VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY – HO CHI MINH CITY
UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES & HUMANITIES
FACULTY OF ENGLISH LINGUISTICS & LITERATURE

A SURVEY INTO THE TEACHING AND LEARNING
OF ENGLISH ARTICLES AT ENGLISH FACULTY,
UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES

A thesis submitted to the
Faculty of English Linguistics & Literature
in partial fulfillment of the Master’s degree in TESOL

By
DINH THIEN LOC

Supervised by
NGUYEN THI KIEU THU, Ph.D.

HO CHI MINH CITY, AUGUST 2015


STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP
I hereby certify my authorship of the thesis submitted today entitled:
A SURVEY INTO THE TEACHING AND LEARNING OF
ENGLISH ARTICLES AT ENGLISH FACULTY,
UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES
in terms of the statement of Requirements for the Thesis in Master’s Program issued
by the Higher Degree Committee. The thesis has not been submitted for the award of
any degree or diploma in any other situation.
Ho Chi Minh City, August 2015


I would like to acknowledge all members, teachers and students of the Faculty
of English Linguistics and Literature who directly and indirectly contribute to the
fulfillment of this thesis.
I am deeply thankful to my friends Ba Tong and Thuy Anh who gave me
indispensable advices and unceasing encouragement during my most difficult time. I
also appreciate every single support I received from my other friends at USSH.
Last but not least, my deepest gratitude goes to my parents, my sister, my aunt
and her son who are truly a miracle of my life. Without them, the whole thesis would
still be far from finished.

iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP ................................................................................ i
RETENTION AND USE OF THE THESIS ................................................................. ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................... iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................. iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................... vii
LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................... viii
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................... ix
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... x
CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION ................................................................ 1

1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY ............................................................. 1
1.2 RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY ................................................................ 2
1.3 AIM AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY ............................................... 2
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS .......................................................................... 3

2.3.2.2 Cognitive method............................................................ 34
2.4 ACQUISTION OF ARTICLES .................................................................. 36
2.4.1 Types of Articles Errors ................................................................ 36
2.4.2 Causes of Articles Errors .............................................................. 38
2.5 ERROR ANALYSIS .................................................................................. 40
2.6 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ............................................................... 40
CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY ............................................................. 42

3.1 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ........................................................................ 42
3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN ................................................................................ 43
3.2.1 Context of the study ...................................................................... 43
3.2.2 Participants.................................................................................... 43
3.2.3 Research Materials ........................................................................ 47
3.2.3.1 Coursebooks ................................................................... 47
3.2.3.2 SOC, TLU and UOC ...................................................... 48
3.2.4 Research Methods and Research Tools ........................................ 50
3.2.4.1 Coding system ................................................................ 51
3.2.4.2 Contrastive analysis ........................................................ 53
3.2.4.3 Error analysis .................................................................. 54
3.2.4.4 Questionnaire .................................................................. 55
3.2.4.5 Proficiency test ............................................................... 57
v


3.2.4.6 Interviews ....................................................................... 59
3.3 DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE ...................................................... 61
3.4 DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURE ............................................................ 61
CHAPTER 4


vi


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CA

Contrastive Analysis

CL

Classifier

EF

the Faculty of English Linguistics and Literature

ELT

English Language Teaching

ESL

English as a Second Language

HK

Hearer’s Knowledge

L1


SOC

Supplied in Obligatory Context

TESOL

Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages

TLU

Target Like USe

TOEFL

Test of English as a Foreign Language

UOC

Used in Obligatory Context

USSH

University of Social Sciences and Humanities – Ho Chi Minh city

vii


LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: Classification of English Articles by Master (1994)

