (I dont know what this is?). Therefore according to him, simple singular questions are learnt first then followed by singular embedded ones. Stowel (1981) used the Theory of Markedness and in Universal Grammar and observed that the unmarked word order in English is headfirst and specifier first and the marked one is head-last and specifier last. For example (here in-complement + Head preposition/Radford (1988: 274).

According to the Stowel (ibid) the complement + preposition order illustrated in the above sentence is highly marked and hence subject to heavy restrictions on its use. Forms such as thereafter, herein, whereby are stylistically highly marked (that is they are only used in particular registers such as legal language). There are also severe syntactic restrictions on the constructions; only a

49

locative pronoun like there, here, and where can be used as a preceding complement of a preposition. There is also lexical restriction (that is restrictions on the choice of prepositions which precede the locative complement. For example we can have thereby, there in, there to, there after, and there from but less freely *there under, or *there over, *there inside, *there behind.(* means rare prepositional complement).

Related to the area of preposition, Gulluci and Goodluck (1986) studied the development of English-speaking childrens ability to comprehend prepositions-initial and preposition-final relative clauses. Learners were exclusively exposed to the prepositionalfinal forms around them. For example (John sees the donkey which the camel pushes the zebra to final form) [the example is the

researchers] English favours the preposition final forms than the preposition initial forms. For example (John sees the donkey to which the camel pushes the zebra - initial form). According to this study, learners found problems comprehending the preposition initial forms. The initial form (..to which. ) is generally considered to be unmarked, normal form. While the preposition final form (.which ..to) to be marked. Nonetheless, modern English favours the marked prepositional final forms. Gulluci and Goodluck (ibid) says this poses as one of the main difficulties among foreign learners of English as regards preposition use. They thus conclude that the case of acquisition

50

sequence may follow the dictates of the speech forms the child hears around him rather than the order predicted by a progression from unmarked for marked forms.

Frequency of use and markedness Haspelmath (1999) says that frequency of use with regard to meaningful categories is a variable that make five of the markedness senses. Frequency of use is a property of parole or performance, not of language structure or competence, and throughout the 20th century most linguists have shown little interest in explaining structure in terms of use. Frequency is not just one correlate of markedness, but in fact a major determinant of markedness effects in morphosyntax.

Greenberg (1996: 65: 69) noted that much of morphosyntactic and lexical markedness can be explained by frequency of use. Greenberg (ibid) emphasised the importance of frequency for markedness asymmetries, and he was the first to assign it an explanatory role in this context. Also Baayen et al. (1997: 14) explicitly defined marked forms as the forms that occur less frequently. In explaining text frequency, Greenberg (ibid) says that If tokens of a typologically marked value of a category occur at a certain frequency in a given text sample, then tokens of the unmarked value will occur at least as frequently in the text sample (Croft 2003: 110).

51

Waugh (1982: 307) pointed out that the only way in which the relevant contexts can be defined is with reference to frequency of use. Mayerthaler (1981: 136 - 140)claims that both unmarkedness as morphological difficulty and conceptual unmarkedness explain high frequency in texts, without providing a mechanism. Such a mechanism is provided by Lehrer (1985: 399) (and similarly Waugh 1982: 302): the unmarked member may occur in a wider range of contexts and will also be more frequent.

In Greenbergs (1966: 32) figures, the singular occurs in 75 85% of the cases, the plural in 15 25%. From Leech (2001) for gradable antonyms in English, it shows that unmarked gradable adjectives are between twice and six times as frequent as their marked counterparts. For example unmarked member (long) = frequency (392)/ marked member (short) = frequency (198); Ratio unmarked/marked 2.0 (Leech et al. 2001, per million word tokens).

Consequently, Fenk Oczlon (1991: 373 - 381) in explaining the role of frequency in language acquisition, processing and leveling, noted that a category that is used more frequently will of course be easier to process in a number of ways than a rarely used category. In support of Oczlon (ibid), Givon (1991) says that conceptual difficulty is apparently the cause for the lower frequency of a category. He also states that structures that are processed with

52

more difficulty and acquired later by children is probably due to their lower frequency.

In this research, frequency of prepositional meanings played a great role in establishing the relationship between semantic functions and the acquisition and use of English prepositions. A preposition that conveyed many semantic functions was considered to be frequent in the learners language data than the one that conveyed few semantic functions.

It is worth noting that though some of the above studies were not the focus of this study in terms of preposition use, they show that language universals may influence how L2 grammars are formed. They thus give a background to the use of Markedness Theory in Universal Grammar as suitable theoretical framework for this study. From the studies above, there is evidence that universals place constraints on interlanguage, that acquisition may follow the hierarchical ordering of features and that unmarked or less marked features are acquired before marked or more marked features. In relation to this rules, the present research sought to identify the difficulty order in the use of prepositions by secondary school learners. The prepositional use was based on the differentials in the meanings of the English prepositions.

53

Organization and teaching of English prepositions in the secondary school curriculum

The approved English textbooks in secondary schools address the preposition content in line with the English syllabus. The English syllabus organises the teaching of the English prepositions at different levels of learning. This is briefly illustrated below. Form 1- Prepositions (e.g. in, on, at) one word prepositions. Form 2- Prepositions (e.g. in spite of) more than one word prepositions. Form 3- Distinguishing prepositions from connectors and adverb particles. Form 4- Functions of prepositions in sentences. A brief review on how the English textbooks present the above preposition content is discussed below.

Formal instruction plays a very important role in second language acquisition. This is an important issue because it addresses the question of the role played by environmental factors in SLA. Language pedagogy has traditionally operated on the assumption that grammar can be taught. The way instructions take place

affects the route of SLA in the classroom. Language instruction has a purpose of teaching the learner the formal systems of L2 in particular grammar. Selinkers (1972). Interlanguage theory suggested five processes that operated in

54

interlanguage. The third of these processes focused on transfer of training. That is, a rule enters the learners system as a result of instruction.

In instructional methods, an assumption is made that focusing on linguistic form aids the acquisition of grammatical knowledge or that raising learners consciousness about the nature of target

language rules helps the learner to internalize them. In this regard the researcher found it necessary to comment on the instructional materials especially how English text books approach the prepositional content

(a) Form 1 class content on English preposition. The form 1 class English textbooks have been written by various established writers. For example, Excelling in English (Mwangi 2005), New Integrated English. (Gathumbi (2002), Advancing in English, (Vikiru. (2005) and Bukenya. (2003), Headstart Secondary English. These are the approved textbooks for the teaching of the English language in secondary schools.

The above writers address the content of one word prepositions and their contextual meanings from almost a similar perspective. Efforts have been made to mention the examples of one word prepositions. The ones mentioned commonly are: ON, OVER, DOWN, THROUGH, UP, ROUND, INTO, TOWARDS, IN, AT,

55

TO, FROM, DURING, SINCE, BY, FOR., ALONG, the researcher observed that the coverage on examples of the one word preposition was deficient because the writers focused on only a few of them as mentioned above.

The researcher also observed that, writers addressed the coverage of contextual roles of prepositions very lightly. It is only Mwangi (2005) who attempts a pictorial presentation that shows the meanings of a few prepositions. Other writers, as mentioned above, do not make such an attempt. The common meanings covered by all the four authors that is, Mwangi (2005), Vikiru (2005),

Gathumbi.(2002) and Bukenya. (2003) are as follows: Direction ((towards) on, in, from, to, down) Position (on, in, at, under, over, between, among) Passage (over, through, into, round) Time (on, at, during, since, from, for) Movement (by, from, on, to) Place (at, in, on, in, under, along,) Transport (by, in, on, off, into, on)

Conclusively, it is quite evident that the coverage of the English prepositions and their denotative meanings in the Form 1 class is wanting . ( Selinkers (1972) third strategy of transfer of training ). The approach of prepositional content in form 1 class may not fully facilitate the internalization of the rules in the learner. Only a

56

few prepositions are handled and a few circumstantial roles are described. The prepositional meanings that are not addressed are for example Orientation, Distance, Area, Agent, Source, Goal, Passage, Cause, Reason among others. Consequently, the English prepositions that have not been given adequate coverage are as follows: WITH, DESPITE, BESIDE, AFTER, UNDERNEATH, ACROSS, AMONG, BETWEEN, OVER and others. Therefore, it is evident that , transfer of training on prepositions in form one class is insufficient. Selinker (1972). (b) Form 2 class content on English prepositions. The aforementioned English textbook writers have also written the Form 2 English textbooks. The Form 2 Grammar syllabus focuses on the teaching of two or more words prepositions and their possible circumstantial roles. These writers organise the coverage of these prepositions in terms of structure. That is, those made up two words like ACCORDING TO, and those of three words like IN ADDITION TO.

In the textbook by Bukenya (2003) no effort is made to discuss the various uses of the two or more words prepositions. Similarly, Vikiru (2005) only identifies examples of such prepositions without making any discussion on their possible meanings. Only one textbook by Mwangi, (ibid) identifies a few of these prepositions and their possible meanings. The meanings covered are those of place/space (a way from), cause/reason (due to),

57

exception (apart from), and alternative (instead of). Other circumstantial meanings like contrast, concession, have not been covered.

(c) Form 3 class English preposition content. The Form 3 class preposition content is on distinguishing among a preposition, an adverb or a connector. A similar word can function at all the above three classes given different contexts. The researcher observed that the Form 3 class preposition content was mainly at the definition level. All the aforementioned writers address this content as such. (d) Form 4 class English preposition content. The Form 4 class English preposition content is on identifying the functions of prepositions in a syntactic unit. That is a prepositional phrase can function as a modifier of a noun, a modifier of an adjective or adverbials. In conclusion, the above review on how the secondary school curriculum organises the teaching of English prepositions vis viz the available approved teaching textbooks; shows that the coverage of English prepositions is deficient. The researcher observed that

58

the coverage on the variability of

the English prepositional

meanings of both one-word and more than one-word prepositions is incomplete/inadequate. In addition, a few common prepositions are given prominence. This literature review was crucial in explaining the findings of this particular study on the use of prepositions. (See chapter 5 of this thesis.) It is thus evident that transfer of training of the prepositional content in secondary school is deficient. This type of instruction affects the route and rate of SLA in the class room. Studies conducted locally on the learning of English prepositions A few studies have been carried out by scholars in the area of prepositions. Among them are Mutiti (2000) and Mwangi (2004). Mwangi (ibid) looked at the grammatical variation in second language. Varieties Of English: The Case of Prepositions in Kenya. She observed that most of the research has focused and concentrated on the more salient aspects of language, especially vocabulary and pronunciation while little has been done on grammatical aspects. Mwangi (ibid) examined the usage of prepositions in Kenyan English, with the aim of showing the extent to which this va ri et y varies from its parent variety (British English). She asserts that the Englis h prepositional system is well known for

59

its complexity and studies of second language acquisition have documented the difficulties encountered by second language learners in the attempt to master these complexities.

She quotes from Kennedy ( 1 9 9 8 : 1 3 9 ) who says that "when t h e h i gh frequency and difficulty of acquisition of the English prepositional system is considered, it is somewhat surprising that there have not been more corpus-based studies of how the system is used." Thus Mwangi ( i b i d ) in her study compared the usage of prepositions in two components of the International Corpus of English (1CE), the British Component (ICE-GB) and the Kenyan Component ( IC E - K ) .

Her findings showed that differences in the collocational patterns of prepositions and the distribution of their semantic functions are important markers of variety differences. She also established that some prepositions in Kenyan English do not perform all semantic functions as they do in British English. She says there are a lot of semantic restrictions in the usage of some prepositions, which consequently expands the semantic range of others. Thus certain semantic distinctions whi ch are made in British English are not made in Kenyan English. She concluded t h a t t h e E n gl i s h prepositional system is more simplified in Kenyan

60

English w hi c h is as a result of the influence by a range of linguistic and contextual factors. Mwangi (i b i d) gives one of the following examples of simplification in the use of preposition in the Kenyan English. 1. For guys you just wash Now imagine like flos hair yeah if that thing just decides to go in.

2. ..but let us take the length and width of Zanzibar Island and the people who are there what do you think if there are so many people just coming in the country (Mwangi, 2004: 27-32) She says that the above examples indicate the cause and effect relationship between preposition of location and direction which is not always maintained in Kenyan English. In sentence (1), the verb go is dynamic and the preposition into would therefore obtain in Standard English, because hair should be seen as a volume into which something goes. In sentence (2), the preposition into is not obligatory because, when a place is being regarded as a destination rather than a position, it is more natural to see it vaguely as a geographical point than as an area. Hence the more frequent use of to than into in reference to countries.

61

This research did not look at the English variety but looked at differentials in the meaning of English prepositions as a factor influencing the acquisition of prepositions by secondary school learners. The present research focused on how secondary school learners learn the English prepositions. It did not look at the collocational distribution of the prepositions. The prepositions with high semantic functions were considered complex hence peripheral. While those with a few semantic functions were considered simple hence core.

Mutiti (2000), in his work attributed the difficulties in the use of prepositions to the first language acquisition. The present research did not study interference as a factor influencing the learning of the English prepositions.

Theoretical frame work This study was guided by Selinker (1972) Interlanguage theory which refers to an internal system that a learner has constructed at a single point in time; and the Theory of Markedness as propounded by salient representatives like Zobl (1983), Rutherford (1982), Greenberg (1966). Each of the above theories is discussed in the sections below. (a) The Interlanguage Theory

62

The term interlanguage was first used by Selinker (1972). Various alternative terms have been used by different researchers to refer to the same phenomenon. Nemser (1971) refers to approximative systems and Corder (1971) to idiosyncratic dialects and transitional competence. These terms reflect two related but different concepts. First, interlanguage refers to the structured system which the learner constructs at any given stage of development. Second , the term refers to the series of interlocking systems which form what Corder (1967) called the learners Interlanguage continuum) The assumptions underlying interlanguage theory were stated clearly by Nemser (1971. built in sylabus ( i.e

They were (1) at any given time the approximative system is distinct from the L1 and L2 : (2) the approximative systems form an evolving series : and (3) that in a given contact situation, the approximative systems of learners at the same stage of proficiency roughly coincide.

