The role of prior and actual situational context in conversational routines produced by Chinese learners of English

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. Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen
   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. Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen
   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. Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen
   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. Cohen, Jacob
   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
   2009 The 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. Kecskes, Istvan
    2003 Situation-bound utterances in L1 and L2. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110894035
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110894035 [Google Scholar]
13. Kecskes, Istvan
    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. Kecskes, Istvan
    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. Kecskes, Istvan
    2013 Intercultural 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. Kecskes, Istvan
    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
    2005 Second language research: methodology and design. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Ren, Wei
    2022 Second language pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781009082709
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009082709 [Google Scholar]
22. Ren, Wei
    2015 L2 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. Ren, Wei
    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. Taguchi, Naoko
    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. Taguchi, Naoko
    2015 Developing 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. Taguchi, Naoko
    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) 2017 Second language pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Wang, Yuqi
    2022 L2 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]