1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Applied Pragmatics
  4. Volume 6, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 6, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2589-109X
  • E-ISSN: 2589-1103
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This quasi-experimental study investigated the effects of four oral corrective feedback (OCF) types, namely recast, clarification request, explicit correction, and metalinguistic clues, on the acquisition of English requests by low intermediate Vietnamese university learners of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) ( = 122) in the context of explicit pragmatic instruction. The control and four treatment groups received six hours of explicit instruction on English requests. Each treatment group received one of the four OCF types. Data were collected using role plays (RP), pragmatic judgment tasks (JT), and journals from the learners after each session. The results demonstrate that all five groups significantly improved their posttest performance in both the JT and RP, and these gains were retained by the time of the delayed posttest, but there were no statistically significant differences among the groups. However, Cohen’s effect sizes indicate that metalinguistic clues produced the largest gains in the learners’ pragmatic recognition and production, while recasts produced the smallest gains for pragmatic recognition but a similar effect to metalinguistic clues for pragmatic production. The results suggest that teachers should be judicious in selecting the OCF type that suits their instructional goal and task.

© 2024 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ap.21007.pha
2025-02-07
2026-05-12

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ap.21007.pha
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alcón Soler, E.
    (2005) Does instruction work for learning pragmatics in the EFL context?System, 33(3), 417–435. 10.1016/j.system.2005.06.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2005.06.005 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bachman, L. F.
    (1990) Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S.
    (1996) Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Barekat, B.
    (2013) Investigating effects of metalinguistic feedback in L2 pragmatic instruction. International Journal of Linguistics, 51, 197–208. 10.5296/ijl.v5i2.3032
     https://doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v5i2.3032 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bardovi-Harlig, K.
    (2015) Designing instructional effect studies for L2 pragmatics: A guide for teachers and researchers. InS. Gesuato, F. Bianchi, & W. Cheng (Eds.), Teaching, learning and investigating pragmatics: Principles, methods and practices (pp.135–164). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. (2017) Acquisition of L2 pragmatics. InS. Loewen & M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp.224–245). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315676968‑13
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315676968-13 [Google Scholar]
  7. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C.
    (1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
  8. Carroll, S., & Swain, M.
    (1993) Explicit and implicit negative feedback: An empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalizations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 151, 357–386. 10.1017/S0272263100012158
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100012158 [Google Scholar]
  9. Celce-Murcia, M.
    (2007) Rethinking the role of communicative competence in language teaching. InE. Alcón Soler & P. Safont Jordà (Eds.), Intercultural language use and language learning (pp.41–57). Springer. 10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑5639‑0_3
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5639-0_3 [Google Scholar]
  10. Chen, J., Lin, J., & Jiang, L.
    (2016) Corrective feedback in SLA: Theoretical relevance and empirical research. English Language Teaching, 9(11), 85–94. 10.5539/elt.v9n11p85
     https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n11p85 [Google Scholar]
  11. Cohen, J.
    (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Derakhshan, A.
    (2021) Naoko Taguchi (ed.): The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition and Pragmatics. Applied Linguistics, 42(5), 1029–1032. 10.1093/applin/amz031
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amz031 [Google Scholar]
  13. Derakhshan, A., & Shakki, F.
    (2021) A meta-analytic study of instructed second language pragmatics: A case of the speech act of request. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 15–32. https://rals.scu.ac.ir/article_16722_6e7f1e28eb8560f730bdc765127e771a.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Economidou-Kogetsidis, M.
    (2010) Cross-cultural and situational variation in requesting behaviour: Perceptions of social situations and strategic usage of request patterns. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(8), 2262–2281. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.02.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  15. Eslami, Z. R., & Derakhshan, A.