The concept of hypothesis testing was used to explain how L2 learner progressed along the Interlanguage continuum, in much the same way as it was used to explain L1 acquisition as it was used to explain L1 acquisition . Corder (1967) made this comparison

explicit by exposing that at least some of the strategies used by the

63

L2 learner were the same as those by which L1 acquisition takes place Hypothesis testing was a mentalist notion. Selinker (1972) suggested that five principle processes operated in Interlanguage. These were (1 ) language transfer (2)

overgeneralization of target language rules: (3) transfer of training i.e. a rule enters the learners system as a result of instruction) (4) strategies of L2 learning (i.e. identifiable approach by the leaner to the material to be learned 1972 :37) and (5) strategies of l2 communication i.e. ) an identifiable approach by the learner to communication with native speakers.

The five processes together constitute the ways in which the learner tries to internalize the L2 system. They are the means by which a learner tries to reduce the learning burden to manageable proportions and they can be subsumed under the general

processes of simplification. The learners have limited processing space and therefore, cannot cope with the total complexity of the language system. So they limit the number of hypothesis they test at one point in time.

Selinker also noted that many L2 learners (perhaps as many as 95 per cent ) fail to reach target language competence. That is they do not reach the end of the interlanguage continuum. They stop

learning when their interlanguage contains at least some rules

64

different from those of the target language forms. He referred to this as fossilization. So far the account of interlanguage theory has closely followed the principles of mentalist theories of language acquisition. This is due to the emphasis on hypothesis testing and internal process, together with the insistence on the notion of a continuum of learning involving successive restructuring of an internal system .

Selinkers (1972)

seminal paper provided

the theoretical

framework for interpreting SLA as a mentalistic process and for the empirical investigation Subsequent discussions of language learner language. of interlanguage focused on its three

principal features; 1. Language learner language is permeable The L2 learners interlanguage system is permeable , in the sense that rules that constitute the learners knowledge at any one stage are not fixed , but are open to amendment. The loss of permeability is what brings about fossilization. 2. Language learner language is dynamic. The L2 laeners interlanguage is constantly changing. The learner slowly revises the interim systems to accommodate new hypotheses about the target language system. 3. Language leaner language is systematic Despite the variability of interlanguage , it is possible to detect the rule based nature of the learners use of the L2. He does not

65

select haphazardly from his store of interlanguage rules, but in predictable ways.

It is worth noting that each grammar the learner builds is more complex than the one preceding it. That is why the researcher investigated the acquisition of prepositions at three different levels of learning. That is Form 1 , Form 2, and Form 3.

Empirical studies have shown that linguistic universals like markedness have effect on interlanguage development. The studies found out that L2 learners learn unmarked (or less marked) properties before marked (or more marked) properties of the target language Rutherford (1982). The acquisition of one feature low down on the hierarchy could trigger off the acquisition of other features higher up. This showed a relationship between implicational hierarchy and implicational cluster. Such

implications show whether the difficulty order is the same as the acquisition order.

The findings of this study indicated that learners progressed through a defined Interlanguage continuum. At the Form 1 level, the learners expressed the highest degree of unfamiliarity to the meanings encoded by the prepositions. At Form 2 level, and Form 3 level, familiarity was average.

66

(b) Theory of Markedness and Core Grammar The theory of markedness was first proposed by Nicholas Trubetzkoy and Roman Jakobson in the 1930s. Since then, the term markedness has been very popular in linguistics. It was embraced by European structuralists, generative phonology,

functional typological linguistics, Chomskyian principles and parameters syntax, Neo Gricean pragmatics, optimality theory, first and second language acquisition. In the course of this process, the term markedness developed a multiplicity of sometimes widely diverging senses and it lost its association with a particular theoretical approach and became established as an almost theory neutral everyday term in linguistics.

At first, the term markedness was confined to phonetics: in a pair of opposite phonemes, one is characterised as marked, while the other one lacks such markedness. Earlier on , these oppositions will be found in different environment paradigms the way they relate to other forms.

In such opposition , one might be more restricted than the other referred to as the marked structure while the non- restricted is the unmarked structure. The marked structures are usually complex as opposed to simplicity. They also exhibit more information than the unmarked structure.

67

The unmarked forms are easier to produce and are more available in data , than marked structures which are rare in occurrence. In relation to Universal Grammar, structures and rule systems within the UG framework can be seen in relation to the characteristics of markedeness .For example, in UG , Chomskyian paradigm , considers that there are universal grammar rules and principles that are core to human language. The UG core rules are normally regarded as unmarked which means that every human being will relate to them. Chomsky also says that there are the peripheral rules which are relatively marked.

The peripheral rules are difficult to relate to, use and acquire when it comes to acquisition of language. A given rule or principle might be related to another as a subset. The implicational universals can be considered in the notion of markedness. For example if a rule P is subset of rule Q ,Q will be the unmarked in relation to the rule P which is relatively marked. That is if P then Q.

The implicational relationship between Q and P is that P and Q can be found in acquisition, that is , present and secondly , P and Q may not be present (-P, -Q) . The third possibility is Q will be present and P will also be present.

68

P and - Q will not be allowed ( not possible to acquire a subset rule in a language while there is a superset you have not acquired . For example ,

-P and -Q ( not acquired both) -P and Q ( -P and Q means acquiring a superset first) P and Q ( allowed . This means acquiring both)

Note that (-P and - Q followed by P and Q, is a faster way of acquiring a language. ( P sub set principle ) marked (Q general / superset principle ) unmarked.

Therefore, in any stage of interlanguage development the quantity of producing successful instances of Q will be greater than or equal to the quantity of Production of P. ( That is, Q is always greater than P or equal to P). In case of substitution in any interlanguage stage , Q substitutes for P and not vice versa.

Now it has been widely applied to the researches on phonetics, grammar, semantics, pragmatics, psychological linguistics and applied injustices.

Markedness was used with various senses which are connected through their historical origins (ultimately in Trubetzkoys and

69

Jakobsons work of the 1930s) and synchronically through family resemblances. The term markedness can thus be divided into twelve different senses grouped into four major classes. (Haspelmath 1999) and Battistella (1996). A. Markedness as complexity 1. Semantic markedness (Jakobson 1932): Markedness as specification for a semantic distinction. In the English opposition dog/bitch, dog is the unmarked member because it can refer to male dogs or to dogs in general. 2. Formal markedness (Passim): Markedness as Overt coding. In English, the past tense is marked ( by ed morpheme) and the present tense is unmarked.

B. Markedness as difficulty 3. Markedness as morphological difficulty/unnaturalness. A singular/plural pair like book/books is less marked than sheep/sheep because the latter is not iconic. (Wurzel 1998) 4. Cognitive markedness (Givon 1991): Markedness as conceptual difficulty. The plural category is marked because it requires more mental effort and processing time than the singular. C. Markedness as abnormality

70

5. Textual markedness (Greenberg 1966): Markedness as a rarity in texts. For direct objects, coreference with the subject is marked and disjoint reference is unmarked. 6. Situational markedness (Passim): Markedness as rarity in the world. For marked situations, languages typically use complex expressions. 7. Typological markedness (Jakobson 1941, 1963):

Markedness as typological implication or cross linguistic rarity. 8. Distributional markedness (Passim): Markedness as restricted distribution. Object verb word order is the marked case: it occurs only in negation. 9. Markedness as deviation from default parameter

setting. (Chomsky 1981) Absence of noun incorporation is the unmarked case, and the presence of productive noun incorporation has to be triggered by a specific parametric property. 10. Markedness as a multidimensional correlation

(Greenberg 1966, Croft 1990) The singular is more marked than the plural, and the plural is more marked than the dual. Frequency of use is primary in grammar and lexicon.

71

The above are some

markedness senses and their salient

representatives. Haspelmath (1999) says that most linguists who use the terms marked/unmarked use them only in one or a subset of various senses. Haspelmath (ibid) noted that only Anderson (2001), Battistella (1990) presented works that tried to work with a concept of markedness that subsumes all or at least a large part of the diverse senses of markedness. The present research tried to work with a concept of markedness that subsumed markedness as difficulty Wurzel (1998), Givon (1991), markedness as a rarity in texts (Greenberg 1966), markedness as deviation from default parameter setting (Chomsky 1981) and markedness as a multidimensional correlation (Greenberg 1966, Croft 1990).

Rice (2003) pointed out that the intuitive shared sense of marked/unmarked is not from the sense of everyday words like uncommon/common, abnormal/normal, common/uncommon,

unusual/usual, unexpected/expected. Rice (ibid) observed that the larger class of abnormality was in effect what all markedness senses share. On this basis, Radford (1988) says that an unmarked phenomenon is one which goes against some relative universal and hence is exceptional in some way. The term unmarked can be equated with regular, normal or usual and marked with irregular, abnormal, exceptional or unusual.

72

Chomsky (1981) says that core rules are those that can be arrived at through the application of the general, abstract principles of language structure and they are unmarked. Peripheral rules are not governed by universal principles and thus they are marked or exceptional in some way.

According to Croft (1990) and Greenberg (1966) , comparable linguistic structures exhibit the same markedness values for different markedness dimensions (criteria). Thus a marked structure would be defined as semantically complex, overtly coded, rare in texts, found only in some languages and restricted in their distribution. While an unmarked structure will be semantically simple, not overtly coded, frequent in texts, found in all or most languages, and unrestricted in their distribution.

Similarly, Archangeli (1992: 391) says that the typical pattern or property is called unmarked, the atypical one marked. He also says that the term markedness is used to refer to the continuum between language universal and language particular properties, with completely unmarked properties being those found in virtually all languages and extremely marked properties found quite rarely.

Baayen et al. (1997: 14) explicitly defined a marked form as the one which occurs less frequently.

73

In this research, markedness referred to prepositions that conveyed few meanings and are thus less semantically loaded, consequently rare. Unmarkedness referred to prepositions that conveyed many meanings hence more semantically loaded, consequently common in occurrence.

Empirical studies have shown that L2 learners learn unmarked (or less marked) properties before marked (or more marked) properties of the target language. An example of this was provided in section 2.3 of this thesis. This research aimed at identifying the learning order of English prepositions by secondary school learners. Availability in differentials in meaning and frequency of English prepositions were used to determine if a preposition was acquired first or late. The Theory of Markedness in Universal grammar plays an important role in Second Language Acquisition. Children master unmarked forms relatively quickly since they are core. This would do on the basis of their linguistic experience found in the target language learning. (Chomsky 1981)

According to Chomsky (ibid) the linguistic universals of Core Grammar contribute to interlanguage development. He says that although the learning sequences do not entirely follow the markedness scale; because of maturational processes to do with

74

development interfere, it is nevertheless expected that at least some transition features can be explained by Markedness Theory. White (1977) points out that by recognizing degrees of markedness, predictions can be made about the acquisition order. This research aimed at identifying the learning order in the use of prepositions by the secondary school learners.

Further studies on the importance of the Theory of Markedness in Universal grammar and SLA were discussed in the literature review section in this thesis. (Chapter 2).

Finally, from the theory of Interlanguage by Selinker, it is implicit that learners progress through an Interlanguage at different levels of their learning a second language. This research aimed at identifying such a continuum.

CHAPTER THREE

75

METHODOLOGY Introduction This chapter explains the procedure used in data collection and presentation. In the initial stages of research, the library research strategies were used especially in the review of related literature. The second stage of research covered field work where the researcher collected the raw data. The research was conducted using a survey approach. The task mode was in form of a written test (see appendix (i)) administered to Form 1, Form 2 and Form 3 students. The task focus was a linguistic manipulation task where linguistic rules were required to perform the task. This study made use of descriptive and inferential statistical methods in describing, recording, analysis and interpretation of data. In the following section of this chapter, a description of the methodologies used is discussed in detail.

Population

76

The population of secondary schools in Gucha was 141 schools with an average of 16,920 students in Form 1, Form 2 and Form 3. Since this was a cross sectional study, the sample sizes used in the language development literature range from 24 to over 1,200, Dulay and Burt (1982: 246). In this study 60 respondents were selected for the linguistic task.

Sample and sampling method The researcher employed random sampling procedure to select the sample schools from the stated population. Four schools were sampled. These were School A - Mixed secondary, School B -Girls secondary, School C -Mixed secondary and School D - Girls secondary. Random sampling was used to select five students from each class giving rise to a total of 15 students per school who were given the written test as shown in the table below;

Table 3: Description of samples.

77

NAME OF SCHOOL

A
MIXED SECONDARY SCHOOL

B
GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL MIXED

C
GIRLS SECONDARY SCHOOL

D
SECONDARY SCHOOL F3 54 F1 60 F2 60 F3 90

Level of learners Total learners No.

F1

F2 120

F3 100

F1 60

F2 75

F3 80

F1 70

F2 45

of 90

Average age of 16 learners No. of learners 5 used for analysis Total No. used for data analysis for three classes Grand learners study total of

17

18

13

14

17

15

15

17

14

15

16

15

15

15

15

60

under

KEY: F = FORM (F1, F2, F3) = FORM 1, FORM 2, FORM 3. No. = Number

78

Location of study The study was conducted in Gucha district in Nyanza province of Kenya. (See appendix (ii)). Since this research did not consider L1 as a variable, the location of the study would have been anywhere in the country Kenya; in English as a second language situation. The learners comprised the Form 1, Form 2 and Form 3. These groups were chosen because the syllabus covers the prepositions and their meanings in Form 1 and Form 2. Thus, a Form 3 student is expected to show a high level of competence in the use of prepositions in regard to their inherent meanings. Also a cross sectional design simulates actual development over time by including many learners who are at different stages of L2 development. Instrumentation A written test was used for collecting the data from the learners. ( see appendix 1) . The structures were in form of sentences with blank spaces. The learners were to select an appropriate preposition from the list given to fill in the blank spaces. The context of syntactic unit determined the preposition to be chosen. There were differences in

79

item numbers in relation to variability of semantic functions. Such functions guided the researcher in identifying the prepositional meaning indicated by the preposition chosen by the learner for each test item. Chomsky (1981) says that the reason why a learner selects item X and not Y is an indicator of the availability of such an item in the learners language data. Consequently a selection of a misinformed or no preposition at all is also an indicator of the

linguistic experience a leaner has at that point in time. It underlines the internal structure of the learners language data. The following is the description of order of tasks in the test.

