1887
Volume 13, Issue 4
  • ISSN 1878-9714
  • E-ISSN: 1878-9722
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the effects of English proficiency (EP) and study-abroad (SA) experience on routine production among 143 Chinese university English learners. The interplay of learners’ mastery of prior context (PC) and actual situational context (ASC) knowledge reflected their productive competence of routines (PCR). Participants were divided into three groups based on their EP levels and length of SA experience: high EP without SA, low EP without SA, and high EP with SA. A pilot study with 41 American native speakers was conducted to determine the target response set as the baseline. A seven-item computer-animated production task was used to elicit routines that revealed learners’ mastery of ASC and PC knowledge. The findings revealed that EP was only necessary for learners’ PC knowledge and PCR. SA experience, alongside SA and EP interaction, had a significant impact on both sides of ASC and PC knowledge, as well as learners’ overall PCR.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ps.20027.wan
2022-11-04
2022-12-08
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen
    2009 “Conventional expressions as a pragmalinguistic resource: Recognition and production of conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics.” Language Learning591: 755–795. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2009.00525.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00525.x [Google Scholar]
  2. 2012 “Formulas, routines, and conventional expressions in pragmatics research.” Annual Review of Applied Linguistics321: 206–227. 10.1017/S0267190512000086
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190512000086 [Google Scholar]
  3. 2014 “Awareness of meaning of conventional expressions in second-language pragmatics.” Language Awareness23(1–2): 41–56. 10.1080/09658416.2013.863894
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2013.863894 [Google Scholar]
  4. 2019 “Routines in L2 pragmatics research.” InHandbook of SLA and pragmatics, ed. byNaoko Taguchi, 47–62. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781351164085‑4
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351164085-4 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen, and Maria-Thereza Bastos
    2011 “Proficiency, length of stay, and intensity of interaction and the acquisition of conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics.” Intercultural Pragmatics81: 347–384. 10.1515/iprg.2011.017
    https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2011.017 [Google Scholar]
  6. Cohen, Jacob
    1988 Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd Ed.). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 1992 “A power primer.” Psychological Bulletin1121: 155–159. 10.1037/0033‑2909.112.1.155
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155 [Google Scholar]
  8. Dörnyei, Zoltan
    2009The psychology of second language acquisition. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Halenko, Nicola
    2018 “Using Computer-assisted Language Learning (CALL) Tools to Enhance Output Practice.” InPractice in Second Language Learning, ed. byChristian Jones, 137–163. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316443118.008
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316443118.008 [Google Scholar]
  10. Kasper, Gabriele
    2008 “Data collection in pragmatics research.” InCulturally speaking (2nd Ed.), ed. byHelen Spencer-Oatey, 279–303. London & New York: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Kecskes, Istvan
    2000 “A cognitive-pragmatic approach to situation-bound utterances.” Journal of Pragmatics32(6): 605–625. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00063‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00063-6 [Google Scholar]
  12. 2003Situation-bound utterances in L1 and L2. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110894035
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110894035 [Google Scholar]
  13. 2007 “Formulaic language in English lingua franca.” InExplorations in pragmatics: Linguistic, cognitive and intercultural aspects, ed. byIstvan Kecskes and Laurence R. Horn, 191–218. New York & Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 2010 “Situation-bound utterances as pragmatic acts.” Journal of Pragmatics42(11): 2889–2897. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.06.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.06.008 [Google Scholar]
  15. 2013Intercultural pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199892655.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199892655.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  16. 2015 “How does pragmatic competence develop in bilinguals?” International Journal of Multilingualism12(4): 419–434. 10.1080/14790718.2015.1071018
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2015.1071018 [Google Scholar]
  17. Kecskes, Istvan, Olga Obdalova, Ludmila Minakova, and Aleksandra Soboleva
    2018 “A study of the perception of situation-bound utterances as culture-specific pragmatic units by Russian learners of English.” System761: 219–232. 10.1016/j.system.2018.06.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.06.002 [Google Scholar]
  18. Kinginger, Celeste
    2008 “Language learning in study abroad: Case studies of Americans in France.” Modern Language Journal92, Supplement S1. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2008.00821.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00821.x [Google Scholar]
  19. Li, Citing, Wendong Li, and Wei Ren
    2021 “Tracking the trajectories of international students’ pragmatic choices in studying abroad in China: a social network perspective”. Language, Culture and Curriculum34(4): 398–416. 10.1080/07908318.2020.1857393
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2020.1857393 [Google Scholar]
  20. Mackey, Alison, and Susan M. Gass
    2005Second language research: methodology and design. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Ren, Wei
    2022Second language pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781009082709
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009082709 [Google Scholar]
  22. 2015L2 pragmatic development in study abroad contexts. Bern: Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑3‑0351‑0734‑0
    https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0351-0734-0 [Google Scholar]
  23. 2019 “Pragmatic development of Chinese during study abroad: A cross-sectional study of learner requests”. Journal of Pragmatics1461: 137–149. 10.1016/j.pragma.2019.01.017
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.01.017 [Google Scholar]
  24. Roever, Carsten
    2012 “What learners get for free: Learning of routine formulae in ESL and EFL environments.” ELT Journal661: 10–21. 10.1093/elt/ccq090
    https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccq090 [Google Scholar]
  25. Taguchi, Naoko
    2011 “The effect of L2 proficiency and study-abroad experience in pragmatic comprehension.” Language Learning611: 904–939. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2011.00633.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00633.x [Google Scholar]
  26. 2013 “Production of routines in L2 English: Effect of proficiency and study-abroad experience.” System411: 109–121. 10.1016/j.system.2013.01.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.01.003 [Google Scholar]
  27. 2015Developing interactional competence in a Japanese study abroad context. Bristol & New York: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783093731
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783093731 [Google Scholar]
  28. 2018 “Contexts and pragmatics learning: Problems and opportunities of the study abroad research.” Language Teaching51 (1): 124–137. 10.1017/S0261444815000440
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444815000440 [Google Scholar]
  29. Taguchi, Naoko, Qiong Li, and Xiaofei Tang
    2017 “Learning Chinese formulaic expressions in a scenario-based interactive environment.” Foreign Language Annals501: 641–660. 10.1111/flan.12292
    https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12292 [Google Scholar]
  30. Taguchi, Naoko, Shuai Li, and Feng Xiao
    2013 “Production of formulaic expressions in L2 Chinese: A developmental investigation in a study abroad context.” Chinese as a Second Language Research21: 23–58. 10.1515/caslar‑2013‑0021
    https://doi.org/10.1515/caslar-2013-0021 [Google Scholar]
  31. Taguchi, Naoko, and Carsten Roever
    (eds) 2017Second language pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Wang, Yuqi
    2022L2 pragmatic competence in Chinese EFL routines. Cham: SpringerBriefs in Education. 10.1007/978‑981‑19‑6352‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-6352-0 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ps.20027.wan
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ps.20027.wan
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