| تعداد نشریات | 24 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 862 |
| تعداد مقالات | 7,672 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 13,660,604 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 11,735,692 |
Exploring EFL Learners’ Use of Formulaic Sequences in Pragmatically Focused Role-play Tasks | ||
| Teaching English as a Second Language Quarterly (Formerly Journal of Teaching Language Skills) | ||
| مقاله 5، دوره 37، شماره 4، خرداد 2019، صفحه 141-165 اصل مقاله (300.73 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Research Paper | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22099/jtls.2019.33711.2694 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Abdullah sarani1؛ Rasool Najjarbaghseyah* 2 | ||
| 1University of Sistan and Baluchestan | ||
| 2Language Department, IRI Amin Police University, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Communicative language use largely entails regular patterns consisting of pre-constructed phrases or sequences. These sequences have been examined by many researchers to find the situation-based formulas which may help L2 learners follow a possibly more target-like speaking system. This study, therefore, explored two categories of formulaic expressions including speech formulas and situation-bound utterances used by EFL learners. The randomly selective participants included 30 intermediate and 30 advanced learners, who performed a total number of 120 role-play tasks focused on the situations which required the use of thanking, requesting, offering, and apology speech acts. Audio-recorded data from role-plays were transcribed and analyzed based on existing lists of speech formulas. Results showed that the participants produced more than 102 types of formulaic sequences that could be called “a list of pragmatic routines for thanking, requesting, offering, and apologizing speech acts in the EFL context”. This list includes 44 and 58 speech formulas and situation-bound utterances, respectively. Results further indicated that advanced language learners used more diverse situation-bound utterances in terms of its internal and contextual complexity than their counterparts in the intermediate group due to expert judgments. Because these formulas can increase coherence in speaking, and enhance effective and natural communication, their instruction could be part of the language teaching curriculum. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Formulaic Expressions؛ Language Formula؛ Pragmatic Routines؛ Teaching English as a Foreign Language | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Abdou, A. (2010). The semantic structure of Arabic idioms. In D. Wood (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: acquisition and communication (234-256). New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Adolphs, S. & Durow, V., (2004). Social-cultural integration and the development of formulaic sequences. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (107-126). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Aijmer, K. (1996). Conversational routines in English. London: Longman.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2012). Formulas, routines, and conventional expressions in pragmatics research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 206–227.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2013). Pragmatic routines. The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Griffin, R. (2005). L2 pragmatic awareness: Evidence from the ESL classroom. System, 33, 401-415.
Bhatia, V. K., Flowerdew, J., & Jones, R. H. (2008). Approaches to discourse analysis. In V. K. Bhatia, J. Flowerdew, and R. H. Jones (Eds.) Advances in discourse studies. Oxon: Routledge.
Chen, L. (2008). An investigation of lexical bundles in electrical engineering introductory textbooks and ESP textbooks. Unpublished master’s thesis, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario.
Coklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 72–89.
Dai, Z., & Ding, Y. (2010). Effectiveness of text memorization in EFL learning of Chinese students. In D. Wood (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: acquisition and communication (71-87). New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Dörnyei, Z., Durow, V., & Zahran, K. (2004). Individual differences and their effects on formulaic sequence acquisition. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (87-106). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Forsberg, F., & Fant, L. (2010). Idiomatically speaking: Effects of task variation on formulaic language in highly proficient users of L2 French and Spanish. In D. Wood (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: Acquisition and communication (257-274). New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Giammarresi, S. (2010). Formulaicity and translation: A cross-corpora analysis of English formulaic binomials and their Italian translations. In D. Wood (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: Acquisition and communication (257-274). New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Hammod, J. (2011). Classroom discourse. In K. Hyland and B. Paltridge (eds.), the continuum companion to discourse analysis (pp. 22–38). London: continuum.
Ishihara, N. (2010). Maintaining an optimal distance: Nonnative speakers’ pragmatic choice. In A. Mahboob (Ed.), Non-native speakers of English in TESOL: Identity, politics, and perceptions (pp. 35–53). Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars.
Jones, M., & Haywood, S. (2004). Facilitating the acquisition of formulaic sequences: An exploratory study in an EAP context. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (269-300). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Jung, J., Y. (2002). Issues in acquisitional pragmatics. Teachers College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 2(3), Retrieved August 25, 2019, from http://journal.tc-ibrary.org/ojs/index.php/tesol/article/download/21/26
Kanagy, R. (1999). Interactional routines as a mechanism for L2 acquisition and socialization in an immersion context. Journal of Pragmatics, 3, 1467-1492.
Kecskes, I. (2007). Formulaic language in English Lingua Franca. In I. Kecskes and L. R. Horn (Eds.), Explorations in pragmatics: Linguistic, cognitive, and intercultural aspects (191-218). New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kirner-Ludwig, M. (2018). Trying to make it fit…That's what she said: An argument for a new category on the formulaic continuum. Journal of Pragmatics, 137, 76-91. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.08.001
Li, S. (2014).The effects of different levels of linguistic proficiency on the development of L2 Chinese request production during study abroad. System 45, 103-116. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.05.001Get rights and content
Li, J., & Schmitt, N. (2010). The development of collocation use in academic texts by advanced L2 learners: A multiple case study approach. In D. Wood (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: Acquisition and communication (257-274). New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
McGuire, M. (2009). Formulaic sequences in English conversation: Improving spoken fluency in non-native speakers. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of North Texas, US.
Nekrasova, T., M. (2009). English L1 and L2 speakers’ knowledge of lexical bundles. Language Learning, 59(3), 647-686.
Schmitt, N. (Ed.). (2004). Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Simpson-Vlach, R., & Ellis, N. C. (2010). An academic formulas list: New methods in phraseology research. Applied Linguistics, 31(4), 487-512.
Solar, E. A., & Martinez-Flor, A. (2008). Pragmatics in foreign language contexts. In E. A. Solar and A. Martinez-Flor (eds.), Investigating pragmatics in foreign language learning, teaching and testing. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Taguchi, N. (2011). Teaching pragmatics: Trends and issues. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 289–310.
Taguchi, N. (2013). Production of routines in L2 English: Effect of proficiency and study-abroad experience. System, 41(1), 109-121. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.01.003Get rights and content
Tajeddin, Z., & Hosseinpur, R. (2014). The impact of deductive, inductive, and L1-based consciousness-raising tasks on EFL learners' acquisition of the request speech act. JTLS, 33(1), 73-92. doi: 10.22099/jtls.2014.2022
Tajeddin, Z., & Malmir, A. (2015). The construct of interlanguage pragmatic learning strategies: investigating preferences of high vs. low pragmatic performers. JTLS, 33(4), 153-180. doi: 10.22099/jtls.2015.301
Tremblay, A., & Baayen, H. (2010). Holistic processing of regular four-word sequences: A behavioral and ERP study of the effects of structure, frequency, and Probability on Immediate Free Recall. In D. Wood (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: Acquisition and communication (151-173). New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Walsh, S. (2011). Exploring classroom discourse language in action. New York: Routledge.
Weinert, R. (1995). The role of formulaic language in second language acquisition: A review. Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 180-205.
Wood, D. (2010). Lexical clusters in an EAP textbook corpus. In D. Wood (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: Acquisition and communication (88-106). New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Wray, A. (2000). Formulaic sequences in second language teaching: Principle and practice. Applied Linguistics, 21, 463–89.
Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1,310 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,040 |
||