Table 4: Variability of meaning of items in the test.

80

TASK

ASPECT

TARGET MEANINGS

TESTED

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.

ON IN AT TO FOR FROM WITH BESIDE OVER DESPITE IN SPITE OF UNDERNEATH BENEATH BEHIND IN FRONT OF AMONG

15 16 9 11 8 8 8 3 7 3 2 5 3 5 3 3

15 16 9 11 8 8 8 3 7 3 2 5 3 5 3 3

It is worth noting that the researcher tested on both one word and three-word prepositions. All the prepositions under study except IN SPITE OF and IN FRONT OF are one word. The researcher used variability of semantic function to test the learners ability to

81

use the correct preposition that reflects the context given. The meaning of a preposition is determined by the context in the specific syntactic unit. Leech (1975).

The following variability of semantic functions of prepositions, guided the researcher in analyzing the contextual meaning of the preposition chosen by the learner, in a given test item. The preposition that the learner selects depends on the context of the sentence. Thus even though such semantic functions were not provided in each test item they are usually conveyed / encoded by the preposition being used in relation to that particular context.

Table 5; Description of items in the test on the basis of prepositional semantic functions; Preposition tested Meanings tested

82

1.

ON

Surface Direction Area (one dimensional) On top of Attached to Area (two dimensional) Time (when) Subject matter Place (position) Relative destination Recipient Reason Resultative Orientation Metaphorical

83

2.

IN

Manner Comparison Position (three dimensional) Position (two dimensional) Time (length) Destination Direction Metaphorical Area Identity Time (duration) Reference Quasi-agent Result Level of ability

84

Company

AT

Point (location) Position Time (point) Target goal Level of ability Place (attending) Direction Reaction (stimulus) Result

TO

Direction (path) Actual recipient Position (against)

85

Reaction (emotion) Goal (source) Perception (response) Completion of action Time (end of a period) Comparison (ratio) Movement (specific direction) Metaphorical (different) 5 FOR Duration Purpose Destination (intended) Reason Recipient (intended) Support (Standard) respect

86

Comparison (age) 6 FROM Source Origin (place) Time (starting point) Material cause Separation/ distinction Perception Movement (location) Metaphorical 7 WITH Manner Instrument Company Support / opinion Possession / belonging Reference

87

Contents / ingredients 8 BESIDE Relative position Orientation Metaphorical support 9 OVER Position Destination Passage/ movement Orientation Resultative Pervasive (static) Pervasive (motion) 10 DESPITE Concession Contrast Irrespective/ with all

88

11

IN SPITE OF

For all Concession

12

UNDERNEATH

Covered completely Passage Relative position Relative destination Vertical direction ( abstract scale)

13

BENEATH

Orientation Relative position Vertical direction ( abstract scale)

14

BEHIND

Relative destination Passage Orientation Relative support (metaphorical)

89

Part and parcel

15

IN FRONT OF

Relative position Orientation Direction (vertical)

16

AMONG

Passage Relative position One of them

Data collection phases In the collection of the desired data, the researcher employed one phase, which involved carrying out the major research on a larger population. Data Collection Procedure The researcher went in person to the specific schools and after explaining to the administration and students what she was about

90

to do, she was allowed to administer the test by herself assisted by language teachers in the school. The test was done in 4 hours in two sessions with 15 minutes interval between the sessions. Table 6: Number of questions administered to the respondents. Category respondents FORMS No. One Two Three 20 20 20 109 109 109 109 109 109 100 100 100 No. of Questions Number Administered returned % return rate

All the above questions were tested in the test given to the respondents

Scoring Procedure and Data Analysis

91

Each learners work was marked and a score given. The procedure was an adaptation from Dulay and Burt (1982: 219). Acquisition criterion is not only set in terms of out put but also in terms of out put where required. Each obligatory context can be regarded as a kind of test which the child passes by supplying the required morpheme or fails by supplying none or one that is not correct.

Treating each obligatory occasion for a morpheme as a test item Dulay and Burt scoring procedure was as follows: no preposition supplied misinformed preposition correct preposition supplied - 0 point - 0 point - 2 points

The scoring process resulted in two scores for each structure in each subjects total speech corpus : the subjects actual score for each structure, which varied according to the subjects

performance on that structure; and the expected scores for each structure, which was always 2 points for each occasion of a structure in the subjects protocol. The expected score for a given

92

structure depends on the number of obligatory occasions for a structure in a subjects total corpus.

After scoring all obligatory occasions of the structures under investigation, the group score computational method was used for the group of subjects to receive a single score for each grammatical morpheme. The group score for a particular preposition was obtained as follows: Add the expected scores. ( where each occasion is worth two points) for that preposition across all the learners in the group. Then divide the total actual score by the total expected score, and multiply the result by 100. This yields the groups % of accuracy in producing that structure. Group score = actual score X 100 expected score

Using the scores thus obtained , the structures are then ranked according to the decreasing group score, acquisition sequence may be inferred. from which their

93

The following is an illustration from a learners work. 1. Fill in the blank space in the sentences below with a suitable preposition a) This book is Nandwa ( 0 point) ( b) The strange man comes from Rwanda (c) The refuges died on lack of food (0 point) ( d) Can you tell butter from margarine ? ( 2 points) (e) The boy came from the village just like other days. (2 points) From the above illustration the expected score will be (5 X 2) where 2 refers to points for each occasion and 5 the occasions in the subject. ( 2 points)

The computation procedure would be as follows; Preposition X.

94

Raw score Child a) b) c) d) e) Total 0 2 0 2 2 6

occasion

2 2 2 2 2 10

Group score = actual score

= 6
10

expected score = .6 X 100 = 60 The actual score is computed by adding all the obligatory occasion of that Morpheme or preposition across all the children. Preposition Continuum

95

Groups of structures typically cluster together with very close scores. For example one group may exhibit scores of 81,& 2 and 84 , while another may cluster at 96,98 and 99 . if all theses items are ranked in descending order, the simple ranking of 1st, 2nd ,3rd ,4th ,5th and 6th will give the impression that the items are equally distinct from each other. Items within each group may well be unordered with respect to each other. ( Dulay and Burt 1982) The concept that groups of structures are acquired , rather than one structure at a time, is by now shared by most language acquisition researchers. This calls for clustered scores for the structures in a rank order study , often with distinct breaks between groups. Dulay and Burt introduce such procedures in yielding acquisition hierarchies ( ordered groups of structure. This concept mentioned was applied by Burt and Dulay to speech data of children from various groups. The hierarchies show that the items in the group I are acquired before all the item sin the groups below it. Items in group II are acquired before those in group III and group IV etc. The reverse is also true, namely; the acquisition of the items in Groups I to III . In this study, the following ranking of prepositions was applied in establishing the preposition continuums. Table 7: Preposition Ranking

96

The following points were also considered during the marking of Rank Very easy Easy Relatively easy Difficult Most difficult Percentage group score . 80% 60 -79% 40 -59% 20 -39% 0 -19%

the test. 1. Beginning a preposition with a capital letter within the blank space was not penalised. 2. The preposition BENEATH and UNDERNEATH were awarded points if they were used correctly though interchangeably. 3. The prepositions that acted as distractors to the learner were not awarded any mark. These were SINCE, AFTER, BETWEEN, APART FROM. 4. No mark was awarded for an unattempted question. 5. Beginning a preposition with a capital letter within the blank space was not penalised.

97

Interpretation of scores In establishing the learning order of prepositions, the variability of semantic functions was considered. The group score method applied as per Dulay and Burt ( 1982) was used. Using the scores thus obtained the structures are then ranked according to the decreasing group scores, from which their acquisition sequence is inferred. This method was used to establish the continuum in the acquisition of English prepositions and thus identify which prepositions are simple and difficult to acquire, then draw a conclusion on whether the established acquisition order is characterized by markedness issues.

CHAPTER FOUR DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION Introduction For any research to be meaningful there is need for quantification of the data collected. This automatically paves way for easier

98

analysis and thereafter interpretation of the research findings. In this study, data collected is mainly expressed in terms of percentages. As for data presentation, tables and bar graphs, have well served the purpose. Selinker (1972) says that learners of a target language, in this case English language, will progress through a certain interlanguage as they try to acquire the second Language. The interlanguage will be characterised by previous rules as well as revised ones. In this section, statistical evidence is adduced to establish whether learners progress through defined interlanguages as they learn the English prepositions. Similarly, Chomsky (1981) says that structures that are marked are usually difficult and thus may cause learnibility problems to their acquisition. While the unmarked structures are usually easy and thus will be acquired with a lot of ease by the learners. in this chapter, an attempt is made to establish the relationship between the semantic functions of prepositions and their acquisition and use; to establish whether markedness/unmarkedness determine the acquisition of prepositions and investigate the continuum in the acquisition of English prepositions.

The next sub-section dwells on establishing whether there is a relationship between semantic functions and acquisition of English prepositions.

Preposition learning.

99

The table below summarizes the performance of English prepositions at three levels of learning. Level 1 (Form 1); Level 2 (Form 2) and Level 3 (Form 3).

Table 8. Group scores of prepositions. Preposition X IN ON AT TO LEVEL 1 73.5 72.3 42.4 48.6 % GROUP SCORE LEVEL 2 74.7 75.7 45.7 50.2 LEVEL 3 71.5 72.6 40.8 40.9

100

FOR FROM WITH BESIDE OVER DESPITE IN SPITE OF UNDERNEATH BENEATH BEHIND IN FRONT OF AMONG

44.3 42.3 41.8 9.6 27.0 10.5 7.8 18.0 10.8 14.7 9.8 12.8

47.0 44.0 42.0 11.0 28.0 11.5 8.3 18.3 11.0 16.3 10.8 13.7

49.5 58.4 45.2 11.2 31.2 12.7 9.0 17.5 10.5 16.0 12.1 12.6

The table above displays the actual group performance of the prepositions under study at three different levels of learning. Analysis of each preposition performance was done in relation to variability of the semantic functions. A comparison of the prepositions was then made as observed at different levels of learning. Variability of preposition meaning and acquisition Table 9: The Preposition IN Group score LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 73.5 74.7 71.5

101

Table 9 above shows that the learners at level 2 performed better in the use of the preposition IN. The higher the score the

increasing ease of use in the preposition. This was followed by Level 2 and then Level 3.On average, the group scores indicate that the preposition IN was easily learned and used by the learners.

The results indicate that learners at level 1 used

the preposition

IN, in relation to space as a POINT and not DIMENSION. The examples identified in the learners work include the following:1. The children are playing on the field. 2. The children are playing at the field. It was observed that most of the learners at level 1 used the preposition ON for two-dimensional objects and not IN. This was an indicator that the learners perceived space as a surface or a dimensional object. In sentence 2, above, the learners perceived space as a POINT and not AREA. This is evident in the use of AT and not IN.

In comparison to Level 2 and Level 3, the learners used the preposition IN, in relation to DIMENSION and POINT as well. This was an indicator that as learning progressed, the learners could semantic functions. At all the three levels of learning, the use of the preposition IN to show meanings of DIRECTION, DESTINATION and POSITION was appropriate. The use of TIME relations was also correct. As per Selinkers (1972) third

102

strategy in the interlanguage theory, this shows that transfer of training had taken place.

However, it was observed that the metaphorical use of the preposition IN was the lowest at Level 1 and 2.The following examples were identified in the learners work. 3. Our friends are at a hot soup. 4. Our friends are on a hot soup. 5. Our friends are in a hot soup. In relation to the above sentences, the learners at level 1 mostly used sentence (3) Level 2, sentence (4) and Level 3; sentence (5).This indicated that the abstract use of the preposition IN had only been acquired by the Level 3 learners. This was attributed to transfer of training. As learning progressed the learners were able to use the preposition IN metaphorically.

The use of the preposition ON and AT in the above sentences was an indicator that the learners had acquired such prepositions in relation to POINT and POSITION. In relation to acquisition order, the Level 2 learners displayed early acquisition in the use of the preposition IN followed by Level 1 and 3.This was again attributed to transfer of training.

103

The following was the observed performance of the preposition ON as at Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 of learning. This was also done in relation to variability of meaning in the semantic functions.

TABLE 10: The Preposition ON Group score LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 72.3 75.7 72.6

Table 10 above shows how the preposition ON was performed by the learners at different levels of instruction. A higher group score was an indicator of increasing case in the use of the preposition. Using the group scores, the preposition ON was performed well at Level 2 followed by Level 3 and then Level 1.On average, the preposition ON was used with ease by the learners. The fact that the preposition ON was best performed at Level 2 can be attributed to transfer of training as per Selinker (1972) key process in the interlanguage. It was one of the common prepositions covered in the teaching materials like English text books

Through frequency of training, the learners may have internalized the use of the preposition ON, hence the high group scores observed at the three levels. As learning progressed, the learner is able to use the preposition ON, with other variables of meaning.

104

This explains why Level 2 learners showed a slightly higher mastery of the preposition ON than Level 1.The low group score at Level 3 can be attributed to factors of language learner strategies towards instruction and materials.

In

terms of spatial meanings, the preposition ON was used

correctly in relation to space as a SURFACE ,DIRECTION, and POSITION.

Most of the learners at the three levels of learning, for example, used the preposition ON in relation to PASSGE as a SURFACE. The following is a learners example. 6. The sponge floated on water. 75 percent of the learners used the preposition ON in the context of perceiving water as a SURFACE on a one or two dimensional area . Learners used the same preposition ON to express an idea of PASSAGE (that is, movement towards, then away from a place).The use of the preposition OVER in sentence (6) above by the learners was an indicator that the learners had acquired both the use of PASSAGE in relation to MOVEMENT and POSITION.

Learners at Level 1 used different prepositions in relation to space as a DESTINATION, ORIENTATION, PURPOSE and

POSITION and not as a DIMENSION. The prepositions that the learners used in relation to such meanings were TO, IN FRONT

105

OF, FOR and OVER. This was illustrated in the learners work as shown in the following examples; 7. Put a new roof to the house 8. Put a new roof in front of a roof. 9. Put a new roof for the house. 10. Put a new roof over the house. In sentence (7) the preposition TO was used with the meaning of INTENDED DESTINATION while in (8) IN FRONT OF is used to show orientation; in (9) FOR is used with an INTENDED PURPOSE and in sentence (10) OVER is used as a POSITION.