Figure 4.1: Accuracy of Article Uses according to Article Contexts
Figure 5.1: Differences in Generic Sense under the View of Cognitive Grammar by
Nguyen (2005)

ix


ABSTRACT
Since the birth of the communicative approach, more and more attention have
been paid to the article system in English language which was partly considered as
function words, hardly carry any message and partly believed to determine users’
level of proficiency. Therefore, the study done for and reported in this thesis was
conducted with the aim to investigate (i) the teaching practices of the English article
system at EF, USSH and (ii) the learning of English articles of 127 EF juniors. To
ensure the validity and consistency of the data collected, the five following research
methods and research tools were applied (i) error analysis, (ii) contrastive analysis,
(iii) proficiency test, (iv) questionnaire and (v) interviews.
The findings, although provisional, revealed some problems with EF teachers
and students’ performance in regards to the rules of English articles. The main
concerns were the shortcomings in the coursebooks and the pedagogies being applied
for Advanced Grammar course that might create a false perception on the learners.
Besides, EF students also caused quite many errors which were later classified into 11
types of errors with the application of a statistical software. Discussing learners’
causes of errors, the two main sources were confirmed including (i) the complicated
nature of English articles and (ii) the interference of learners’ mother tongue which
was believed to be an article-less language.
The study, therefore, urged for a proper attention on the English articles at EF,
USSH. It also suggested some applicable techniques that (i) facilitate the
understanding of confusing concepts, (ii) balance the concentration on all article types
and (iii) simplify the long list of rules.

language teaching. With respect to learners’ errors in using articles, Barrett & Chen
1


(2011) suggested that teachers should not ignore those minor mistakes for they may
lead to a false perception in learners’ mind. Especially, as stated by Miller (2005),
native speakers tended to be sensitive with articles’ errors made by foreigners.
According to his research, three most frequent errors caused by non-native speakers
were the choice of tense, subject-verb agreement and the use of articles. While the
first two issues can be overcome, the problems with articles are still the common
errors which can be used to distinguish a native speaker and a non-native one. In a
same manner, Nguyen (2005) called for a special attention to the teaching and
learning of English articles because they reflected the proficiency of learners.

1.2 RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY
This study is carried out based on the Doctor dissertation of Nguyen (2005),
namely “Vietnamese learners mastering English articles”. Although Nguyen had
made an experimental teaching, his conclusion seemed yet to be verified by a survey.
It is quite clear that English articles have been discussed in many contexts of L2
speakers with article-less native language; the case in Vietnam is still new. Besides,
the Vietnamese counterparts of English articles were different and the absence of
articles is common in usage. Students, therefore, may lean on a false perception when
using English articles which is believed to lead to a majority of errors on articles. Due
to the reasons above, the current study was conducted by doing a survey on the
teaching and learning of English articles at University of Social Sciences and
Humanities- Ho Chi Minh city, a leading university in English language teaching in
Vietnam to see whether English articles are treated properly. It is obvious that in such
an academic environment where students mostly express themselves in written form,
errors related to articles should be controlled.



1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The study is hoped to fill the gap in the literature review so that some
significance to the study could be as follows:

3


1.5.1 Theoretical significance
Chapter 2 of this thesis gave an overview as well as some detailed information
on the understanding of the complicated system of English articles and Vietnamese
counterparts. Some common pedagogical practices to teach articles from the past to
the present were also collected. The study strived to arrive at some errors that L2
learners often made as well. Furthermore, the process of learning articles would be
clarified which was expected to reflect the effectiveness of the current teaching
method at EF, USSH.

1.5.2 Practical significance
Detailed description of learners’ errors and the possible causes would bring
some certain benefits to the teaching of articles at EF, USSH and also at other
universities in Vietnam in general. The teaching and learning implications as well as
suggestions were attempted to provide both teachers and learners the most suitable
and effective method to master the English articles.

