Pragmatic Capabilities and Challenges: A Mixed Method Study of Gender-Based Differences in Varied Pragmatic Tasks Performances
محورهای موضوعی : نشریه زبان و ترجمه
Roohollah Maleki
1
(
Department of English Language, Imam Khomeini International University,
Ghazvin, Iran
)
Ali Malmir
2
(
Department of English Language, Imam Khomeini International University,
Ghazvin, Iran
)
Rajab Esfandiari
3
(
Department of English Language, Imam Khomeini International University,
Ghazvin, Iran
)
کلید واژه: pragmatic competence, challenge, pragmatics, Advanced L2 learner, Pragmatic task type,
چکیده مقاله :
The present study was mainly concerned with investigating advanced L2 learners’ pragmatic knowledge and the challenges of teaching and learning it. To fulfill the objectives of this study, a convergent mixed-methods study was conducted, and 196 advanced L2 learners and 10 experienced Iranian EFL teachers took part in the study. The results of the quantitative study yielded that, on the whole, the pragmatic knowledge level of advanced EFL learners is not satisfactory. In fact, advanced EFL learners are more skilled at receptive, non-interactive productive, and then pragmalinguistic tasks than sociolinguistic ones. In other words, they are good at intrapersonal perception of pragmatic knowledge but weak at interpersonal and pragmatic social interaction and communication. Furthermore, the gender factor was found to be insignificant. Additionally, the results of the qualitative study revealed five main challenges for teaching and learning pragmatics i.e., inappropriate pedagogical material, improper pragmatic assessment, pragmatically incompetent teachers, unsuitable instructional context, and insufficient time and effort. Finally, both quantitative and qualitative results confirmed and completed each other. In light of the findings, the study provides some pedagogical implications for language teachers, supervisors, language institute managers, material developers, and curriculum designers.
بررسی‌کردن کنش‌های گفتاری و چالش‌های آموزش و یادگیری آن، هسته اصلی تحقیق حاضر را تشکیل داد. به منظور دست‌یابی به اهداف این پژوهش، تعداد 196 زبان آموز پیشرفته و 10 مدرس زبان پیشرفته ایرانی در این مطالعه‌ی تلفیقی و همزمان شرکت کردند. نتایج مطالعه کیفی نشان داد که، در کل، سطح فعلی دانش کنش‌های گفتاری زبان‌آموزان پیشرفته ایرانی رضایت‌کننده نیست. درواقع، زبان‌آموزان پیشرفته ایرانی در زمینه فعالیت‌های کنش‌های گفتاری دریافتی، تولیدی-بدون تعاملی و سپس زبانی-گفتارشناسی، تسلط بیشتری نسبت به فعالیت‌های گفتارشناسی زبانی-اجتماعی دارند. به‌علاوه، در این تحقیق فاکتور جنسیت بی‌تاثیر یافت شد. همچنین، یافته‌های بخش کیفی، پنج چالش مهم در امر آموزش و یادگیری کنش‌های گفتاری را شناسایی کرد: مطلب درسی نامناسب، سنجش و اندازه گیری گفتارشناسی نادرست، معلمان ضعیف از منظر گفتارشناسی، بافت آموزشی نامناسب، و زمان و تلاش ناکافی. درنهایت، نتایج بخش کیفی و کمی این تحقیق، مورد بحث قرار گرفته و همدیگر را تصدیق و تکمیل نمودند. با توجه به این نتایج، تحقیق حاضر برای مدرسان زبان، ناظران آموزشی، مدیران مؤسسات زبان، تهیه کنندگان مطالب درسی، و طراحان برنامه ریزی درسی، کاربردهایی آموزشی ارائه می دهد.
Barron, A. (2003). Acquisition in interlanguage pragmatics: Learning how to do things with words in a study abroad context. John Benjamins.
Billmyer, K., & Varghese, M. (2000). Investigating instrument-based pragmatic variability: Effects of enhancing discourse completion tests. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), 517-552. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.4.517
Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1984). Request and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns. Applied Linguistics, 5(3), 196-203. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/5.3.196
Caprario, M. (2020). Developing pragmatic competence in English academic discussions: An EAP classroom investigation. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, 16(1), 123-152. https://doi.org/10.1515/lpp-2020-0006
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Cohen, A. D. (2019). Considerations in assessing pragmatic appropriateness in spoken language. Language Teaching, 39. 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000156
Cohen, A. D., & Ishihara, N. (2012). Pragmatics. In B. Tomlinson & H. Masuhara
(Eds.), Applied linguistics applied: Connecting practice to theory through materials development (pp. 113-126). Continuum.
Cohen, A. D., & Weaver, S. J. (2006). Styles-and strategies-based instruction: A teachers' guide. Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition. https://stylesandstrategiesi.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/cohen-weaver.pdf
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (Facilitator). (2005, May). Mixed methods. Workshop hosted by the Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Health Care System, Center for Practice Management and Outcomes research, Ann Arbor, MI.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE.