At Level 2 and Level 3, the learners used the preposition ON in relation to space as a dimension. This was in contrast to the use of the same preposition with the same meaning by learners at Level 1 and 2. 11. Put a new roof on the house In sentence (11) above, ON is used to show space in relation to area as a DIMENSION. In this case, the house was perceived as a two-dimensional object. It was therefore observed that as instruction progresses, the learners can now use the preposition ON with otherwise complex variables in meaning like DIMENSION.

It was also observed that the use of the meaning of RECIPIENT was internalized by the learners at all the three levels of learning.

106

The meaning of SUBJECT MATTER was also used correctly in relation to the preposition ON.

The metaphorical use of the preposition ON again was problematic for the learners. In the item given, majority of the learners could not use the preposition ON metaphorically.

Consequently, the use of TIME relations was also well internalized by the learners. It was observed that relations of POSITION, REASON, RESULTATIVE and SURFACE meanings were

internalized by the learners at the three levels of learning. This was also attributed to instruction.

Table 11: The Preposition AT Group score LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL3 42.4 45.7 40.8

The table above shows that the preposition AT had the highest group score at Level 2 than Level 1 and 3. A high score is an indicator of increasing ease and a low score indicates increasing difficulty. The learners at Level 2 will internalize the use of the preposition AT before learners at Level 1 then at Level 3.This was

107

also attributed to transfer of training. At Level 3, there was no instruction on prepositional meanings as at Level 1 and 2.

The preposition AT conveyed nine different semantic functions in relation to variability of meaning. The learners at Level 1 used the preposition AT in relation to space as a POINT and others as two-dimensional objects.50 percent of the learners at Level 1 used AT as a DIMENSION. The following sentences from the

learners work illustrated this. 12. My car is at school. 13. My car is in school. -Point -Dimension

In sentence (12) ,the use of preposition AT indicated a mere point in relation to the cars position. Whereas in (13), the use of IN indicated a two-dimensional object. A learners selection of a given structure is an indicator of his linguistic experience at that time. Chomsky (1981).This showed that the learners at Level 1 had mastered the use of the preposition IN, in relation to DIMENSION than AT .Consequently they had also internalized the use of the preposition AT in relation to space as a POINT..A similar acquisition of the use of the preposition AT, at Level 2 and 3 was also observed. Between the notions of simple POSITION (or static location) and DIRECTION a cause and effect relationship may be realized. This could lead to the learners use of the preposition TO or AT in the given test items. In this study, it was observed that a few learners

108

at Level 1 used the preposition AT in relation to SPACE as POSITION. Only 10 percent of the learners at this level used the preposition AT in the sense of space as a POSITION. This was an indicator that most of the learners at this level had not acquired the sense of POSITION in relation to the preposition AT. However, the linguistic input predisposed by the learners at this level showed that they were able to use other prepositions in the same context to show relations of RELATIVE POSITION as in: Sentence (14) below. 14. The teacher is standing behind the door. The use of the preposition BEHIND in the above sentence indicated space as a RELATIVE POSITION. 40 percent of the learners at this level perceived space as a relative position. More so, 50 percent of the learners used the preposition IN FRONT OF in the context of sentence (14 ) above. This showed that the learners had internalized the use of relative position horizontally.

At Level 3, the learners used the preposition AT in relation to space a RELATIVE POSITION similar to Level 1.At Level 2, 80 percent of the learners used the preposition AT in relation to space as POSITIVE POSITION. It was thus observed that at Level 2,the learners presented the highest level of internalization of variability of meaning of semantic functions. The use of the preposition AT to show relations of TIME had been internalized by most learners at the three levels of learning. The preposition AT was used to show

109

a POINT of TIME chiefly clock-time.40 percent of the learners used other prepositions in the time context to refer to DURATION to indicate a period of time. This is illustrated in the learners example below. 15. The matron left since noon. 16. The matron left from noon. The use of SINCE and FROM in sentence (15) and (16) respectively is an indicator that the learners had acquired the use of relation of time as a DURATION. This was evidenced mainly by the learners at Level 2 and 3. This shows that as instruction

progresses, the learners could use different prepositions with other variables in meaning. The learners had acquired the use of TIME and also acquired the meaning of TIME as DURATION.

The preposition AT, in combinations with a word such as aim at expresses intended GOAL or TARGET . At Level 1 of learning, 80 percent of the learners used the preposition TO in the same

context to show the RECIPIENT of the message and not as a TARGET. This was exemplified in the learners example below: 17) The robbers aimed the gun at him 18.) The robbers aimed the gun to him 19.) The robbers aimed the gun from him

In sentence (18) TO is used to imply a RECIPIENT, while in (19), FROM is used with the meaning of SOURCE. As mentioned

110

earlier, most of the learners at Level 1 used the meanings of RECIPIENT and source in the same context as above, whereas over 70 percent of the learners at Level 2 and 3 used the preposition AT in relation to transformational relationship with the indirect object construction to show meanings of TARGET or GOAL. Chomsky (1981) says that a learner selects an item depending on her linguistic experience at that point in time. This shows that the learners at Level 1 have internalized the contingency relations as a RECIPIENT and SOURCE and not as a TARGET or GOAL. As learning progresses, the learners internalize the rules in the use of other semantic functions ( Selinker 1972) as shown by the Level 1, 2 and 3 learners.

It was also observed that the acquisition of METAPHORICAL or ABSTRACT use of prepositions was problematic to learners at all levels in relation to the use of the preposition AT. Only 10 percent of the learners used the preposition AT metaphorically in the sentence below to show LEVEL OF ABILITY. 20. She is bad at remembering facts. Most of the learners used misinformed prepositions that did not correspond to the contextual meaning of the test item provided. This was an indicator that METAPHORICAL use of prepositions had not been internalized in the language learner data.

111

It was observed that the learners used space in relation to DIMENSION, DIRECTION and POSITIVE POSITION. This was illustrated in learners examples below 21. The teacher is at school. 22. The teacher is from school. 23. The teacher is in school. 24. The teacher is to school. In sentence (21), the learners used the preposition AT to indicate space as a POSITION. Most of the learners used AT in this sense. In sentence (22), reference is being used in terms of DIRECTION (that is, away)-in respect to movement from a destination. With the use of IN , in the same context (23), school becomes a threedimensional object . 30 percent of the learners at Level 3 used such a sense. In sentence (24), TO shows space in relation to movement to a DESTINATION. It was thus observed that learners at Level 1 had acquired the meanings of space as a POSITION and DIRECTION. As instruction progresses, the learners could now use other prepositions with other variables example three-dimensional objects. of meaning for

The learners showed that they had internalised the use of the preposition AT in relation to RESULTATIVE meaning. This indicated the state of having reached the destination. This was illustrated in the learners example below: 25. Though it rained heavily, we arrived at last.

112

The use of the preposition AT was signaled by the adverb last .Over 75 per cent of the learners at all the three levels of learning did not show knowledge of having internalised the semantic meaning of STIMULUS in relation to REACTION. The learners could not show the relation between an emotion and its stimulus by use of the preposition AT. This was exemplified in the learners examples below: 26. The poor mother was surprised at her sons behavior. With the use of AT in sentence (26) above, the relation between an emotion and stimulus is expressed. Most learners in the study used the context in the sentence above with prepositions like WITH and TO. When sentence (26) is used with the preposition WITH, the meaning expressed is that of a quasi-agent. In addition, the use of the preposition TO in the context above indicated the person reacting and in this case ``the sons behaviour which sounds rather ambiguous.

It was thus established that the acquisition of the preposition AT by the learners at the three levels of learning was largely influenced by the variability of the semantic function of that preposition.

TABLE 12: The Preposition TO LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 1 50.2 Group score 40.9 48.6

113

The above table shows that the preposition TO had the highest score at Level 2 followed by Level 1 and then Level 3. As observed earlier, learners at Level 2 showed the highest acquisition rate for the preposition IN, ON and AT. This was attributed to the transfer of training as per Selinker(1972). The acquisition of the preposition TO was the lowest at Level 3. In the literature review on the syllabus coverage at Level 3 of learning, It was observed that no reference was made to learning of prepositions and the meanings they encoded. The focus at this level was on differentiating between a connector and a preposition.

The preposition TO was used in various contexts to indicate variability of meaning in its semantic functions .In relation to space, the learners used the preposition TO as a DIRECTION, POSITION, MOVEMENT and DESTINATION (as in completion of an action).The Level 1 learners used the preposition TO, to show direction as in movement towards a certain destination. This was illustrated in the use of the preposition TO in the learners example below: 27. Tom went to the door However, 50 percent of the learners used a different preposition other than TO, to indicate POSITION and DESTINATION. For example the use of BEHIND in the same context as in (27) above indicated relative position.25 percent of the learners used the

114

preposition AT in context (27) which expressed space as a relative position.

In expressing temporal relations, the learners showed that they had internalized the use of the preposition TO, to indicate end of a PERIOD.A small percentage of learners at Level 1 used the context in (27) above with the preposition WITH (as in Tom went with the door).The use of WITH in this context expresses the relation of accompaniment (that is, in company with). When

WITH is used in this sense, it should be followed by an animate complement which was not in context (27) above. In reference to Selinkers (1972) Interlanguage theory, this type of acquisition can be attributed to language transfer as in strategy one. Such constructions were not observed at Level 2 and 3 with the same context. This shows that, as learning progressed the learner

acquired the correct use of the preposition TO and WITH.

It was observed that the acquisition of the preposition TO in relation to REACTION was problematic to the learners at the three levels of learning.90 percent of the learners could not use the preposition TO, to show a reaction .TO can be used to identify the person reacting. Instead of using TO, to show REACTION in the following test item(28),the learners used the preposition IN SPITE OF. 28. TO my annoyance, they rejected the offer.

115

The use of the preposition TO in the above sentence was to show the PERSON REACTING .However, as pointed out earlier, most of the learners could not use the preposition TO in this sense. They used the preposition IN SPITE OF. The use of IN SPITE OF indicated relations of CONCESSION. This showed that the learners had internalized the meaning of concession and not REACTION in relation to the use of the preposition IN SPITE OF.

In showing COMPARISON in terms of RATIO, the learners at the three levels used the preposition TO, correctly in the context (28). This indicated that they had mastered the variable of

COMPARISON in terms of RATIO.

The METAPHIORICAL use of the preposition TO was not internalized by the learners. This was illustrated in the learners example below: 29. I may be his daughter, but not to his manners. The use of the preposition TO in the above sentence showed its metaphorical sense to mean DIFFERENT. However, most of the learners used the same context with preposition IN ,ON which indicated space relations in terms of VOLUME and SURFACE. A conclusion was therefore drawn that the learners had not acquired the METAPHIORICAL use of prepositions.

116

The GOAL relation was internalized by the learners in relation to the preposition TO . Most of the learners used the preposition TO ,to show a GOAL in the following test item. 30. Nyakundi lent the book to me. This indicated that the use of TO, to express GOAL relations had been mastered by the learners.

In terms of variability of meaning of semantic functions encoded by the preposition TO; eleven such functions were tested in the learners test item. It was observed that as learners learned the use of the preposition TO, they found some semantic functions to be easy to acquire and others difficult. The learners acquired the use of relations of DIRECTION, POSITION DESTINATION, GOAL, TIME, MOVEMENT earlier than those of REACTION,

PERCEPTION and METAPHORICAL .However, as instruction progressed, the use of prepositions with other variable meanings was observed.

Table 13:The Preposition FOR Group score LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 44.3 47.0

117

LEVEL 3

49.5

The group scores above shows that the performance of the preposition FOR was highest at Level 3 than at Level 2 and 1.The group scores show that the use of the preposition FOR was not easy for the learners at all the three levels.

The learners used the preposition FOR in relation to TIME as a point, period or duration .It was observed that at Level 1, 60 percent of the preposition FOR was used to indicate TIME as DURATION. At the same level, 30 percent of the learners used the preposition SINCE and FROM to show a PERIOD of time. At Level 2 of learning, 85% learners used the preposition FOR in reference to DURATION. Whereas some used the preposition IN to indicate a PERIOD of TIME. At Level 3 of learning.90 percent of the preposition FOR was used to indicate TIME as DURATION and only 10 percent as a PERIOD in time.

The observation made is that as learning progresses, the learners were able to use relation of TIME as DURATION without any problems.

The contingency relation of the preposition FOR was used in relation to PURPOSE and INTENDED DESTINATION. It was observed that 70 percent of the learners at Level 1 used the

118

preposition TO in the same context to express relations of TARGET or PURPOSE; rather than FOR to indicate This is exemplified in the learners example below. 31. The children ran for shelter 32. The children ran to shelter In sentence (31) above, FOR is used to express INTENDED PURPOSE while sentence (32), TO is used to show INTENDED GOAL/TARGET. This indicated that the learners at Level 1 had internalized the use of space relations as a TARGET or GOAL and not a PURPOSE. This perception however, changed as learning progressed. At Level 2 and Level 3, the learners showed familiarity in the use of the preposition FOR to express relations of PURPOSE as well as INTENDED DESTINATION. This was attributed to the factor of instruction as per Selinker (1972). the same.

The preposition

FOR was also used to indicate INTENDED

RECIPIENT. When so used, the recipient may or may not receive the object. It was observed that the learners at all the three levels used the preposition FOR to express relations of intended recipient. When the preposition TO is used in the same context, it shows the ACTUAL RECIPIENT.30 percent of the learners at Level 3 used this sense. This is illustrated in the learners item below: 33.He made a doll to his daughter. 34. He made a doll for his daughter.

