Browsing by Author "Bouamara, Rachida"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Etude comparative d’un langage enfantin au plan phonétique et lexicale : Cas des enfants d’un an à trois ans ayant fréquentés ou non la crèche
    (UNIVERSITE MOULOUD MAMMERI DE TIZI-OUZOU, 2016) Bouamara, Rachida; Oukara, Kahina
    Tazwert tamatut: Tutlayt d yiwen wallal n teywalt, tesɛa azal meqqer deg tmetti, imi s-yes i yettemsefham wemdan seg mi ara yili d agrud, annecta yettemxallaf seg wegrud yetteqsaden tilakulin timeẓyanin, d win i d-yetturebban deg wexxam, acku di tlakulin timeẓyanin selmaden-asen tutlayin nniḍen (tafransist s umata). Axeddim-agi nneɣ, yebḍa ɣef kraḍ yixfawen, ad d-yawi ɣef wemgired n ulmad n tutlayt n teqbaylit ɣer wegrud yetteqsaden d win ur netteqsad ara tilakulin timeẓyanin seg useggas amenzu ama d wis kraḍ. Ixef 1u , d asefhem n wawalen icudden ɣer usentel-agi. Ixef wis sin, deg-s ad d-nessebgen amgired n tutlayt ɣer wegrud aqbayli deg wayen yaɛnan tasnilsit. Ixef wis kraḍ, deg-s ad d-yil iusebgen n umgired n tutlayt taqbaylit deg wayen yaɛnan amawal ɣer yigerdan-a. Iswi n leqdic nneɣ, d asebgen n wemgired yellan gar sin-agi n leṣnaf n tezrawt, ɣef aya tuttra Ad tili s wudem-a : Amek i d-yettili wemgired n umessuɣ n tutlayt ɣer yigerdan-a s wudem n tesnilsit d umawal? Tasnarayt I wakken ad d-nheggi axeddim-agi nneɣ, nessexdem (dictaphone) s wayes i d-nejmeɛ asagem i ɣef nexdem tazrawt-agi, rnu ɣer-s asekles n kra n yidlisen, d yimawalen, d yikatayen swayes ara s-nefk udem unṣif. Ilmend n tezrawt-agi nessekles ṭam(08) n yigardan deg yiḥricen yemxallafen( axxam, tilakulin timeẓyanin ) deg useggas ama d wis kraḍ. Tudriwin: Igardan n tlakult tameẓyant seqdacen tafrensist s waṭas ɣef wid n ur tent-neqsid ara. Aswir n leqraya akked tmetti anida ttidiren igardan-agi, yettaǧa-ten ad sxedmen tutlayt-a mačči d tayeḍ Tamukrist: Piaget. J yefreq almad n tutlayt n yigerdan ɣef ukuẓ n tegnatin. S wakka naɛreḍ ad dnessebgen tulmisin n tmeslayt n yigerdan yetteqsaden d wid ur netteqsad tilakulin timeẓyanin seg useggas alamma d krad n yiseggasen deg wudem n tesnilsit d umawal. Ɣef waya tuttra nneɣ ad tili s wudem-a: Wiss dɣa ma yella wemgired gar unerfud n tutlayt deg wudem n tesnilsit d umawal ɣer yigerdan n tlakulin timeẓyanin d yigerdan yetturebban deg wexxam? Aḥric amezwaru: Nefka-d deg-s tabadut n wawalen igejdanen yesɛan assaɣ akked usentel n unadi-agi nneɣ, ama d awalen icudden ɣer temsislit(tiɣra, tirgalin, asusru) ama d wid icudden ɣer umawal(iṛeṭṭalen, tarwest). Am wakken i d-newwi awal daɣen ɣef tezrawin yemxallafen, igqedcen ɣef usentel-agi n tutlayt n yigardan, ger-asent tazrawt n “Behavioreste” i yexdem “ Skinner” akked “Pavloy”; iyxedmen timusniwin nsen ɣef yiɣarsiwen, iḍan d yiɣardayen, anda ṣṣawḍen ɣer tamawt i dyeqqaren d akken almad n tutlayt ɣer wegrud yettas-d s leḥris. Tella daɣen tezrawt “Cognitiviste” yexdem “Chomsky” akked “Piaget” id-yusan s yigemmaḍ ixulfen tazrawt yezrin, nna-d dakken anefali n tutlayt ɣer wegrud yettas-d mebla lḥeris fell-as ɣer welmad. Ma d azerawt yexdem “Jakokson” i d-yuran ɣef uqɛad n ulmad n temeslayt yenna-d dakken ulac tameslayt anda ur llin-t ara targalin tixarajiyin, ma ur llin-t ara targalin tiddaxliyin. Ad naf daɣen deg yixef-agi timaliyin yetteḥwiǧǧi ugrud deg ulmad n tutlayt ɣef waya ad d-naf agrud yessexdam tamalit n tmesliwt iwakken ad t-yaweḍ wawal ɣer lmux-is, tamalit n ufham d wamek ara yefhem lheḍur, tamalit n uɛaned d aɛrad n wegrud ad d-iɛiwed ayen yesla, tamalit n urwas