1887
image of Second language pragmatics development through different instructional techniques
  • ISSN 0019-0829
  • E-ISSN 1783-1490
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study investigated the effectiveness of three types of instruction on learning the speech act of criticizing by 100 Iranian learners of English. For 10 weeks, the consciousness raising group ( = 27), input enhancement group ( = 23), and ZPD (Zone of Proximal Development)-sensitive group ( = 25) participated in the study. The three treatment groups were compared with a control group ( = 25) on pre-tests, immediate and delayed posttests performance of discourse completion test and role-play test. The results revealed that treatment groups significantly improved and outperformed the control group. They maintained their improvement in the delayed posttest. In addition, the results showed the superiority of ZPD-sensitive instruction in relation to two other methods, and better performance of consciousness raising instruction than input-enhancement method. Finally, by interviewing the participants, the researchers could understand the opinions of learners about the instructions they received. The findings and implications are discussed.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/itl.17001.zaf
2019-06-25
2019-09-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alcon Soler, E.
    (2007) Fostering EFL learners’ awareness of requesting through explicit and implicit consciousness-raising tasks. InM. P. García Mayo (Ed.). Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp.221–241). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ammar, A., & Spada, N.
    (2006) One size fits all? Recasts, prompts and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(4), 543–574. 10.1017/S0272263106060268
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060268 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bardovi-Harlig, K.
    (2001) Evaluating the empirical evidence: grounds for instruction in pragmatics. InK. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in Language Teaching (pp.13–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524797.005
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524797.005 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B. S.
    (1993) Learning the rules of academic talk: A longitudinal study of pragmatic development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition15, 279–304. 10.1017/S0272263100012122
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100012122 [Google Scholar]
  5. Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S.
    (1972) Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684. 10.1016/S0022‑5371(72)80001‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X [Google Scholar]
  6. Donato, R.
    (1994) Collective scaffolding in second language learning. InJ. P. Lantolf & G. Appel, (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp.33–56). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Dornyei, Z.
    (1997) Psychological processes in cooperative language learning: group dynamics and motivation. The Modern Language Journal, 81, 482–893. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.1997.tb05515.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1997.tb05515.x [Google Scholar]
  8. Doughty, C. J.
    (1994) Fine-tuning of feedback by competent speakers to language learners. InJ. Alatis (Ed.), GURT 1993: Strategic interaction (pp.96–108). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Edstrom, A.
    (2015) Triads in the L2 classroom: Interaction patterns and engagement during a collaborative task. System, 52, 26–37. 10.1016/j.system.2015.04.014
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.04.014 [Google Scholar]
  10. Ellis, R.
    (2008) The study of second language acquisition (2nd edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Eslami, Z. R., & Eslami-Rasekh, A.
    (2008) Enhancing the pragmatic competence of non-native English-speaking teacher candidates (NNESTCs) in an EFL context. InE. Alcón-Soler & A. Martínez-Flor (Eds.), Investigating pragmatics in foreign language learning, teaching and testing (pp.178–197). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Maters. 10.21832/9781847690869‑011
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847690869-011 [Google Scholar]
  12. Eslami, Z. R., & Liu, C. N.
    (2013) Learning pragmatics through computer-mediated communication in Taiwan. International Journal of Society, Culture, and Language, 1(1), 52–73.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Fordyce, K.
    (2014) The differential effects of explicit and implicit instruction on EFL learners’ use of epistemic stance. Applied Linguistics, 35(1), 6–28. 10.1093/applin/ams076
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams076 [Google Scholar]
  14. Gass, S.
    (1988) Integrating research areas: a framework for second language studies. Applied Linguistics, 9, 198–217. 10.1093/applin/9.2.198
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/9.2.198 [Google Scholar]
  15. Ghobadi, A., & Fahim, M.
    (2009) The effect of explicit teaching of English thanking formulas on Iranian EFL intermediate level students at English language institutes. System, 37, 526–537. 10.1016/j.system.2009.02.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.02.010 [Google Scholar]