119

Sentence (33) above was common with the learners at Level 1.Which indicated actual recipient while in sentence (34) FOR was used to show intended recipient. Most of the learners showed familiarity in the use of the preposition FOR to show the idea of SUPPORT. The construction below illustrates the learners use of the preposition FOR to indicate relations of SUPPORT. 35. I can see that you are for the plan. 36. I can see that you are with the plan. In sentence (35) above, FOR is used to express relations of SUPPORT. While in sentence (36), the learners used the preposition WITH in the same context which implies a different meaning. This was observed from learners at Level 2 and 3, WITH in this case is used with the idea of SOLIDARITY. The implication here is that at initial stages of learning, the learners have internalized the notion of SUPPORT with the use of FOR and not SOLIDARITY , which has been internalized by the learners at a later stage of learning. Therefore, learners can use prepositions with other variables in meaning as instruction progressed, as per Selinker (1972).

It was observed that in the acquisition of the preposition FOR, some semantic functions like DURATION, RECIPIENT, RATIO, PURPOSE, REASON and SUPPORT were acquired at an earlier stage in relation to use of the preposition FOR. On the other hand,

120

relations of ACTUAL RECIPIENT, INTENDED DESTINATION, STANDARD RESPECT were acquired later by the same learners in relation to use of FOR as a preposition.

TABLE 14: The Preposition FROM Group score LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 42.3 44.0 58.4

Learners at Level 3 expressed the best familiarity in the use of the preposition FROM as compared to Level 1 and Level 2.Again this is attributed to transfer of training as per Selinker (1972) interlanguage principles. What can be observed is that on average, the preposition FROM was acquired with difficulty as illustrated by the low group scores. While expressing PROCESS relations, notions of SOURCE and ORIGIN were considered in the test items. It was observed that the learners used the preposition FOR to express the idea of POSSESSION; only a low percentage of learners used the preposition FROM in the same context to indicate relation of SOURCE OR ORIGIN. This showed that the learners had mastered the relations of POSSESSION earlier than that of SOURCE. This can be explained by the linguistic experience that the learners had in their language data at that point in time.

121

TIME relations were used with the preposition FROM to indicate starting POINT. Most of the learners had internalized this notion of TIME. 37. The boy came in the village just like other days. 38. The boy came from the village just like other days. With the use of the preposition IN, in sentence (37) above, space is viewed as an AREA where village is being perceived as a volume where someone can enter.

However, with the use of the preposition FROM as in sentence (38) ,space is viewed as MOVEMENT in terms of location. Very few learners perceived space in the sense of (38).This indicated that the learners had acquired the relation of space as a VOLUME or AREA than as MOVEMENT to location.

Another observation made is that the learners could not distinguish between the use of the preposition FROM and FOR to indicate notions of CAUSE and PURPOSE. The learners use of such notions was seen in the following test item. 39. The refugees died from lack of food. 40. The refugees died for lack of food. In the same syntactical context as above, the learners either used FROM or FOR. With the use of FROM as in context show MATERIAL CAUSE .Consequently, the use of FOR as (40)

122

expressed PURPOSE. Most of the learners approached the context with the sense of PURPOSE by using FOR and few used the one of MATERIAL CAUSE with FROM. The use of relations of PERCEPTION with the preposition FROM was well internalized by the learners, as well as relations of

SEPERATION/DESTINATION.

The METAPHORICAL use of the preposition FROM proved to be problematic for the learners at the three levels of learning. It was observed that the meaning of the preposition FROM, through metaphorical connection, to its locative use was not internalized by the learners. This was established in the test item below. 41. His changing jobs was like moving from the frying pan into the fire The test item (41) above necessitated the use of the preposition FROM to indicate a metaphorical use for the idiomatic expression in context .However, it was observed that most of the learners instead used other prepositions like WITH, TO and ON. This was a clear indication that such learners had not acquired the metaphorical use of the preposition FROM .It was therefore observed that the acquisition of the preposition FROM was largely influenced by variability of meaning in the semantic functions I conveyed. Earlier on, from the group scores for each level of learning, it was evident that the scores were low. Considering the acquisition of the semantic functions of FROM, a conclusion can

123

be drawn that the learners were less conversant with such semantic functions in use. This can be used to explain the low group scores for the preposition FROM.

Table 15:The Preposition WITH Group score LEVEL: 1 LEVEL: 2 LEVEL: 3 41.8 42.0 45.2

Table 15 above shows that the preposition with was best learned at Level 3 than at Level 2 and 1. This can be attributed to transfer of instruction as per Selinker (1972). Conceptualization of an item increases with the period of instruction. Since the learners at Level 3 had a longer period of instruction on the use prepositions could be a reason why their language learner data shows some improvement in the use of the preposition WITH. The preposition WITH was mainly used in relation to PROCESS meanings. Most learners were able to use the preposition WITH in relation to process relations of MANNER, INSTRUMENT and POSSESSION. It was however observed that the learners had problems in the use of this preposition with SUPPORT / OPINION meaning. Most of the learners used locative prepositions like TO, ON, which mainly

124

expressed spatial relations. Others used FOR and WITH alternatively to indicate the notion of SUPPORT. This was shown in the test item below. 42. Go with public trend for safety. 43. Go for public trend for safety. 44. Go to public trend for safety. The use of the preposition WITH as in context (42) indicates the idea of SOLIDARITY whereas the use of FOR in context (43) conveys that one of SUPPORT. In the test item the learners mainly used context (44). That is, they used the preposition TO yet the context did not necessitate the use of such a preposition. This shows that the learner had acquired the DIRECTION relations and not those of SUPPORT and SOLIDARITY. When followed by an animate complement WITH has the

meaning in company with or together with. A low percentage of learners used the preposition WITH to show relations of ACCOMPANIMENT in the test item below. 45 Please do come with me 46 Please do come for me 47 Please do come to me A few learners used the preposition WITH in the context of (45) above which expressed relations of COMPANY. This shows that the use of WITH to show COMPANY relations had not been

125

internalized. Most of the learners used the preposition FOR and TO in the same context.

The use of the preposition FOR expressed relations of ACTUAL RECEPIENT or PURPOSE. Earlier on, it was observed that while using the preposition FOR, the learners displayed a higher level of mastery in the use of relations of PURPOSE and ACTUAL RECIPIENT. This may explain why in context (46) above, the learners used FOR and not WITH. This was characterized by the learners linguistic data at that particular time. In context (47) the use of the preposition TO expresses MOVEMENT toward a DESTINATION. A good number of learners used context (46 and 47). It was thus observed that the learners had mastered the use of the preposition TO than WITH.

Table 16: The Preposition BESIDE Group score LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 9. 6 11. 0 11. 2

The table above shows that the performance of the preposition BESIDE was low as indicated in the group scores above. This is an indicator that the preposition BESIDE has not been internalized by the learners .In terms of variability of meaning, the preposition

126

BESIDE

conveyed

very few

semantic

functions;

mainly

POSITION, ORIENTATION and METAPHORICAL.

The learners used the preposition BESIDE in relation to space as a position. However, very few learners used the preposition in this sense. Most of them viewed space as RELATIVE POSITION not in relation with BESIDE but IN FRONT OF. Other learners used the preposition WITH to show COMPANY. It was established that only 10 per cent of the learners used the preposition BESIDE in this sense. Chomsky (1981) says that a learner selects a certain item depending on his linguistic experience. Therefore, it was established that the learners had not acquired the preposition BESIDE in relation to space as a POSITION.

It was observed that only 30 per cent of the learners used the preposition BESIDE to show the notion of ORIENTATION. Instead they used BEHIND, ON and OVER. This shows that in the language learner data, there was no preposition BESIDE in reference to a point of orientation. Consequently, there was no learner who used the preposition BESIDE with the

METAPHORICAL relation.

It was thus observed that the learners at all the three levels showed very limited mastery in the use of the preposition BESIDE in relation to its few semantic functions. Despite the preposition

127

having very few semantic functions; the learners could not use the preposition in the test items provided appropriately.

Table 17: The Preposition OVER Group score LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 27.0 28.0 31.2

It can be observed that the preposition OVER was not easily used by the learners at all the three levels. The group score for the preposition OVER at each level of learning was very low. This was an indicator of difficulty in use.

The learners used the preposition OVER in relation to different semantic functions. Over 50 per cent of the learners used the preposition OVER in relation to space as a POSITION. This was seen in the test item below. 48. The keys hung over the door. 49. The keys hung on the door. 50. The keys hung at the door. In sentence (49) above, place is viewed as a surface while in (50), space is viewed as a positive position. The learners at level 1 used the meaning of POSITION in reference to OVER . In the same context ,learners at Level 2and 3used the preposition ON and AT

128

respectively which expressed space as a SURFACE and RELATIVE POSITION .This indicates that as learning progresses, the learners acquire use of other prepositions irrespective of the context in use. The failure to use OVER in showing POSITION showed that the learners had acquired the preposition ON and AT earlier than OVER. Apart from viewing space as a POSITION, the preposition OVER was also used to show the idea of DESTINATION as in the test item below. 51. The blanket was drawn over him.

OVER

in

the

above

sentence

indicates

the

relative

DESTINATION. In this context, most of the learners used the preposition ON, and TO, AT and not OVER. This indicated that the learners had acquired the use of the preposition ON, To and AT in expressing spatial relations and not OVER.

The sense of PASSAGE/MOVEMENT is used with verbs of motion together with the preposition OVER. In this study, it was observed that learners were conversant with the use of the preposition OVER to express

PASSAGE/MOVEMENT. This was illustrated in the test item below. 52. The student jumped over the wall.

129

In the same context, 10 per cent of the learners used the preposition ON instead of OVER. This showed that the learners perceived the wall as a surface or a two dimensional object.

The preposition OVER was also used to indicate a relation of ORIENTATION, where two things are being spatially related viz a POINT OF ORIENTATION. This sense was used in the test item below but with very few learners. 53. The old man lives over the hill.

In the above illustration, OVER shows the notion of BEYOND (= on the far side of) in relation to the point where the speaker is standing. Another observation made in relation to context (53) is that most of the learners used the preposition ON and BEHIND. The use of ON expressed the idea of space in relation to SURFACE. While the use of BEHIND also indicated a point of orientation. The implication here is that the preposition ON was earlier acquired compared to OVER. Also the use of BEHIND to indicate point of orientation that OVER shows that most of the learners had not internalized the use of OVER to show ORIENTATION.

The preposition OVER was also used in relation to static resultative meaning indicating the state of having reached the

130

destination. Few learners used the preposition OVER in the test item below:

54. At last we are over the hill. The preposition OVER in this case means that they are now

beyond. Most learners used the preposition ON and AT in the above context which expressed the meaning of SURFACE and POSITION respectively.

OVER (dimension type 1/2) especially when preceded by all, have pervasive meaning which is either static or motional. The following test items illustrate this statement. 55. The leaves lay thick over the ground. 56. The children splashed water over me.

It was observed that most learners used the preposition ON in both context (55) and (56). The use of ON expressed the meaning of TARGET in (56) and SURFACE in (55). The failure of the learners to use the preposition OVER in any of the sentences above was an indicator that the preposition OVER was difficult to master.

TABLE 18: The Preposition DESPITE

131

Group score LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 10.5 11.5 12.7

The scores above shows that the preposition DESPITE was used with difficulties. This is indicated in the low group scores. This showed that most learners could not use this preposition to show relations of concession. This is illustrated below. 57. I like him despite his faults.

In the above sentence, DESPITE is used to show concession which means that for all his faults, he likes him. Most learners used preposition IN SPITE OF and with the same context. In using IN SPITE OF, the same relation of concession is achieved. However, this showed that learners had internalized the use of IN SPITE OF and not DESPITE for similar semantic function. The use of WITH in the same context implied that the learners perceived the object in terms of possession. This indicated that even though the use of WITH was misinformed in the above context, nevertheless, the learners had acquired the use of the preposition and its semantic function.

132

It was observed that despite the preposition DESPITE conveying few semantic functions, most of the learners were not conversant with those few semantic functions it conveyed.

TABLE 19: The Preposition IN SPITE OF Group score LEVER 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 7.8 8.3 9.0

The table above shows that the preposition IN SPITE OF was problematic for the learners at all the three levels of learning. This is indicated in the low scores obtained in the use of the same preposition.

The preposition IN SPITE OF had similar semantic functions to those of the preposition DESPITE. It is mainly used to show CONCESSION just like DESPITE. In the test items provided to the learners, only a few of them used this preposition correctly to show the meaning of for all. It was also observed that despite this preposition conveying very few meanings, the learners could not use it correctly. This means that it was rare in the language data of the learners.

133

TABLE 20: The Preposition UNDERNEATH Group score LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 18. 0 18. 3 17. 5

The table above shows that the preposition UNDERNEATH was used to show RELATIVE POSITION in relation to two objects. It was observed that few learners used this preposition to show relative position. This was illustrated in the test item below. 58. The coin is underneath the tin. The use of the preposition UNDERNEATH in the above context shows that the learner has used it to show a direct vertical relationship or spatial proximity. However, few learners used this preposition but instead made use of the preposition IN and ON to indicate relationship of space as a VOLUME or a SURFACE. It was also observed that the learners used the preposition UNDERNEATH in relation to space as a DIRECTION and SURFACE.

134

It was also observed that the learners used the preposition UNDERNEATH in relation to space as a DIRECTION and SURFACE than a PASSAGE. This was observed in the use of the preposition TO, ON and OVER in the same contextual test item with the Level 1 learners. However, as instruction progresses, the same preposition was used in relation to PASSAGE especially with the meaning of destination by a few learners. It was also observed that a small fraction of the learners used the preposition UNDERNEATH to show the notion of being covered completely. Instead most of the learners used the preposition IN to indicate such a meaning. An example from the learners work includes: 59. The victims are underneath the rubble. 60. The victims are in the rubble. In sentence (59), the use of UNDERNEATH indicates an idea of being covered completely. However, in (60), the use of IN shows that the learner viewed space as a VOLUME. This shows that again most of the learners had internalized the use of the preposition IN than UNDERNEATH in relation to SPACE.

The use of METHAPHORICAL meaning of the preposition UNDERNEATH was the most difficult for the learners at all the three levels. Only 10 per cent of the learners used the preposition

135

UNDERNEATH metaphorically to show vertical direction in abstract scale.

TABLE 21: The Preposition BENEATH Group score LEVEL 1 LEVER 2 LEVEL 3 10. 8 11. 0 10. 5

It can be observed that the preposition BENEATH had very low scores. This was an indication that the learners experienced problems in using this preposition. The low score was an indicator pf difficulty in the use of the preposition.