    (2020) Promoting advantageous ways of corrective feedback in EFL/ESL classroom. (Special Issue: In Honor of Andrew Cohen’s Contributions to L2 Teaching and Learning Research). Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 191, 48–65. 10.32038/ltrq.2020.19.04
     https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2020.19.04 [Google Scholar]
  16. Fukuya, Y. J., & Zhang, Y.
    (2002) The effects of recasts on EFL learners’ acquisition of pragmalinguistic conventions of request. Second Language Studies, 211, 1–47. 10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.3n.2p.53
     https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.3n.2p.53 [Google Scholar]
  17. Gass, S. M.
    (1988) Integrating research areas: A framework for second language studies. Applied Linguistics, 9(2), 198–217. 10.1093/applin/9.2.198
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/9.2.198 [Google Scholar]
  18. Ha, C. T.
    (1998) Requests by Australian native speakers of English and Vietnamese learners of English cross-communication study in pragmalinguistics (Unpublished MA thesis). La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Heiman, G. W.
    (2002) Research methods in psychology. Houghton-Mifflin.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Hymes, D. H.
    (1972) On communicative competence. InJ. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics: Selected readings (pp.269–293). Penguin.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Ishihara, N.
    (2010) Collecting data reflecting the pragmatic use of language. InA. D. Cohen & N. Ishihara (Eds.), Teaching and learning pragmatics: Where language and culture meet (pp.37–55). Pearson.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Jeon, E. H., & Kaya, T.
    (2006) Effects of L2 instruction on interlanguage pragmatic development. InJ. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp.165–211). John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.13.10jeo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.13.10jeo [Google Scholar]
  23. Kasper, G.
    (2008) Data collection in pragmatics research. InH. Spencer-Oatey (Ed.), Culturally speaking: Culture, communication and politeness theory (2nd ed., pp.279–303). Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Kasper, G., & Dahl, M.
    (1991) Research methods in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13(2), 215–247. 10.1017/S0272263100009955
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100009955 [Google Scholar]
  25. Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R.
    (2002) Pragmatic development in a second language. Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Koike, D. A., & Pearson, L.
    (2005) The effect of instruction and feedback in the development of pragmatic competence. System, 33(3), 481–501. 10.1016/j.system.2005.06.008
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2005.06.008 [Google Scholar]
  27. Li, S.
    (2010) The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309–365. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2010.00561.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x [Google Scholar]
  28. Li, S., & Vuono, A.
    (2019) Twenty-five years of research on oral and written corrective feedback in System. System, 84(1), 93–109. 10.1016/j.system.2019.05.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.05.006 [Google Scholar]
  29. Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M.
    (2013) Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46(1), 1–40. 10.1017/S0261444812000365
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000365 [Google Scholar]
  30. Martínez-Flor, A., & Fukuya, Y. J.
    (2005) The effects of instruction on learners’ production of appropriate and accurate suggestions. System, 33(3), 463–480. 10.1016/j.system.2005.06.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2005.06.007 [Google Scholar]
  31. Nassaji, H.
    (2012) Significance tests and their relation to generalizability of research results: A case for replication. InG. Porte (Ed.), Replication research in applied linguistics and second language research: A practical guide (1st ed., pp.92–115). Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. (2020) Assessing the effectiveness of interactional feedback for L2 acquisition: Issues and challenges. Language Teaching, 53(1), 3–28. 10.1017/S0261444819000375
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000375 [Google Scholar]
  33. (2021) Effect sizes in quantitative and qualitative research. Language Teaching Research, 25(5), 681–684. 10.1177/13621688211040882
     https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211040882 [Google Scholar]
  34. Nipaspong, P., & Chinokul, S.
    (2010) The role of prompts and explicit feedback in raising EFL learners’ pragmatic awareness. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL, 51, 101–146.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Nguyen, T. T. M., Pham, T. H., & Pham, M. T.
    (2012) The relative effects of explicit and implicit form-focused instruction on the development of L2 pragmatic competence. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(4), 416–434. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.01.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.01.003 [Google Scholar]
  36. Nguyen, T. T. M., Do, T. T. H., Nguyen, A. T., & Pham, T. T. T.
    (2015) Teaching email requests in the academic context: A focus on the role of corrective feedback. Language Awareness, 24(2), 169–195. 10.1080/09658416.2015.1010543
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2015.1010543 [Google Scholar]
  37. Nguyen, M. T. T., Do, H. T., Pham, T. T., & Nguyen, A. T.
    (2018) The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 pragmatics: An eight-month investigation. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 56(3), 345–375. 10.1515/iral‑2015‑0059
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2015-0059 [Google Scholar]
  38. Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L.