Cui, X. (2012). Problematic Chinese-Australian social interactions at work [Doctoral dissertation, Melbourne Graduate School of Education, The University of Melbourne]. http://hdl.handle.net/11343/37635
Derakhshan, A., Malmir, A., & Greenier, V. (2021). Interlanguage pragmatic learning strategies (IPLS) as predictors of L2 speech act knowledge: A case of Iranian EFL learners. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 18(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2021.18.1.14.235
Farashaiyan, A., & Tan, K. H. (2012). On the relationship between pragmatic knowledge and language proficiency among Iranian male and female undergraduate EFL learners. 3L: Language, Linguistics and Literature. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 18, 33-46.
Félix-Brasdefer, C. (2010). Data collection methods in speech act performance: DCTs, role plays, and verbal reports. In A. Martínez-Flor, & E. Usó Juan (Ed.), Speech act performance: Theoretical, empirical, and methodological issues (pp. 41-56). John Benjamins.
Garcia, P. (2004). Pragmatic comprehension of high- and low-level language learners. TESL-EJ, 8(2), 1-12. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1068107.pdf
Harrison, R. L., Reilly, T. M., & Creswell, J. W. (2020). Methodological rigor in mixed methods: An application in management studies. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 14(4), 473-495. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689819900585
Kamble, S. S., & Banik, A. (2018). Comparison of various aspects of pragmatic language skills in male and female adults with spastic cerebral palsy. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 8(11), 95-101. http://dx.doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.8.11.2018.p8314
Kasper, G., & Roever, C. (2005). Pragmatics in second language learning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 317-334). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Li, S., & Taguchi, N. (2014). The effects of practice modality on pragmatic development in L2 Chinese. Modern Language Journal, 98(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2014.12123.x
Malmir, A., & Derakhshan, A. (2020). The socio-pragmatic, lexico-grammatical, and cognitive strategies in L2 pragmatic comprehension: The case of Iranian male vs. female EFL learners. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.30466/ijltr.2020.120805
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Mohammad-Bagheri, M. (2015). The status of pragmatics among Iranian EFL learners. English Language Teaching, 8(4), 67-79. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n4p67
Riddiford, N., & Holmes, J. (2015). Assisting the development of sociopragmatic skills: Negotiating refusals at work. System, 48, 129-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.09.010
Ahmadi Safa, M, & Mahmoodi, M. H. (2012). The interface between linguistic and pragmatic competence: The case of disagreement, scolding, requests, and complaints. Journal of English Language, 10(3), 1-26.
Sharif, M., Yarmohammadi, L., Sadighi, F., & Sadegh Bagheri, M. (2017). Teaching pragmatics in the EFL classroom: challenges, lacunas, and suggestions. Advanced Education, 8, 49-53. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.108300
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Sage.
Sykes, J. (2016). Technologies for teaching and learning intercultural competence and interlanguage pragmatics. In S. Sauro, & C. A. Chapelle (Eds.), Handbook of technology and second language teaching and learning (pp. 118-133). Wiley.
Taguchi, N., & Kim, Y. (2014). Collaborative dialogue in learning pragmatics: Pragmatic-related episodes as an opportunity for learning request-making. Applied Linguistics, 37(3), 416-437. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu039
Taguchi, N., & Roever, C. (2017). Second language pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
Tajeddin, Z., & Malmir, A. (2015). The construct of interlanguage pragmatic learning strategies: Investigating preferences of high vs. low pragmatic performers. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills (JTLS), 6(4), 153-180. https://doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2015.3016
Tateyama, Y., & Kasper, G. (2008). Talking with a classroom guest: Opportunities for learning Japanese pragmatics. In E. S. Alcón, & A. Martínez-Flor (Eds.), Investigating pragmatics in foreign language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 45-71). Multilingual Matters.
Tehrani, M. D., Rezaei, O., Dezhara, S., & Kafrani, R. S. (2012). Apology strategies of Iranian undergraduate students. English Language Teaching, 5(2), 93-109. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n2p93
Tran, V. T. T. (2013). Second language interactional competence: Solicitation
effects on suggestions [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia]. http://hdl.handle.net/11343/42024
Zangoei, A., Nourmohammadi, E., & Derakhshan, A. (2014). A gender-based study of Iranian EFL learners' pragmatic awareness: The role of receptive skill-based teaching. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 3(6). https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.3n.6p.53
Barron, A. (2003). Acquisition in interlanguage pragmatics: Learning how to do things with words in a study abroad context. John Benjamins.
Billmyer, K., & Varghese, M. (2000). Investigating instrument-based pragmatic variability: Effects of enhancing discourse completion tests. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), 517-552. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.4.517
Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1984). Request and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns. Applied Linguistics, 5(3), 196-203. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/5.3.196
Caprario, M. (2020). Developing pragmatic competence in English academic discussions: An EAP classroom investigation. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, 16(1), 123-152. https://doi.org/10.1515/lpp-2020-0006
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Cohen, A. D. (2019). Considerations in assessing pragmatic appropriateness in spoken language. Language Teaching, 39. 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000156
Cohen, A. D., & Ishihara, N. (2012). Pragmatics. In B. Tomlinson & H. Masuhara
(Eds.), Applied linguistics applied: Connecting practice to theory through materials development (pp. 113-126). Continuum.