  16. Hancock, E. S. & Gallard, A. J.
    (2004) Pre-service science teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning: The influence of K-12 field experiences. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15 (4), 281–291. 10.1023/B:JSTE.0000048331.17407.f5
    https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JSTE.0000048331.17407.f5 [Google Scholar]
  17. Izumi, S.
    (2000) “Does output promote noticing and second language acquisition?” TESOL Quarterly, 2(34), 239–273. 10.2307/3587952
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3587952 [Google Scholar]
  18. Jeon, E., & Kaya, T.
    (2006) Effects of L2 instruction on interlanguage pragmatic development: a meta-analysis. In: John, Norris, Ortega, Loudres (Eds.), Synthesizing Research on Language Learning and Teaching (pp.165–211). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.13.10jeo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.13.10jeo [Google Scholar]
  19. Kasper, G.
    (2001) Classroom research on interlanguage pragmatics. InK. Rose & G. Kasper (eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp.33–60). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524797.006
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524797.006 [Google Scholar]
  20. Kasper, G., & Rose, K.
    (2002) Pragmatic Development in a Second Language. Blackwell, Oxford.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Kecskes, I.
    (2008) The effect of the second language on the first language: The dual language approach. Babylonia, 2, 31–34.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Kubota, M.
    (1995) Teachability of conversational implicature to Japanese EFL learners. IRLT Bulletin9, 35–67.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Lantolf, J. P.
    (2005) Sociocultural theory and second language learning research: An exegesis. InE. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp.335–353). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E.
    (2011) Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian praxis for second language development, Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 11–33. 10.1177/1362168810383328
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810383328 [Google Scholar]
  25. Li, Q.
    (2012) Effects of instruction on adolescent beginners’ acquisition of request modification. TESOL Quarterly, 46 (1), 30–55. doi:  10.1002/tesq.2
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.2 [Google Scholar]
  26. Li, S.
    (2013) Amount of practice and pragmatic development of request-making in L2 Chinese. InN. Taguchi & J. M. Sykes (eds.), Technology in interlanguage pragmatics research and teaching. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 43–70. 10.1075/lllt.36.04li
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.36.04li [Google Scholar]
  27. LoCastro, V.
    (2003) An introduction to pragmatics: Social action for language teachers. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Long, M. H.
    (1996) The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. InW. Ritchie and T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.413–468). San Diego: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Lyster, R.
    (1998) Recasts, repetition, and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 51–81. 10.1017/S027226319800103X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226319800103X [Google Scholar]
  30. Martinez-Flor, A., & Fukuya, Y.
    (2005) The effects of instruction on learners’ production of appropriate and accurate suggestions. System, 33, 463–480. 10.1016/j.system.2005.06.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2005.06.007 [Google Scholar]
  31. Memari Hanjani, A., & Li, L.
    (2014) Exploring L2 writers’ collaborative revision interactions and their writing performance. System, 44, 101–114. 10.1016/j.system.2014.03.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.03.004 [Google Scholar]
  32. Ments, V. M.
    (1999) The effective use of role-play: practical techniques for improving learning. London: Kogan Page.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Nabei, T., & Swain, M.
    (2002) Learner awareness of recasts in classroom interaction: a case study of an adult EFL student’s second language learning. Language awareness, 11(1), 45. 10.1080/09658410208667045
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410208667045 [Google Scholar]
  34. Nguyen, T. T. M.
    (2005) Criticizing and responding to criticisms in a foreign language: a study of Vietnamese learners of English. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Auckland, Auckland.
  35. (2008) Criticizing in an L2: Pragmatic strategies used by Vietnamese EFL learners. Intercultural Pragmatics. 5 (1), 41–66. 10.1515/IP.2008.003
    https://doi.org/10.1515/IP.2008.003 [Google Scholar]
  36. (2013) Instructional effects on the acquisition of modifiers in constructive criticism by EFL learners. Language Awareness, 22(1), 76–94. doi:  10.1080/09658416.2012.658810
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2012.658810 [Google Scholar]
  37. 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]
  38. Ohta, A. S.
    (2001) Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 10.4324/9781410604712
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410604712 [Google Scholar]
  39. Qing, X.
    (2011) Role-play an effective approach to developing overall communicative competence. Cross-Cultural Communication, 7(4), 36–39. doi:  10.3968/j.ccc.1923670020110704.317
    https://doi.org/10.3968/j.ccc.1923670020110704.317 [Google Scholar]
