Pragmatic transfer in interlanguage development

1997 ◽  
Vol 117-118 ◽  
pp. 151-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seran Doğançay Aktuna ◽  
Sibel Kamişli
Keyword(s):  
Pragmatic Transfer ◽  
Interlanguage Development

“How Dare You Have Another Relationship!”: An analysis of cross-cultural and interlanguage corrections

2019 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ming-Fang Lin ◽  
Miao-Hsia Chang ◽  
Yu-Fang Wang
Keyword(s):  
Chinese Americans ◽  
Strategy Use ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Transfer ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Pragmatic Transfer ◽  
Completion Task ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Interlanguage Development ◽  
Individual Strategies

Abstract The present study aimed to examine the speech act of correction produced by Chinese, Americans, and Chinese EFL learners. A total of 120 participants were asked to fill in a questionnaire with two major parts: a Scaled Response Questionnaire (SRQ) and a Discourse Completion Task (DCT). Elicited data were analyzed in terms of three perspectives: perception of face-threat, overall correction strategy use, and the use of external modifications. The results showed some similarities and differences between Chinese and Americans’ corrections. As for the EFL learners, they exhibited their interlanguage development in the perception and overall strategy use. In addition, instances of L1 pragmatic transfer were found in the learners’ use of some individual strategies and external modifications. Learners’ interlanguage development and L1 socio-cultural transfer demonstrated the multi-competence of the learners. The present study suggests that further instruction should be implemented to enrich L2 learners’ pragmatic repertoire for successful ELF communication.

Terminology in Interlanguage Pragmatics

2004 ◽  
Vol 143-144 ◽  
pp. 109-119
Author(s):  
Giao Quynh Tran
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Speech Acts ◽  
Interlanguage Pragmatics ◽  
Pragmatic Transfer ◽  
Large Corpus

Abstract Inter language pragmatics research has spanned a number of different areas in second language acquisition and pragmatics. In the large corpus of interlanguage pragmatics studies, basic terms such as “interlanguage pragmatics”, “speech acts” and “pragmatic transfer” have been referred to more often than not. But rarely have we stopped to re-evaluate the applicability and appropriateness of these terms. This paper aims to properly interpret or redefine their meanings and to propose more appropriate terms where possible.

Pragmatic transfer

1992 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 203-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriele Kasper
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Interlanguage Pragmatics ◽  
Structural Factors ◽  
Pragmatic Transfer ◽  
Language Research ◽  
Linguistic Action ◽  
Core Areas ◽  
Basic Distinction ◽  
Pragmatic Knowledge

Throughout the short life of interlanguage pragmatics as a subdiscipline of second language research, it has been a virtually uncontested assumption that non-native speakers' comprehension and production of linguistic action is considerably influenced by their L1 pragmatic knowledge. The literature strongly supports this hypothesis. However, whereas there has been a lively controversy about the role of transfer in the traditional core areas of second language research (syntax, morphology, semantics), there has been little theoretical and methodological debate about transfer in interlanguage pragmatics. As a contribution to such a debate, this article seeks to clarify the concept of pragmatic transfer, proposing as a basic distinction Leech/Thomas' dichotomy of sociopragmatics versus pragmalinguistics and presenting evidence for transfer at both levels. Evidence for purported pragmatic universals in speech act realization and for positive and negative pragmatic transfer is discussed. Further issues to be addressed include the conditions for pragmatic transfer (transferability), the interaction of transfer with non-structural factors (proficiency, length of residence, context of acquisition), and the effect of transfer on communicative outcomes. The article concludes by briefly considering some problems of research method in studies of pragmatic transfer.

scholarly journals On the nature of cross-linguistic transfer: A case study of Andean Spanish

2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANTJE G. MUNTENDAM
Keyword(s):  
Language Contact ◽  
Long Distance ◽  
Andean Spanish ◽  
Pragmatic Transfer ◽  
Elicitation Study ◽  
Linguistic Transfer ◽  
Syntactic Properties ◽  
Elicitation Studies ◽  
Long Distance Movement

This paper presents the results of a study on cross-linguistic transfer in Andean Spanish word order. In Andean Spanish the object appears in preverbal position more frequently than in non-Andean Spanish, which has been attributed to an influence from Quechua (a Subject–Object–Verb language). The high frequency of preverbal objects could be explained by focus fronting. The main syntactic properties of focus fronting in Spanish are weak crossover and long distance movement. Two elicitation studies designed to test for these properties in non-Andean Spanish, Andean Spanish and Quechua show no evidence of syntactic transfer from Quechua into Andean Spanish. Rather, the analysis of naturalistic data and an elicitation study on question–answer pairs show that there is pragmatic transfer from Quechua into Andean Spanish. The study has implications for theories of syntax and language contact, and especially for the debate on the nature of cross-linguistic transfer.

scholarly journals A Review of Research on the Effects of LREs on L2 Development

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 11
Author(s):  
Lilliati Ismail
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Learning Opportunities ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Narrative Texts ◽  
Beneficial Effects ◽  
Learner Interaction ◽  
L2 Learning ◽  
Poetic Narrative ◽  
L2 Development ◽  
Interlanguage Development