1.6 ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY
Regarding the framework of the study, the whole thesis is divided into 5 main
chapters (i) Introduction, (ii) Review of Literature, (iii) Methodology, (iv) Results and
Discussion and (v) Conclusion, apart from the Acknowledgements, Abstract,
References and Appendixes.
The first chapter, the Introduction, presents the rationale of the study, the

Although numerous studies have been conducted on the system of English
articles, there seemed to be a widespread agreement on the definition of articles that
very few authors tried to redefine the term. Traditionally, articles are considered as
adjectives due to the fact that their function is to modify the nouns standing right after
them. However, with times, the linguists realized the differences between the
functions of adjectives and articles. The most common explanation of articles is that
articles are used to indicate whether a noun refers to a specific or a general item. This
way of defining articles can be found in most grammar books and also documents on
the internet. Using specificity to define articles, to some extent, is to determine the
definiteness of a noun which is widely accepted by many authors (Chaudron &
Parker, 1990; Chesterman, 1991; Nguyen 2005). Besides the role of marking the
specificity of noun phrases, Foster (2010) added that articles can also be used to
“signify the level of definiteness or knowness”.
A more general definition could be found in (Berry, 1993) that “articles are
determinatives which serve to give precision to the nouns/noun equivalents to which
they are attached” (p. 23). Similarly, in his book about English grammar, Alexander
(1998) defined that “articles are determiners which affect the meaning of the noun and
make it clearer by showing which particular thing we are referring to” (p. 55). Latter,
Neldelcu (2003) supported the idea of Berry (1993) and stated that the definitions of
English articles do not, in general, “go beyond” Berry’s description.

6


2.1.2 Meaning of English Articles
While most scholars and linguists agreed on the definition of English articles,
they based on different ways to categorize the system of articles. When talking about
articles in English, it comes to our mind that a/an, the and zero article are the main
categories. The word zero article is used to describe the state in which no article is
used before nouns or noun phrases. Some authors also suggested putting one more

a student or a teacher is required to classify articles, it would be common that they list
the two types: definite and indefinite articles. The popularity and trueness of the first
approach is another reason that persuaded the author to navigate his study to this
direction. Many linguists and scholars spent thousands of pages to investigate every
corner of the notion of definiteness and up to now, there have not been a common
agreement on all elements that create the definiteness of English articles. So as to give
a sound classification of the system of English articles, three main notions that carry
the meaning of English articles would be reviewed: (i) definiteness, (ii) specificity
and (iii) genericity.

2.1.2.1 Definiteness
Unlike most teachers who classify English articles by the name of a/ an, the or
zero article, researchers always base on one or some particular terms to arrange those
articles in smaller groups. Firstly, the literature review comes up with the most
famous notion which was mentioned in most of studies throughout the history of
English linguistics, ‘definiteness’. Although the term was considered as the core of
the system of English articles by many scholars (Master 1990, Lyons 1999, Butler
2002, Ionin 2004 among others), Nguyen (2005) believed it is not easy to give a clear
definition on definiteness. Using up to six notions to discuss the meaning of
definiteness, Nguyen explained the term based on three different levels. The first one
was about definiteness itself, the second was the intersection between definiteness and
specificity and the intersection between definiteness and genericity was the last level
of this complex definition. Similarly, Chesterman (1991) showed that there are
numbers of issues need to be examined so as to answer the core question on
definiteness. He used a metaphor image “a labyrinth of problems” to express his
8


feeling on definiteness in his book of over 250 pages (Chesterman 1991, p. 3). To
some degree, the study of Lyons (1999) on definiteness was quoted by a handful of

the misunderstanding of familiarity is the main cause of the overgeneralization rule in
choosing the correct articles. With regards to definiteness, the element of familiarity is
also known as “Familiarity theories of Definiteness” and is believed to be first
mentioned by Christophersen (1939) and latter is supported by Heim (1983).
However, the linguist community would not pay much attention to familiarity without
the works of Heim (1983) and his famous ‘donkey example’ (Abbott 2006). In most
literature, the role of familiarity is defined as to decide whether definite or indefinite
should be put before a noun. As the father of the Familiarity theories, Christophersen
also recognized its weakness that he warned learners should pay attention to the
‘unambiguous relation’ between the noun and an entity related to the noun that has
already been known by the hearer. The expression of The author is unknown is a
prominent example when we talk about a certain book. To make it short,
Christophersen (1939) suggested “For the proper use of the, it is necessary that it
should call up in hearer’s mind the image of the exact individual that the speaker is
thinking of” (p. 28).
Interestingly, Hawkins (1978) who was inspired by the quantification theories
of Russell claimed that sometimes the is linked with unfamiliarity rather than
familiarity. Take the example below as an example.
(2) They’ve arrived in Ho Chi Minh city. The plane was five hours late.
Because to reach Ho Chi Minh city, a passenger have many other choices
beside using air way, the appearance of the plane is obviously not known to the hearer
before it was uttered by the speaker. Thus, there was the appearance of ‘unfamiliarity’
in the choice of definite article the in this case. The Familiarity theories of
Christopheren were challenged again when Perrion (1989) finally pointed out the
weakness he found in indefinite NPs. In his dissertation, Nguyen (2005) restated the
example of Perrion to illustrate this interesting idea:
(3) You have a fine daughter.