The learners did not use the preposition BENEATH in showing relationship of space. They did not use this preposition in relation to space as ORIENTATION, RELATIVE POSITION and VERTICAL DIRECTION in relation to abstract scale. Instead the learners used this preposition in relation to SPACE as PASSAGE and DESTINATION. In the learners construction that required the use of learners used UNDERNEATH in expressing space in terms of relative position. The learners substituted UNDENEATH for BENEATH in showing relative position vertically. This shows that

136

the

learners

had

acquired

UNDERNEATH

earlier

than

BENEATH.

The METAPHORICAL use of BENEATH in relation to abstract scale was very difficult for the learners. In the learners construction below, the preposition BENEATH was rarely used. 61. Such manners are beneath him.

The use of BENEATH in the above sentence shows abstract scale in relation to direction. It was observed that most learners used prepositions like FOR, WITH and IN, in the same construction. This was an indication that the learners had acquired the preposition FOR, WITH and IN earlier than BENEATH.

TABLE 22: The Preposition BEHIND Group score LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 14. 7 16. 3 16. 0

The above display shows that the preposition BEHIND was problematic for the learners. The low scores is an indicator of difficulty in the use of the preposition.

137

The learners used the preposition BEHIND in relation to SPACE as a RELATIVE POSITION as in The teacher is standing behind the door. They also used it in relation to space as a DESTINATION, as in I dashed behind the bush to hide. A few learners perceived the preposition BEHIND in relation to space as a POINT of ORIENTATION.

As observed earlier, the METAPHORICAL use of the preposition BEHIND was difficult to express. Few learners used the preposition BEHIND in a context that expressed metaphorical relative support.

TABLE 23: The Preposition IN FRONT OF Group score LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 9. 8 10. 8 12. 1

The low group scores in the table above is a clear indication that the preposition IN FRONT OF was learned with difficulty by the learners at all three levels.

The preposition IN FRONT OF is mainly a spatial preposition that is used to INDICATE RELATIVE POSITION of two objects. 50

138

per cent of the learners used this preposition in relation to SPACE as a relative position. However, the other 50 per cent used it in the sense of a converse opposite with the preposition BEHIND .It was observed that in a construction that necessitated the use of IN FRONT OF or BEHIND to show relative position, the learners used BEHIND. This was similar to the use of IN FRONT OF to show orientation. This indicated that the learners had acquired the use of BEHIND earlier than IN FRONT OF. It was also observed that despite this preposition conveying a few semantic functions; the learners had problems in using it in sentences. This can be attributed to transfer of instruction in formal learning. Selinker (1972)

TABLE 24: The Preposition AMONG Group score LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 12.8 13.7 12.6

The low group score is an indication that this preposition was used with difficulties by the learners at the three levels. This preposition was used in the metaphorical sense to show relative position as in the construction He is standing among friends. However, in this study, it was observed that few learners used this preposition in this sense of relative preposition. Most of the learners used the

139

preposition AMONG in relation to the meaning of ADDITION or BELONGING. Despite this preposition conveying few meanings, the learner could not use it correctly.

Up to this level, the researcher had analyzed the use of the prepositions in relation to variability of semantic functions.

Summary The above section was a detailed description in establishing whether there is a relationship between semantic functions and the acquisition of prepositions. It was observed that as learning progresses, the learners can use prepositions with other variables in meaning. It was also observed that the learners at Level 1 were conversant with prepositions in expressing TIME relations, like point of time, period of time and duration. A few of them used the various prepositions in showing SPACE in relation to position and direction. However, most of them could not use the prepositions to express relations of CONTINGENCY and PROCESS as purpose, concession, target, recipient, quasi agent, source and agentive. The metaphorical use of prepositions was the hardest for the learners at this level.

However, as time progressed, it was observed that the learners at Level 2 and Level 3 used the prepositions with other semantic functions comfortably compared to learners at level one. For

140

example, the use of SPACE in relation to PASSAGE, DESTINATION, PERVASIVE, ORIENTATION, and

DIMENSION (three dimensional objects) improved. Also the meanings of CONCESSION, RECIPIENT, GOAL, and

INSTRUMENT also improved at Level 2 and 3. It was also observed that the METAPHORICAL use of the prepositions was the most difficult for the learners at the three levels .It was observed that not all the semantic functions of the prepositions were used by the learners. The use of some semantic functions increased the range of others.

Up to this point, the directional hypothesis one in this research was accepted and thus leading to the rejection of the null hypothesis. A conclusion was therefore drawn that there was a relationship between semantic functions and acquisition of prepositions.

The following section is an attempt to ascertain whether markedness/ unmarkedness determine the acquisition of English prepositions.

Preposition acquisition and markedness In section 4.2 of this thesis, it was established that a relationship existed between semantic functions and acquisition of English prepositions. The following data analysis is aimed at showing

141

whether the acquisition of prepositions is determined by markedness issues.

The theory of markedness and Core Grammar Chomsky (1981), Rutherford (1982) puts it that structures that are basic and core are unmarked hence easy to be acquired. While those structures that are peripheral are marked hence considered difficult to acquire .These structures are also peripheral as opposed to core. Also Zobl (1983) puts it hat the core grammar of the language is viewed as unmarked; and those that are not taken to be part of the core grammar are marked grammar of the language and will be learnt later.

In this thesis, the term marked was used to refer to prepositions that conveyed few meanings. Such prepositions are semantically less loaded and therefore not frequent in the data of learners thus peripheral. However, the term unmarked was used to refer to prepositions that are basic and core in use. Such prepositions are semantically more loaded, thus frequent. Marked prepositions were expected to be difficult while the unmarked ones are expected to be easy. Lehrer (1985: 399) and Waugh (1982:302): say that the unmarked member may occur in a wider range of contexts and will be more frequent.

142

The following procedure was used as a binary distribution of prepositional meanings and allocation of scores to the prepositions under study.

TABLE 25: Unmarkedness / Markedness Ranking

Setting Very marked Marked Unmarked Relatively unmarked Very unmarked

Percentage score 0 19 % 20 39 % 40 59 % 60 79 % 80 %

From the actual findings, some prepositions were learned with ease while others were learned with difficulties; in relation to the semantic functions they convey. With regard to Rutherfords (ibid) and Chomskys (ibid) Greenberg (1966), Croft (1966) definition of markedness; the observation that can be made from the actual results is that the learners are progressing from unmarked options to marked ones. Prepositions which encoded more than eight meanings were considered to be unmarked due to their many meanings while those with less than seven meanings were considered marked.

143

The prepositions FOR, TO, ON, IN, AT, FROM, WITH encode more than eight semantic functions. The preposition IN was the highest with sixteen meanings followed by ON with fifteen meanings. Among this group, the prepositions ON and IN had the highest percentage score that is over 70 percent. They were therefore among the best performed prepositions. Prepositions like FOR, WITH, FROM, AT also were heavily loaded in terms of semantic functions but had an average score.

In this research, an increase in percentage score indicated ease in the use of the preposition. This equally translates into easy/first acquisition of such prepositions. (Rutherford 1982). The secondary school learners therefore found such prepositions to be easy to use. According to the definition of unmarkedness, in this research, such prepositions were expected to be easy to use due to their many semantic functions.

The learners found them (FOR, IN, TO, ON, WITH, FROM, AT) to be relatively easy. The prepositions BEHIND, BENEATH, BESIDE, UNDERNEATH, IN FRONT OF, OVER, IN SPITE OF, DESPITE, and AMONG encoded less than seven semantic functions. Prepositions like BESIDE, DESPITE, BENEATH, IN FRONT OF, AMONG encoded only three semantic functions while IN SPITE OF had two functions. The results indicate that despite these prepositions having few meanings; learners had

144

difficulties in their use. Such prepositions had the lowest percentage score; as less as 7 percent. The low scores were an indication of difficulty in the use of the preposition. This was in line with the application of the term markedness in this research. Rutherford (ibid), Chomsky (ibid) and Zobl (1983) say that forms that are grammatically simple or basic will be learned with ease. Despite these prepositions encoding very few semantic roles; the results showed that the learners found them difficult to use, which indicated late learning/acquisition.

Therefore, considering the results as in section 4.2 of this thesis, it is quite evident that the secondary school learners are progressing from un marked to marked options. The learners acquired the prepositions that were semantically more loaded first than those that are less loaded.61.9 percent of the marked prepositions turned up to be difficult while only 38.1 percent of the unmarked preposition turned up to be easy. This is captured in the figure below.

145

Marked and difficult unmarked and easy

FIG 1: Preposition markedness degree The figure above shows that the difficulty in the use of prepositions is due to markedness.

Up to this point, the researcher found that the difficulty in the use of prepositions was due to the markedness factor. Therefore, the directional hypothesis 2 in this study is accepted and the hypothesis rejected. This automatically paved way into null the

investigation whether frequency(as a markedness factor) of forms was also the determining issue in the acquisition of the prepositions. This is discussed in the next sub-section.

Prepositional acquisition and frequency of semantic functions

61.9

146

Greenberg (1966) says that frequency of use is a property of parole/ performance not of language structure or competence. Frequency explains structure in terms of use. Lexical markedness can be explained by frequency of use. Radford (1988) puts it

that structures that are frequent or regular or common are unmarked hence easy to be acquired. While those forms that are infrequent, irregular or uncommon are considered to be marked hence difficult to acquire. The statistical evidence in section 4.1.3 of this thesis shows that the secondary school learners found the prepositions which were semantically more loaded like IN, ON, AT, TO, FOR, WITH and FROM to be relatively easy to acquire while those that were semantically less loaded to be difficult to learn; like BENEATH, AMONT, IN SPITE OF, IN FRONT OF, UNDERNEATH and OVER.

Generally, it has been assumed that the more a learner hears a structure, the sooner it will be acquired (as per Larsen Freemen, 1976). The prepositions like IN, ON, AT, TO ,FOR and FROM could have been acquired easily because they are common in the language data of the learners. The various semantic functions they convey may have increased their occurrence in the language learner. However, prepositions which were acquired late like BENEATH, OVER, IN FRONT OF, DEPSITE, AMONT, BESIDE, BEHIND and IN SPITE OF could have been due to their infrequency in use. The few semantic functions such prepositions

147

conveyed may have reduced their occurrence in the language learner data. Larsen Freeman (ibid) says that frequently occurring forms will somehow be represented in the childs performance. The literature review (see chapter 2) carried out on these prepositions showed that most of them expressed as less as two to three possible meanings. According to Waugh (1982) such prepositions are a case of textual markedness because they are rare and uncommon in the data the learner is exposed to. The prepositions have a very low semantic flexibility/frequency, which reduces their chances of occurrence in the language data making them to be uncommon. For example, the learners showed the highest level of unfamiliarity in the use of the preposition BENEATH which expresses only three possible meanings. Despite having such few meanings, it scored less that 12 percent. These prepositions may have few meanings but they are grammatically infrequent, rare and uncommon. This could be the reason why learners found them to be very difficult to learn. Givon (1991) also says that structures that are processed with more difficulty and are acquired frequency. later by children is probably due to their lower

Rutherford (1982), Gass (1989) and Wode (1984) say that the development sequences seem to reflect the internal complexity of structure system to be learned, hence the degree of markedness.

148

The above scholars asserted that the unmarked or less marked structures are learned early while the more marked ones later. From the findings of this study the unmarked prepositions were learned early as compared to the marked ones. The unmarked prepositions (high semantic functions) will be acquired early because they appear to be frequent in the language data of the secondary school learners. Another observation from the findings is that the prepositions that expressed many (> eight) possible meanings had high score in the actual performance. The higher scores, is in indication of increasing ease in the use of the prepositions. This prepositions re IN, ON, AT, FOR, FROM, TO and WITH. These prepositions were learned with ease due to their common occurrence in the language data. Greenberg (ibid) says that the unmarked categories are more frequent than the marked ones which are less frequent. Greenberg (ibid) also says that the unmarked categories will be more easily remembered because they occur often.

The high frequency of these prepositions in the language data was attributed to their high semantic frequency. A preposition like IN, for example, expressed sixteen possible meanings and it consequently scored a high percentage of 74.7 percent in the actual performance. Similarly, the preposition ON expressed fifteen

149

possible meanings and it also scored 75.7 percent. This is an indicator that these prepositions were common in the learner language data and that is why they were performed with ease. As Gass (1989) puts it, such prepositions will be learned early because they are available in the data a learner is exposed to. Similarly, Fenk Oczlon (ibid) says that a category that is used more frequently will be easier to process in a number of ways than a rarely used category.

Up to this point, the researcher can confidently assert in relation to markedness that the difficult in the use of prepositions is due to frequency as a markedness factor. Thus the frequency of prepositional semantic functions influence the acquisition of prepositions by the secondary school learners.Therefore the lower the frequency of the prepositional semantic functions, the more difficult the use of such a preposition and the vice versa is true. An assertion was therefore made that a preposition with many semantic functions may be frequent in use and thus common in

the language data of learners than the one with very few semantic functions.

Summary The statistical evidence adduced in section 4.3 and 4.3 (i) provide ground evidence in accepting the directional hypothesis 2 in this thesis. It was thus established that markedness determines the

150

acquisition of the English prepositions. The null hypothesis was thus rejected. Unmarked prepositions were acquired first and with ease than the marked ones.

The following section is an attempt to investigate the continuum in the acquisition of the English prepositions.

Preposition Continuum The following is a description of the preposition order at the three levels of learning. The following figure displays the group performance of the prepositions.

(0-19%) (20-39%) (40-59%) (60-79%)

Figure 2: Summary of preposition performance

151

The above figure presents the group performance of the preposition continuum below. .. ON, GROUP I IN

GROUP II AT, TO, FOR, FROM , WITH

GROUP III OVER

GROUP IV BESIDE, DESPITE, IN SPITE OF, BENEATH, IN FRONT OF, BEHIND, AMONG, UNDERNEATH

152

Figure 3: Preposition acquisition order observed

Figure 3 above shows that GROUP I structures are acquired before the structures in GROUP II, III and IV. One can also observe from the findings that the acquisition of Group IV structures implies that GROUP III, II and I structures have been acquired and the acquisition of GROUP II structures implies that GROUP I structures have been acquired.