d wawalen i d-yesnulfay wegrud i wakken ad as-yifsus lmenṭeq. Deg uḥric wis sin: Deg ixef-agi nexdem tasleḍt tasnilsit i wammud-agi i d-nejmeɛ ɣer yigardan, iɣ-id-yesbegnen dakken tameslayt-nsen tebna ɣef tlata n yiferdisen; abeddel n talɣa n wawalen( changement total) imi ẓẓay-it fell-as di lmenṭeq, s wakka yettɛawad lehdur yesla ɣer yimeqranen. Nufa-d daɣen deg wamud-agi nneɣ anda yettbeddil targelt tamelɣiɣt s targelt tuɣecfirt, acku kra n deg-sen weɛren fell-as i wakken ad ten-id-yenṭeq. Akken id-nufa daɣen anda yessenqes maḍi imesli i wakken ad yessifsus lmenṭeq. Deg uḥric wis krad: Deg uḥeric-agi nxdem tasleḍt n umawal i wamud-agi nneɣ, nufa-d dakken aamawal-is yebna ɣef kra tarrayin. Yessexdam ayen umu neqqar (l’analogie) anda yettaɛraḍ wegrud ad dyessileɣ Akken yessexdam ayen umu neqqar (la paraphrase) d asefhem n tikti s wawal yellan d aɣezfan wa ad yeǧǧa ayen yellan d awezlan. Nufa daɣen asexdem n wayen umu neqqar (la surextantion) anda yessexdam wegrud kra na wawlen yfɣen ɣef unamek n wayen yebɣa ad dyin im sɛan amecabeh akk d wiyiḍ. Yettili-d daɣen deg umawal n yigerdan (l’emprunt) d asemres n tutlayt deg tayeḍ, asemres n tarayt agi yettili-d kan deg tmeslayt n yigerdan yetteqsaden tilakulin timeẓyanin. Taggrayt tamatut Ar taggarra n tezrawt-agi nneɣ, nufa-d d akken yella wemgired gar tmeslayt n yigerdan yetteqsaden d wid ur netteqsad tilakulin timeẓyanin, ay-agi iban-d deg wudem n umawal acku igerdan yetteqsaden talakult tameẓyant semrasen deg umawal-nsen tutlayin tijenṭaḍin
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Jhumpa Lahiri’s The Namesake (2003) and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s Americanah (2013): Living in-between two Worlds
    (Mouloud Mammeri University OF Tizi-Ouzou, 2022) Si hamdi, Dalila; Bouamara, Rachida
    This research is a post-colonial comparative study between Jhumpa Lahiri’s The Namesake (2003) and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s Americanah (2013). The main purposes of this study is to demonstrate how dispersion from the place of birth to new lands, results in identity transformation through the process of assimilation, and to reveal the hardships of the immigrant experience, exposing the concerns of the Diasporic communities in the two novels. To achieve this purpose, we have made use on some post-colonial concepts that are Homi Bhabha’s hybridity and mimicry and Stuart Hall’s theoretical work Cultural Identity and Diaspora. At the beginning of our analysis, we have explored the two authors’ biographies in relation to their realistic immigrant experiences, and its influence on their writings. Moreover, we have drawn the similarity between the Asian immigrant experience in The Namesake and the African immigrant one in Americanah, comparing between the two novels’ immigrant characters. Then, through the inclusion of our selected postcolonial theoretical concepts, we have come to notice its relevance in the study of the immigrant writings, referring to the immigrants’ attempt to integrate through Bhabha’s concept of mimicry and Hall’s identity transformation on immigrant characters. In this way, at the end of our analysis of these two novels, we conclude that despite of belonging into two different immigrant generations, communities and cultures, Jhumpa Lahiri and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie have a similar immigrant experience, and share the same convictions towards the sufferings of their indigenous immigrant communities.