Cohen, A. D., & Weaver, S. J. (2006). Styles-and strategies-based instruction: A teachers' guide. Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition. https://stylesandstrategiesi.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/cohen-weaver.pdf
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (Facilitator). (2005, May). Mixed methods. Workshop hosted by the Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Health Care System, Center for Practice Management and Outcomes research, Ann Arbor, MI.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE.
Cui, X. (2012). Problematic Chinese-Australian social interactions at work [Doctoral dissertation, Melbourne Graduate School of Education, The University of Melbourne]. http://hdl.handle.net/11343/37635
Derakhshan, A., Malmir, A., & Greenier, V. (2021). Interlanguage pragmatic learning strategies (IPLS) as predictors of L2 speech act knowledge: A case of Iranian EFL learners. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 18(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2021.18.1.14.235
Farashaiyan, A., & Tan, K. H. (2012). On the relationship between pragmatic knowledge and language proficiency among Iranian male and female undergraduate EFL learners. 3L: Language, Linguistics and Literature. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 18, 33-46.
Félix-Brasdefer, C. (2010). Data collection methods in speech act performance: DCTs, role plays, and verbal reports. In A. Martínez-Flor, & E. Usó Juan (Ed.), Speech act performance: Theoretical, empirical, and methodological issues (pp. 41-56). John Benjamins.
Garcia, P. (2004). Pragmatic comprehension of high- and low-level language learners. TESL-EJ, 8(2), 1-12. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1068107.pdf
Harrison, R. L., Reilly, T. M., & Creswell, J. W. (2020). Methodological rigor in mixed methods: An application in management studies. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 14(4), 473-495. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689819900585
Kamble, S. S., & Banik, A. (2018). Comparison of various aspects of pragmatic language skills in male and female adults with spastic cerebral palsy. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 8(11), 95-101. http://dx.doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.8.11.2018.p8314
Kasper, G., & Roever, C. (2005). Pragmatics in second language learning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 317-334). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Li, S., & Taguchi, N. (2014). The effects of practice modality on pragmatic development in L2 Chinese. Modern Language Journal, 98(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2014.12123.x
Malmir, A., & Derakhshan, A. (2020). The socio-pragmatic, lexico-grammatical, and cognitive strategies in L2 pragmatic comprehension: The case of Iranian male vs. female EFL learners. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.30466/ijltr.2020.120805
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Mohammad-Bagheri, M. (2015). The status of pragmatics among Iranian EFL learners. English Language Teaching, 8(4), 67-79. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n4p67
Riddiford, N., & Holmes, J. (2015). Assisting the development of sociopragmatic skills: Negotiating refusals at work. System, 48, 129-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.09.010
Ahmadi Safa, M, & Mahmoodi, M. H. (2012). The interface between linguistic and pragmatic competence: The case of disagreement, scolding, requests, and complaints. Journal of English Language, 10(3), 1-26.
Sharif, M., Yarmohammadi, L., Sadighi, F., & Sadegh Bagheri, M. (2017). Teaching pragmatics in the EFL classroom: challenges, lacunas, and suggestions. Advanced Education, 8, 49-53. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.108300
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Sage.
Sykes, J. (2016). Technologies for teaching and learning intercultural competence and interlanguage pragmatics. In S. Sauro, & C. A. Chapelle (Eds.), Handbook of technology and second language teaching and learning (pp. 118-133). Wiley.
Taguchi, N., & Kim, Y. (2014). Collaborative dialogue in learning pragmatics: Pragmatic-related episodes as an opportunity for learning request-making. Applied Linguistics, 37(3), 416-437. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu039
Taguchi, N., & Roever, C. (2017). Second language pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
Tajeddin, Z., & Malmir, A. (2015). The construct of interlanguage pragmatic learning strategies: Investigating preferences of high vs. low pragmatic performers. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills (JTLS), 6(4), 153-180. https://doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2015.3016
Tateyama, Y., & Kasper, G. (2008). Talking with a classroom guest: Opportunities for learning Japanese pragmatics. In E. S. Alcón, & A. Martínez-Flor (Eds.), Investigating pragmatics in foreign language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 45-71). Multilingual Matters.
Tehrani, M. D., Rezaei, O., Dezhara, S., & Kafrani, R. S. (2012). Apology strategies of Iranian undergraduate students. English Language Teaching, 5(2), 93-109. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n2p93
Tran, V. T. T. (2013). Second language interactional competence: Solicitation
effects on suggestions [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia]. http://hdl.handle.net/11343/42024
Zangoei, A., Nourmohammadi, E., & Derakhshan, A. (2014). A gender-based study of Iranian EFL learners' pragmatic awareness: The role of receptive skill-based teaching. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 3(6). https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.3n.6p.53