10


11


At this stage, some linguists start to look at definiteness under pragmatics
viewpoint. So as to understand the situation, the physical condition of the utterances
needs to be regarded as well. In (5a), both the speaker and hearer are in a same room,
the speaker asks for a favor and of course the hearer can immediately refer to the shelf
that visible in his eyesight. However, the setting for (5b) is when the speaker stands
on a ladder and intends to drive a nail into the wall and the hammer is out of his reach.
At that very moment, the hearer entered the room and immediately the speaker utters
the suggestion to the hearer. In this case, the hearer does not have any idea about the
hammer but he can quickly realize the current situation with the speaker on the ladder.
The hearer then can look around and find the chair. The quick response action of the
hearer can be understood as the “hearer’s readiness” when he hears the definite article
the before hammer as supposed to exist by Lyons (ibid). The example also proves the
interchange between familiarity and identifiablity. As in “The author is unknown”,
where familiarity fails to explain the choice of article, identifiability can bring
evidence.
It might be noted that Hawkins (1999) used to suggest the use of ‘locatability’
in which the location joins the steps of deciding the definiteness as well. This means
in some cases, the speaker and the hearer do not communicate in harmony because the
relationship between speaker’s referent and hearer’s identifiable entity in real life can
not be established. The suggestion of Hawkins was that location needed to be
considered. The theory was soon directly criticized by some prominent authors like
Lyons (1991) and Chesterman (1991) as another way to define the alrealdy-known
notions of uniqueness and identifiability. Conversely, Nguyen (2005) still believed it
would be worth discussing the examples raised by Hawkins.

Inclusiveness
According to Lyons (1999), to criticize the idea of uniqueness, Hawkins (1978)

by an example of Chesterman (1991)
(7) The Americans have reached the moon.
It is as clear as crystal that not all Americans have reached the moon. The
definite article the in this example can not be understood correctly within its
13


inclusiveness. Thus, the theory of Hawkins needs to be modified. One way to revise
inclusiveness, in Chesterman’s opinion, is that [+all] might be just “more or less all”.
Talking about definiteness, there are tons of paper to discuss and debate on
every small aspects of its. However, in this paper, only the prominent literatures on
some main features of familiarity, identifiability and inclusiveness are reviewed.
Although this is just an overall review, Lyons (1999) and Nguyen (2005) believed the
core of definiteness somehow can be understood with the knowledge on those
aforementioned notions.

2.1.2.2 Specificity
According to Lyons (1999), specificity is a term applied for an indefinite
singular noun phrase to decide whether it refers to a particular entity or a general one.
Later, Briton (2000) supported the idea by defining a specific article as an article that
denotes “a particular entity in the real world” and an article that denotes “no particular
entity in the real world” is a nonspecific article (p.292). It is also well documented in
SLA that specificity is linked with “particular entity in the real world” (ibid.).
Huebner (1983) seemed to trigger this trend and his idea was highly appreciated by
many authors like Roberson (2000). Another way to distinguish specificity and nonspecificity is to identify the two notions of reference and denotation (Guillemin
2011). As explained by the author, the purpose of a specific expression is to “refer”
while a non-specific expression is to “denote” (p. 6). The examples bellows were
given to demonstrate his idea.
(8a) A/ the cat purrs. (non-specific)
(8b) A/ the cat purred. (specific)