The GROUP III structure is only acquired before the GROUP IV structures only.

The Group I prepositions (IN, ON) were thus easy; GROUP II prepositions (AT, TO, FOR, FROM, WITH) were relatively easy; GROUP III preposition (OVER) was difficult and GROUP IV prepositions (BESIDE, DESPITE, IN SPITE OF, BENEATH, BEHIND, AMONG, UNDERNEATH) were the most difficult.

It was thus observed that no preposition was very easy(that is scored above 80 percent) for the learners. This implies that learners generally find prepositions to be difficult to master.

153

The above preposition order shows that easy prepositions are first acquired followed by the difficult ones. Jakobson (1941, 1963), says that structures that are acquired early are usually simple in their abstract structure and also more easy for language users.

The prepositions in GROUP I and II were acquired first because of some factors. Fenk- Oczlon (1991: 373 381) says that a category that is used more frequently will be easy to process in a number of ways than a rarely used category. The prepositions IN, ON, AT, TO, FOR, FROM and WITH conveys many semantic functions that may have increased their occurrence in the learners language data. Such prepositions were unmarked/easy.

Many prepositions in GROUP III and IV were difficult to be performed by the learners. These were, BENEATH,

UNDERNEATH, DESPITE, BESIDE, OVER, IN FRONT OF, IN SPITE OF and AMONG. These prepositions had very low scores which implied an increase in the level of difficulty. Wurzel (1998) pointed out that certain language structures are less preferred than others because they strain the human language capacity. Mayerthaler (1981:4-5) supported Wurzel (ibid) by saying that the marked structures would be acquired late, processed with difficult, not widely used linguistically and less frequent. It was observed

154

that these prepositions were uncommon in the language learner data.

Lehrer (1985:399) and Waugh (1982:302) said that the unmarked member may occur in a wide range of contexts and will be more frequent Thus the prepositions with very few semantic functions were difficult to use. This was due to their rarity in the learners language data.

Radford (1988) says that when learning a second language, learners select from a range of possible Core rules on the basis of their linguistic experience. Such experience would lead them to discard some possible core rules as incompatible with the evidence that they are confronted with; and select instead other rules compatible with the evidence. This possibly explains why the language learner data was characterised with simple prepositions first and the difficult ones later.

Up to this point, the researcher has established that the acquisition of the English prepositions follow a defined continuum. This consequently leads to the rejection of the null hypothesis three and acceptance of the directional one.

The following is a brief analysis of the preposition performance across the three levels of learning.

155

KEY Level 1 level 2 Level 3

Figure 4: Summary of preposition performance across the three levels of learning.

The above figure shows that the learners performance in the prepositions improved with time. As instruction progressed, the learners improved in the use of the prepositions. This was attributed to Selinkers (1972) Interlanguage third strategy. That is, a rule enters the learners system as a result of instruction. This shows that the learners at all the three levels of learning needed instruction in order to learn the use of prepositions in relation to variability of meaning. The preposition performance was best at Level 3 of learning than Level 2 and 1. As learning progresses, the learners learn how to use prepositions with other variables of meaning.

156

Summary The discussion and statistical evidence adduced in section 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 provide ground evidence in accepting all the three directional hypotheses stated in Chapter 1 of this thesis and rejecting all the other three null hypotheses. It was established that there was a relationship between semantic functions and acquisition of English prepositions. Prepositions that conveyed many semantic functions were performed with ease

than those with a few meanings. It was also established that in English language markedness /unmarkedness relations determined the acquisition of prepositions. Unmarked prepositions were acquired first and with ease than the marked ones. Last but not least, it was ascertained that the acquisition of English prepositions followed a defined continuum. That is easy prepositions appeared first in the learners interlanguage than the difficult prepositions which were acquired later. The prepositions IN, ON, AT, FOR, TO, FROM and WITH were first learned than BENEATH, IN FRONT OF, BEHIND, UNDERNEATH, BESIDE, OVER,

AMONG, IN SPITE OF and DESPITE. The following section presents the findings, conclusions and recommendations arising from the data presented in chapter 4.

157

CHAPTER FIVE FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction In chapter four, the data analysis presented performance of prepositions by learners in secondary schools. In this chapter, the findings were discussed and from which recommendations were made.

Findings A keen study of the group scores reflected difficulty in the use the prepositions. A few prepositions turned out to be easy. It was established that there is a relationship between semantic functions and the acquisition of prepositions. It was also observed that as instruction progressed, the learners were able to use a given preposition with other variables of meaning. This explains why the learners at Level 3 performed the best in the prepositions than learners at Level 2 and 1.

It was also found out that in the English Language ,markedness/ unmarkedness relations determined the acquisition of prepositions, unmarked prepositions appeared first in the learners interlanguage as opposed to marked prepositions which appeared later.

158

Another observation made was that the acquisition of prepositions followed a defined continuum. That is, easy prepositions were learned first than difficult ones which were learned late.

From the findings it was quite evident that the secondary school learners had difficulties in the use the English prepositions. It could be observed that the learners found the same prepositions to be difficult and the same to be easy, irrespective of the different level of learning they were in. This was an indication that the acquisition of the prepositions by secondary school learners was relatively the same .

The prepositions that were difficult to be used by the learners had similar grammatical characteristics. That is, all of them had few semantic functions. These prepositions were BEHIND,

BENEATH, BESIDE, UNDERNEATH, IN FRONT OF, OVER, DESPITE, IN SPITE OF, and AMONG.

On the other hand it was observed that the prepositions that were performed with ease had a very wide range of meanings. The

highest having sixteen possible meanings . These prepositions appeared familiar to the learners. They were FOR, FROM, WITH, AT, TO, ON and IN. Thus the unmarked preposition order was found out to be prepositions with many semantic functions and the marked one, prepositions with basic/few functions

159

The research findings on the preposition performance showed that the difficulty in the use of the English prepositions was due to markedness relations. Since the content coverage of the prepositions is distributed differently in the syllabus, the research findings indicated that the prepositions were best performed at Level 3 than Level 2 and 1 .This was attributed to transfer of instruction.

Conclusion There was enough evidence from the statistical score performance in chapter 4 which showed that secondary school learners found the English prepositions to be difficult to learn. Out of the sixteen prepositions under study most of them were difficulty while only a few were learned with ease.

The semantically more loaded prepositions were found to be easy to learn. These prepositions were FOR, FROM, AT, WITH, TO, ON and IN. These prepositions were performed with ease because the learners used them correctly in the sentences given. These prepositions were familiar to the learners since they performed well in the sentences that required the use of such prepositions

.Such prepositions were learned first. Chomsky (1981), Rutherford (1982) and Zobl (1983), pointed out that structures of a language that were easy were acquired first by secondary school learners.

160

Consequently, Radford |(1988) states that structures that are learned with ease are usually frequent, regular and common. It cab therefore be concluded that the above prepositions were learned easily because they were frequent, regular and common in the language data of learners. According to the theory of Markedness and Core Grammar, structures that are unmarked are core and thus learned with a lot of ease. In this study, the prepositions that were performed with ease had many meanings. Similarly, the various possible meanings that they conveyed may have increased their chances of occurrence in the learners data. This made such prepositions to be

language

common/frequent hence easy.

Greenberg (1966) . In addition,

these prepositions were regular in the learners data due to their wide semantic ranges. Thus the more the learners were exposed to the use of these prepositions , the more they became familiar with the various meanings such prepositions encoded.

On the other hand, most of the prepositions under study were learned with a lot of difficulties .These were BENEATH ,BESIDE BEHIND ,DESPITE ,UNDERNEATH ,IN SPITE OF, IN FRONT OF, OVER and AMONG. White (1981), Wode (1976) predicted that structures that are marked will be acquired late. In this study the factor that made these prepositions to be difficult was the unavailability of such forms in the language data of the learner.

161

This was because of the difficulty in the learning of such structures.

The low scores indicated difficulty in the use of the prepositions. Chomsky(1981) in the markedness theory, pointed out that structures that are marked will tend to be difficult. From the test results in this study the difficulty in the use of prepositions was due to markedness . This explains the reason why these prepositions were learned with a lot of difficulties by the secondary school learners. Radford(ibid) also asserted that marked structures are usually infrequent, irregular and rare or uncommon . Consequently , these prepositions that were learned with difficulties can be said to be infrequent and rare or uncommon in the language data of the learner.

The marked prepositions appeared uncommon in use because of their few meanings which may have reduced their occurrence in the learners language data. Similarly, Gass (1984) pointed out that the more marked items are learned late/acquired. These prepositions appeared to be very unfamiliar to the learners and that is why, they could not use them correctly in the questions provided (see appendix (i)). Such prepositions were rarely used and the statistical evidence in this research presented such prepositions as appearing late in the preposition acquisition continuum which was an indication of difficulty in their mastery. A conclusion could

162

therefore be made that the difficulty in the use of the English prepositions was due to infrequency of such prepositions in the language data of learners.

With reference to the preposition acquisition order at the three levels of learning; it was concluded that the system was characterised with easy prepositions first then difficult ones later. That is the prepositions that were learned with difficulty or ease were the same across the three groups.

Recommendations Based on the theories of markedness, prepositions that are unavailable/ uncommon should be concentrated on more by both the teachers of English and learners. Gass (1984) says that

although it is not possible to change the order of difficulty, it may be possible to beat it. The researcher thus recommends that prepositions which are difficult could be generalized to easy

options. This can be done by first: language teachers providing use of these prepositions frequently in written essays, speech drills, situational exercises, and frequent testing. This will ensure increase in the occurrence of the marked prepositions. Secondly, language teachers should also encourage school and inter-school debates where deliberate use of prepositions like BESIDE ,BENEATH BEHIND, AMONG, OVER ,IN SPITE OF, UNDERNEATH, IN FRONT OF, and DESPITE should be over emphasized. Such a

163

competitive situation will not only motivate learners in the use of such prepositions but also will improve on their mastery of prepositions. Thirdly, the English language teacher could consider the aspect of frequency.

One suggestion is that prepositions which are uncommon should occur as many times as possible over a specified period of time. The teacher should also establish the specific number of times a marked preposition should occur and at what length of time for it to be mastered. Fourthly, language teachers should use marked prepositions in varied syntactical units. This should be done in a to avoid the clich use of prepositions that may lay emphasis on one or few meanings of a given preposition. In this case, collocation distribution of prepositions should be considered . For example, the collocation clich in the use of the preposition OVER was seen in the use of the verb jump. That is Jump over--------------- indicating the direction meaning. However, this preposition over can be used in other collocation distribution to show other

meanings. For example hang over(place position), draw over (destination), live over ( orientation ). This will facilitate the learning of prepositions.

Basing on the research findings in this study, it was established that preposition mastery is poor across the three groups of learners. Also from the literature review on the teaching and learning of

164

prepositions as provided in the secondary school curriculum , syllabus and the approved English text-books; preposition content coverage was deficient. A recommendation is thus made to the curriculum developers to restructure the English syllabus in the teaching of prepositions. One suggestion is to teach from known to unknown, and the difficult area to be given more time in the syllabus.

Thus we can have the following re-organization; Form 1: Distinguishing prepositions from Adverbs and connectors. Form 2 : Simple prepositions. Form 3 : Simple and complex prepositions. Form 4: Functions of prepositions.

The above structure will ensure that the use of prepositions and their semantic distribution is given focus. Since this is the backbone of the preposition content. Similarly, the teaching materials especially the English language textbooks should have exhaustive coverage of prepositional meanings. A part from the common meanings of PLACE, TIME, MOVEMENT, DIRECTION, other important prepositional

meanings should be covered. This should especially include the meanings of ORIENTATION, REACTION, SUPPORT,

PERVASION (static and dynamic), PASSAGE, SUBJECT

165

MATTER,

GOAL,

SOURCE,

AGENT,

RECIPIENT,

ACCOMPANIMENT, AREA, CONTRAST and RELATIVE POSITION. This will ensure that there are no semantic restrictions in the use of the prepositions. This will lead to an improved mastery of the prepositions.

Summary In chapter one of this thesis, three major objectives of the research were outlined. The results of the data analysis prove that these objectives have been achieved. The statistical findings in chapter four reveal that if specific prepositional structures are selected and focused upon during teaching, learning and testing, their acquisition will be highlighted. The learner will soon register them and use them as required . The claims by Fenk- Oczlon(1991) that a category that is used more frequently will be easier to process in a number of ways than a rarely used category is in this context acceptable as supported by empirical evidence in chapter 4. As Waugh (1982) posits, the unmarked member may occur in a wider, range of contexts; and it will be more frequent . In chapter 4, the results indicated that prepositions that conveyed several semantic functions which were acquired late and with difficult. Therefore it was observed that frequency of the semantic of prepositions played a role in the learners acquisition of the prepositions . As Dulay

166

and Burt (1982) says, if teachers knew the order in which students naturally tend to learn language structures, they could work with the process rather than against it . Further research Further research should be carried out to investigate the difficulty in the use of the English prepositions using other theories apart from the Theory of Markedness and Core Grammar used in this research. Further research should also be done on the acquisition of prepositions using a larger number of both simple and complex prepositions using the same Theory of Markedness and Core Grammar.

REFERENCES Andersen, H (2001), Markedness and the theory of linguistic

Change. Amsterdam. Benjamins.

Archangeli ,D (1992), Markedness In Bright W. ( ed) International Encyclopaedia of linguistics , New York . Oxford University Press.

Baayen, H, (1997), Effects of semantic Markedness in the processing of regular nominal singulars and plurals in Italian Italy

167

Battistella,

E,

L,

(1990),

Markedness

The

evaluative

Superstructure of Language New York. Oxford university Press.

Battistella, E, L, (1996) The Logic of Markedness, New York Oxford University Press .

Bukenya , A Kioko, A, Njengere D, Mutei V, Headstart Secondary English Form 1, Nairobi . Oxford University Press.

Bukenya A ,et, al (2003) ,Headstart Secondary English Form 2, Nairobi. Oxford University Press Bukenya A, et ,al (2004), Headstart 3,Nairobi. Oxford University Press Secondary English Form

Chomsky ,N, A (1981), Lecturers on government and binding . Dorrecht: Foris

Clark, R (1980), Errors in talking to learn- First language 1:7-32.