  40. Rose, K.
    (2005) On the effects of instruction in second language pragmatics. System, 33, 385–399. 10.1016/j.system.2005.06.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2005.06.003 [Google Scholar]
  41. Rose, K. R. & K. F. Ng
    (2001) Inductive and deductive teaching of compliments and compliment responses. InK. R. Rose & G. Kasper (eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 145–169. 10.1017/CBO9781139524797.013
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524797.013 [Google Scholar]
  42. Schmidt, R.
    (1993) Consciousness, learning, and interlanguage pragmatics. In: Gabriele, Kasper, Blum-Kulka, Shoshana (Eds.), Interlanguage Pragmatics (pp.21–42). New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. (2001) Attention. InP. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003 [Google Scholar]
  44. Sharwood Smith, M.
    (1993) Input-enhancement in instructed SLA: Theoretical bases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165–179. 10.1017/S0272263100011943
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100011943 [Google Scholar]
  45. Shehadeh, A.
    (2011) Effects and student perceptions of collaborative writing in L2. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20, 286–305. 10.1016/j.jslw.2011.05.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.05.010 [Google Scholar]
  46. Simin, S., Z. Eslami, A. Eslami-Rasekh & S. Ketabi
    (2014) The effects of explicit teaching of apologies on Persian EFL learners’ performance: When e-communication helps. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 3, 71–84.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Svalberg, A. M.-L.
    (2005) Consciousness-raising Activities in some Lebanese English Language Classrooms: Teacher Perceptions and Learner Engagement. Language Awareness, 14 (23), 170–190. 10.1080/09658410508668832
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410508668832 [Google Scholar]
  48. Taguchi, N.
    (2009) Pragmatic competence. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110218558
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110218558 [Google Scholar]
  49. (2015) Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies were, are, and should be going. State-of-the-art article. Language Teaching, 48, 1–50. 10.1017/S0261444814000263
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444814000263 [Google Scholar]
  50. Taguchi, N., & Kim, Y.
    (2016) Collaborative Dialogue in Learning Pragmatics: Pragmatic- Related Episodes as an Opportunity for Learning Request-Making. Applied Linguistics, 9 (6), 416–437. 10.1093/applin/amu039
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu039 [Google Scholar]
  51. Takahashi, S.
    (2010) Assessing learnability in second language pragmatics. InA. Trosborg (Ed.), Pragmatics across languages and cultures, Handbooks of Pragmatics, Vol.7 (pp.391–421). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Takimoto, M.
    (2006) The effects of explicit feedback and form-meaning processing on the development of pragmatic proficiency in consciousness-raising tasks. System, 34, 601–614. 10.1016/j.system.2006.09.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2006.09.003 [Google Scholar]
  53. (2009) The effects of input-based tasks on the development of learners’ pragmatic proficiency. Applied Linguistics, 30, 1–25. 10.1093/applin/amm049
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm049 [Google Scholar]
  54. (2012) Assessing the effects of identical task repetition and task type repetition on recognition and production of second language request downgraders. Intercultural Pragmatics, 9, 71–96. 10.1515/ip‑2012‑0004
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2012-0004 [Google Scholar]
  55. Tateyama, Y.
    (2001) Explicit and implicit teaching of pragmatic routines: Japanese sumimasen. In: Kenneth, Rose, Kasper, Gabriele (Eds.), Pragmatics in Language Teaching (pp.200–222). New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524797.015
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524797.015 [Google Scholar]
  56. Turuk, M. C.
    (2008) The relevance and implications of Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory in the second language classroom. ARECLS, 5, 244–262.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Van Compernolle, R. A.
    (2011) Developing second language sociopragmatic knowledge through concept-based instruction: A micro-genetic case study. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 3267–3283. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.06.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.06.009 [Google Scholar]
  58. Vygotsky, L. S.
    (1978) Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Yoshimi, D., & Wang, H.
    (2007) Selected papers from pragmatics in CJK classrooms: The state of the art. Manoa: University of Hawaii at Manoa, National Foreign Language Resource Center.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/itl.17001.zaf
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/itl.17001.zaf
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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