    (2000) Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), 417–528. 10.1111/0023‑8333.00136
     https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00136 [Google Scholar]
  39. Plonsky, L., & Zhuang, J.
    (2019) A meta-analysis of second language pragmatics instruction. InN. Taguchi (Ed.), Routledge handbook of SLA and pragmatics (pp.287–307). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Roever, C., Fraser, C., & Elder, C.
    (2014) Testing ESL sociopragmatics: Development and validation of a web-based test battery. Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑3‑653‑04598‑7
     https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-04598-7 [Google Scholar]
  41. Roever, C., & Phakiti, A.
    (2018) Quantitative methods for second language research. A problem-solving approach. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Rose, K. R.
    (2005) On the effects of instruction in second language pragmatics. System, 33(3), 385–399. 10.1016/j.system.2005.06.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2005.06.003 [Google Scholar]
  43. Schmidt, R.
    (1993) Consciousness, acculturation, and the acquisition of communicative competence. InG. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp.21–42). Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780195066029.003.0002
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195066029.003.0002 [Google Scholar]
  44. (2001) Attention. InP. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.3–32). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003 [Google Scholar]
  45. Sheen, Y.
    (2006) Exploring the relationship between characteristics of recasts and learner uptake. Language Teaching Research, 10(4), 361–392. 10.1191/1362168806lr203oa
     https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168806lr203oa [Google Scholar]
  46. (2007) The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 255–283. 10.1002/j.1545‑7249.2007.tb00059.x
     https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00059.x [Google Scholar]
  47. Sheen, Y., & Ellis, R.
    (2011) Corrective feedback in language teaching. InE. Hinkle (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (Vol. 21, pp.593–610). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Taguchi, N.
    (2011) Do proficiency and study-abroad experience affect speech act production? Analysis of appropriateness, accuracy, and fluency. IRAL — International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 49(4), 265–293. 10.1515/iral.2011.015
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2011.015 [Google Scholar]
  49. (2015) Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies were, are, and should be going. Language Teaching, 48(1), 1–50. 10.1017/S0261444814000263
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444814000263 [Google Scholar]
  50. Taguchi, N., & Roever, C.
    (2017) Second language pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Tajeddin, Z., & Alemi, M.
    (Eds.) (2021) Pragmatics pedagogy in English as an International Language. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Takimoto, M.
    (2006) The effects of explicit feedback on the development of pragmatic proficiency. Language Teaching Research, 10(4), 393–417. 10.1191/1362168806lr198oa
     https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168806lr198oa [Google Scholar]
  53. (2012) Metapragmatic discussion in interlanguage pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(10), 1240–1253. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.05.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.05.007 [Google Scholar]
  54. Yousefi, M. & Nassaji, H.
    (2019) A meta-analysis of the effects of instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pragmatics and the role of moderator variables: Face-to-face vs. computer-mediated instruction. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 170(2), 277–308. 10.1075/itl.19012.you
     https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.19012.you [Google Scholar]
  55. Yousefi, M., & Nassaji, H.
    (2021) Corrective feedback in second language pragmatics: A review of research. TESL-EJ, 25(1). https://tesl-ej.org/pdf/ej97/a6.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/ap.21007.pha
Loading
Effects of oral corrective feedback combined with explicit instruction on EFL learners’ recognition and production of English requests
Applied Pragmatics 6, 196 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.21007.pha
/content/journals/10.1075/ap.21007.pha
/content/journals/10.1075/ap.21007.pha
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): clarification request; corrective feedback; explicit correction; explicit instruction; metalinguistic clues; pragmatic competence; recast

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error