<p>Swain and Lapkin’s (1998, 2001, 2002) language-related episodes (LREs) have generated greater interest among ESL (English as a Second Language) practitioners and researchers on the effects of addressing linguistic issues during learner-learner interaction in the course of completing pedagogic tasks on interlanguage development. This paper reviews the results of various studies that measured the effects of LREs on L2 development. This paper concludes that LREs could have beneficial effects on L2 learning as reflected by the amount of negotiation and learning opportunities that occurred, the rate of successful outcomes of the repair practices, and L2 achievements in posttests. This paper also suggests that future research could further analyse the exchanges that occur during LREs to gain a greater understanding of interaction-oriented learning opportunities.</p>he semiotic atoms of its grammatical narration as much as the semiotic atoms of its spatial narration in poetic narrative texts to develop and improve the theories of poetic narratology and expand its studies from macro-studies to micro-studies.<p> </p>

Re-evaluating the use of the L1 in the L2 classroom: students vs. teachers

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dina Tsagari ◽  
Christina Nicole Giannikas
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Data Analysis ◽  
Native Language ◽  
Language Learner ◽  
Classroom Observations ◽  
Cognitive Effect ◽  
Interlanguage Development ◽  
L1 Use ◽  
Lack Of Knowledge

AbstractThe present paper examines the effects of the monolingual and the bilingual approach in the second language (L2) classroom. The outcomes of two Likert type questionnaires and classroom observations have been employed to explore teachers’ and learners’ opinions and actions in order to evaluate how the use of the native language (L1) and the L2 is used by both learners and practitioners. Data analysis shows that there is a place for both languages and, when used in a balanced manner, they can comprise a positive cognitive effect due to the fact that the language learner actively draws in interlanguage development. The present study offers clear direction for further research as there is an evident lack of knowledge of principles of L1 use in similar EFL contexts.

scholarly journals Pragmatic Transfer in Advanced Saudi EFL Learners’ Refusals

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jawaher Abdulaziz Hamad Al-Juraywi
Keyword(s):  
Social Status ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Family Health ◽  
Baseline Data ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Similar Frequency ◽  
Pragmatic Transfer ◽  
Refusal Strategies ◽  
Data Group

The present study investigated pragmatic transfer in the refusals of advanced Saudi learners of English as a foreign language (SEFL) in terms of the frequency and content of the emantic formulas, and whether their refusals correspond more to those of Saudi native speakers of Arabic (NSA) or native speakers of English (NSE). A total of 45 female subjects participated in the study and were divided into three groups: advanced SEFL as the target group (n = 15), NSA as a baseline data group (n = 15), and NSE as a baseline data group (n = 15). The study employed a mixed-method data collection approach consisting of a Discourse Completion Test (DCT) and semi-structured interviews. The collected data were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively using the chi-square test and descriptive statistics. The results of the study revealed that pragmatic transfer was evident in the refusals of the SEFL group in both the frequency and content of semantic formulas. Moreover, the SEFL group’s realization of the speech act of refusal corresponded more to the NSA group than the NSE group. The analysis revealed that the SEFL group’s use of the direct refusal strategies, indirect refusal strategies, and adjuncts to refusals either resembled or approximated the NSA group’s use of the strategies to refuse all of the four stimulus types: requests, invitations, offers, and suggestions. Both the SEFL and NSA groups used the direct refusal strategies in a similar pattern; they used the direct strategies significantly less with interlocutors of a lower and higher social status, and significantly more with interlocutors of an equal social status. Furthermore, the content of the semantic formulas used by the SEFL group corresponded more to the content of the semantic formulas used by the NSA group in terms of the degree of specificity and the choice of the type of specific excuses. The SEFL group significantly approximated the NSA group’s use of both specific and unspecific excuses; they used three categories of specific excuses in a similar frequency: family, health, and personal preferences or needs.

Politeness and pragmatic transfer in L2 pronominal address usage

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yixin Wang
Keyword(s):  
High Power ◽  
First Language ◽  
Social Consequences ◽  
Pedagogical Intervention ◽  
Power Differential ◽  
Pragmatic Transfer ◽  
Address Forms ◽  
Chinese Learners ◽  
L1 Use ◽  
Pragmatic Knowledge

Abstract This study investigates how Chinese learners of Spanish, who have a T/V distinction in their first language (L1), use the T/V address forms in Spanish as a second language (L2). Findings show that the learners rely mainly on their L1 pragmatic knowledge to employ the T/V in the L2. Despite having relatively good grammatical control of T/V, the learners produced frequent T/V alternation due to negative pragmatic transfer. In Chinese using V normally conveys speaker’s perception of a high-power differential and in relationships that are borderline T or V usage, shifting from T to V can convey deference and tends to co-occur with face-threatening or face-enhancing acts. The learners transferred from Chinese their tendency to use V to express deference and overutilized this politeness strategy in Spanish regardless of their relationship with the addressee. This problematic usage may generate negative social consequences and calls for pedagogical intervention.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document