Closs, R, A (1975), A reference Grammar for students of English, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Corder, S (1974) , Error Analysis, Oxford, Oxford University Press .

168

Corder , S(1981) Error Analysis and Interlanguage, Oxford , Oxford University Press.

Croft, W (1990), Typology and Universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Croft ,W (1996), Markedness and Universals: from the Prague school to typology :Nodus.

Croft

W,(2003),

Typology

and

Universals.

2nd

edition.

Cambridge. Cambridge University Press .

Crystal, D (1987), Cambridge Encycopaedia of language, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press .

Dulay, H and Burt M (1997), Remarks on creativity in language acquisition. Dulay, Burt and Finochiaro(EDS) (1977). Viewpoints on English as second Language. Regents Publishing New York.

Dulay H, Burt ,M, Krashen ,S (1982),Language Two. New York. Oxford University Press

169

Eckman ,F,(1977), Markedness and the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis. Language Learning 27:2:313. New York, plenum Press.

Elaine, C (1990), Toward Second Language: A study of NullPreposition, New York, Cambridge University Press .

Ellis ,R (1985), Understanding Second Language Acquisition, New York, Cambridge University Press .

Fenk-Oczlon, G (1991), Frequenz Und Kognition-Frequenz Und Markiertheit..Folia linguistica 25:3-4

Fitikides

,J (1988),Common Mistakes in English ,London,

Longman Group

Fletcher,D and Garman, M, (1996) Language Acquisition, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

Freeman ,D and Long ,M (1991) An Introduction To Second Language Acquisition Research ,New York, Longman Group.

Gass, M, and Schachter, J ,(1989) Linguistic Perspective on Second Language Acquisition ,U.S.A, Cambridge University Press.

170

Gathumbi, A, Kilimaro, E, Mugambi, H,(2003) New Integrated English Form1, Nairobi, Jomo Kenyatta Foundation.

Gathumbi, A, et al,(2004) New Integrated English Form 2,Nairobi, JKF

Gathumbi

A,

et

al,(2004)

New

Integrated

English,Form

3,Nairobi,JKF

Givon,

T,(1991)

Markedness and

in

grammar Correlates of

:Distributional,Communicative

Cognitive

syntactic Structure. Studies in Language 15:2:335-370

Greenberg, J ,(1966), Language Universals with special reference to feature hierarchies.(Janua Linguarum ,Series Minor59). The Hague :Mouton

Hayes B ,(2004), Introduction :the phonetic bases of phonological markedness. Cambridge, C.U.P.

Haspelmath, M, ( 2005), Against Markedness (and what to replace it with) paper represented at the Max Planck Institute for evolutionary of Berlin . Berlin.

171

Hume, E,(2004), Deconstructing Markedness. Berkeley Linguistics Society 30.

Jakobson, R, (1941), [1971], Zur Struktur des russichen Verbums., Prague (74-84 ) ( also in : selected writings , vol, 1 )

Jakobson ,R (1941) [1962], Kindersprache, Aphasie Und allgemeine Lautgesetze. Upsala: (also in : selected writings ,Vol, 1 )

Jakobson , R, (1963), Implications of language universals for linguistics .In Greenberg ,Joseph (ed) 1963.Universals of language .Cambridge ,MA:MI T Press .

Kathuri N, and Pals (1993) , Introduction to Educational Research Egerton Educational Media Centre .

Kiai ,A ,Oduor , B, Owuor, E, (2003) , New Horizons in English Book 2 , Nairobi, East Africa Educational Publishers .

Kenya Institute of Education (1987), A Handbook for Teachers of English in Secondary Schools in Kenya ,Nairobi, Jomo Kenyatta Foundation.

172

Kenya Institute of Education (1989) , Integrated English Book 2 , Nairobi, Jomo Kenyatta Foundation.

Kenya Institute of Education (2002), Secondary Education Syllabus. Volume One: Nairobi, K.I.E.

Kenya National Examination Council(1999) , The year 1989 K.C.S.E Examination Candidates Performance Report .K.N.E.C, Nairobi.

Kenya National Examination Council (2004), The year 2003 K.C.S.E Examination Candidates Performance Report. K.N.E.C, Nairobi.

Klein , W (1986) , Second Language Acquisition. UK, Cambridge University press

Larsen-Freeman,D, (1975) An explanation for the morpheme acquisition order of second language learners. Language Learning 25:125-34.

Leech, G( 1975) , A communicative Grammar of English , London, Longman Group.

173

Leech , G, et al (2001) , Word frequencies in written and spoken English based on the British National Corpus..Herlow, England: Longman.

Lehrer , A (1985) . Markedness and Antonymy . Journal of Linguistics 21:397

Lyons , J (1981) , Language and linguistics , Cambridge University press .

Cambridge,

Mathews, P(1974), Morphology, New York, Cambridge University press.

Mayerthaler, W, (1981), Morphologische Naturrlichkeit . Wiesbaden: Athenaion. ( English translation: Mayerthaler 1988).

Ministry of Education and Kenya National Examination Council, (1980-93), Handbook, Teaching English in Kenya secondary Schools ,Nairobi, Jomo Kenyatta Foundation .

Mutiti K, J(2000), The parameters of syntactic information Packing in the Second Language Acquistion of English by Gikuyu First Language Speakers. Thesis, Egerton

174

.Mwangi ,S (2004), Grammatical Variation in Second Language Varieties of English. The case of Kenyan English.(Prepositions Vanishing in Kenya).English Today, Volume 20 ,Issue 01,pp 2732.

Mwangi ,P, Indangasi, H, Gecaga C, (2005) , Excelling in English Form 1 An Integrated Approach, Nairobi, Kenya Literature Bureau.

Mwangi, P , et

al (2004), Excelling in English Form 2 An

Integrated Approach, Nairobi, Kenya Literature Bureau.

Mwangi, P, et al (2004), Excelling in English Form 3 An Integrated Approach, Nairobi, Kenya Literature Bureau.

Nasiuma ,D, Statistical Tables for Teaching and Exams , Ngeti publishers . Nemser , W (1971) Approximate Systems of foreign language learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics. 9:115-23

Pemagbi, J (19910, The implications of the English in Sierra Leone for the English Teacher . Educational Research in Africa 2 .

Quirk, R, Greenbaum, S, Leech ,G, (1972), A Grammar of Contemporary English , London, Longman Group.

175

Quirk,R,and Greenbaum ,S,(1973), A University Grammar of English London, Longman Group.

Radford,A (1988), Transformational Grammar. A first course. New York, Cambridge University Press .

Rice ,K, (2003), Featural Markedness in Phonology: Variation.: Berlin .

Rutherford ,W(1987), Second Language Grammar, Learning and Teaching. New York, Longman.

Rutherford ,W(1982), Functions of Grammar in a Language Teaching Syllabus. Language Learning and Communication, New York, Longman.

Rutherford ,W,(1982), Markedness in Secondary Language Acquisition Language Learning 32. 1:85-108

Seliger, H (1983) Classroom Oriented Research in Second Language Acquisition , London, Rowley Mass,

Selinker, L (1972), Rediscovering Interlanguage Acquisition, New York, Cambridge University press .

176

Slobin ,D, (1973), Cognitive Prerequisites for Development of Grammar ,New York, Cambridge University Press.

Spolky ,B,(1989), Conditions for second Language Learning, New York, Oxford University press.

Schmied , J, (1996), Second-Language Corpora. Greenbaum, Sidney ed. The International Corpus of English. Oxford . Oxford University press.

Thomson ,A J and Martnet, A, (1986), The Oxford Library of English Usage, New York,Oxford University press .

Tomlinson ,B, and Ellis R,(1980),Teaching Secondary School English, London ,Longman Group

Trubetzkoy ,N, (1939), Grundzuge der phonologie: Gottingen: Vanden hoeck &Ruprecht.

Vikiru, L ,Omwoyo H, Oburu ,H (2004) ,Advancing in English: A New Intergrated Course for Secondary Schools Students Book 1 , Nairobi,Longman .

177

Vikiru ,L ,et al (2003).Advancing in English: A New Intergrated Course for Secondary Schools Students Book 2 , Nairobi, Longman .

Vikiru ,L, et al (2004) Advancing in English: A New Intergrated Course for Secondary Schools Students Book 3 , Nairobi, Longman .

Waugh, L ,R (1982), Marked and Unmarked : A choice between unequals Semiotica 38:299-318.

White, L (1977)Error Analysis and error correction in adult learners of English as a second Language .New York .Cambridge University Press.

Wode, H, (1976), Developmental Sequences in naturalistic L2 acquisition. In E. Hatch (ed) (1978) Second Language Acquisition. Rowley; Newbury House.

Wurzel, W (1988), On Markedness Theoretical Linguistics 24. 1:53-71.

Zobl, H(1983) , Markedness and the projection problem: Language Learning (33). West Germany .

178

APPENDIX (i) Questionnaire Written test Form....................... Instructions

Answer all the questions in this test. Please do not leave any question unattempted. Use the words in the list provided below to fill in the blank spaces from question 1 to 7 : - ON, AT, TO, IN, FROM, BESIDE, UNDERNEATH, OVER, IN SPITE OF, WITH, FOR, IN FRONT OF, BEHIND, AMONG, BENEATH, DESPITE, SINCE, AFTER, BETWEEN, APART FROM 1) Fill the blanks below using a suitable word from the list above. a) The sponge floated ........................... water. b) He replied ..........................an offensive way. c) My car is................................ school. d) Tom went.................. the door. e) The guests are here .............................. three weeks. f) This book is............................................. Nandwa. g) The guests were received .............................. a smile

179

h) Sit.........................him. i) The keys hung ......................the door. j) I like him ...........................................................his faults. k) I admire him .....................................................his weaknesses. 1) The victims are ........................................the rubble. m) The shop is .............................................the butchery. n) I dashed ............................................the bush to hide. o) Mwangi sits....................................... Kamau. p) Njeri is dancing ...................................................the people.

2. Fill in the following blank spaces with a suitable word from the list above. a) He is standing .................................... friends. b) The butchery is ............................................. the hotel. c) John ran ................................................the bushes. d) When the building collapsed, the people were buried ......................the rubble. e) The coil rolled .........................the chairs. f) I agree with him .........................................the quarrels. g) We went home ................................................the rains. h) The blanket was drawn............................................... him. i) The house is ..........................the hill. j) The screen was broken ...................... a stone. k) This strange man comes .................................Rwanda.

180

1) This man does anything ...................a living. m) He gave a beautiful doll .........................................his daughter. n) The teacher is standing....................... ...the door. o) He is like his sister..one way. p) The stone fell ................................the ground

3. Use a suitable word from the list provided {on the first page} to fill in the blank spaces below a) Write .............................this page. b) There is a bed ..................................the room. c) The matron left........................................noon. d) He leaned .....................................the wall. e) The children ran ...........................................shelter. f) The performance begins ..................................Monday to Friday. g) Please do come ...................................me. h) Go ahead I am .............................you. i) The student jumped.................... the wall. j) He is very weak ...............................eating good food. k) This book is ..........................the table. 1) The coin is .......................the tin. m) Such manners are ..........................him. n) The servants live ........................the valley. o) The teacher is ................................the class. p) Nanjala was ...........those girls who misbehaved.

181

4. Use an appropriate word from the list provided {see first page} to fill in the blank spaces. a) He was jailed ..................................defiling a minor. b) ..........................my annoyance, they rejected the offer. c) Go ahead with the plan I am ................................you. d) She is bad ................................remembering facts. e) When it started raining, they rushed ................................the trees. f) He went....................... ..the house. g) The fruits are ............the trees. h) The old man lives..........................................the hill. i) The students completed their work ................................. a few hours. j) Go............................................public trend for safety. k) The refugees died.....................................lack of food. 1) He made a doll ........................................his daughter. m) Nyakundi lent the book ...............................me. n) The robbers aimed the gun ...............................him. o) The children are playing .........................................the field. p) Put a new roof.........................................the house.

5. Fill in the following blank spaces with an appropriate word from the list

182

provided on the first page. a) The kiosk is closed ......................................Tuesdays. b) Anne dived ........................the water. c) The teacher is......................................school. d) It looked .............................me like a vast chasms. e) I can see that you are ..............................the plan. f) Can you tell butter........................................ margarine? g) I saw a man ....................................large ears. h) .................................... his behaviour, one can tell he is a drug addict. i) At last we are .......................the hill. j) I am sorry to say that I am disappointed ...............................you. k) He gave a talk.............................abortion. 1) You are our leader we are...................................you. m) Our friends are .............................. a hot soup. n) The head girl is ...................................the strike. o) He is pointing ..............................you. p) Jane fell............................the floor.

6. Use a suitable word from the list provided {see the first page} to fill in the Blank spaces in the sentences below. a) ...................reference to your letter dated 23rd......... b) The boy came .........................the village just like other days. c) He is not bad ................................. a youngster.

183

d) The show will start from Monday........................ Saturday. e) The poor mother was surprised .........................her son's behaviour. f) Kemunto was born .........................Kenya. g) The pen is ......................the table. h) The leaves lay thick ........................the ground. i) The children splashed water ......................me. j) The food is filled .....................water. k) His changing jobs was like moving ...the frying pan into the fire. 1) The man is a bit too old .............................you. m) We won by three goals.......................... nil. n) Though it rained heavily, we arrived.....................last.

o) A face appeared ....................the window. p) She went ........................the market. 7. Fill in the blank spaces in the sentences below using an appropriate word from The fist provided {see list on the first page} a) The rains fellhim. b) The examination results will be out ....................four months. c) Drive .......................the city. d) The student was congratulated .................. his success. e) ........................regard to your letter dated 2lst................. f) I may be his daughter, but not......................his manners.

184

g) At last we were.........................the hill. h) Moraa is interested ........................sports. i) Mary passed her exams .....................the end. j) His house is ......................the rough road. k) Jennipher is good......................cooking. 1) I will be ...............you this week. m) The boy went..........................company of two.

185

APPENDIX (ii)

Map of Gucha District

186

187

188