Effects of Instruction on the Use of Discourse Markers in Japanese EFL Learners’ Speech
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study investigated the effects of explicit and implicit discourse marker (DM) instruction on English as a foreign language (EFL) learners’ speech. Two different teaching methods were used over seven weeks of online English classes at a university in Japan. Participants were split into two groups, and in the first week, a pre-test comprising two speech tasks was administered to both groups. The groups were then given explicit or implicit feedback about the usage of target DMs using video clips and emails. The results of the post-test in Week 5 revealed that, although the frequency of the marker for example was significantly higher after explicit instruction, there was no significant difference in the frequency of the other target markers in both groups. However, some students’ repertoires of DMs increased after explicit feedback. In Week 7, a speaking test including tasks similar to those in the pre- and post-tests was administered as a substitute for the delayed test. Although some easily accessible markers such as and and because were used in speech, both groups’ repertoire was limited. Hence, explicit instruction on DMs may have a limited effect on EFL learners’ speech.
Abstract
This study investigated the effects of explicit and implicit discourse marker (DM) instruction on English as a foreign language (EFL) learners’ speech. Two different teaching methods were used over seven weeks of online English classes at a university in Japan. Participants were split into two groups, and in the first week, a pre-test comprising two speech tasks was administered to both groups. The groups were then given explicit or implicit feedback about the usage of target DMs using video clips and emails. The results of the post-test in Week 5 revealed that, although the frequency of the marker for example was significantly higher after explicit instruction, there was no significant difference in the frequency of the other target markers in both groups. However, some students’ repertoires of DMs increased after explicit feedback. In Week 7, a speaking test including tasks similar to those in the pre- and post-tests was administered as a substitute for the delayed test. Although some easily accessible markers such as and and because were used in speech, both groups’ repertoire was limited. Hence, explicit instruction on DMs may have a limited effect on EFL learners’ speech.
참고문헌 (27)
- (2020)[URL]
- Blakemore, D, "Relevance and linguistic meaning: The semantics and pragmatics of discourse markers" (2002), Cambridge University Press
- Carter, R., "Cambridge grammar of English: A comprehensive guide to spoken and written English grammar and usage" (2006), Cambridge University Press
- Daller, H., "Modelling and assessing vocabulary knowledge", pp.150~164 (2007), Cambridge University Press
- Ellis, R., "Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), pp.339~368 (2006)
- Flowerdew, J., "The effect of discourse markers on second language lecture comprehension", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17(4), pp.435~458 (1995)
- Fotos, S., "Communicating about grammar : A task-based approach", TESOL Quarterly, 25(4), pp.605~628 (1991)
- Fraser, B., "An account of discourse markers", International Review of Pragmatics, 1(2), pp.293~320 (2009)
- Fung, L., "Discourse markers and spoken English : Native and learner use in pedagogic settings", Applied Linguistics, 28(3), pp.410~439 (2007)
- Gilquin, G., "LINDSEI : Louvain international database of spoken English interlanguage" (2010), Presses universitaires de Louvain
- Hernandez, T., "The effect of explicit instruction and input flood on students’ use of Spanish discourse markers on a simulated oral proficiency interview", Hispania, 91(3), pp.665~675 (2008)
- House, J., "Developing pragmatic competence in English as a lingua franca : Using discourse markers to express(inter)subjectivity and connectivity", Journal of Pragmatics, 59, pp.57~67 (2013)
- Jones, C., "Teaching spoken discourse markers explicitly : A comparison of III and PPP", International Journal of English Studies, 14(1), pp.37~54 (2014)
- Katayama, A., "Effects of instruction on Japanese discourse marker n desu", master, pp.2012
- Lyster, R., "Corrective feedback and learner uptake : Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), pp.37~66 (1997)
- "The Japan Association for Language Education and Technology 133rd Kanto Chapter Conference", 2014, ~, pp.Takasaki University of Health and Welfare
- Mizumoto, A., "Examining the effectiveness of explicit instruction of vocabulary learning strategies with Japanese EFL university students", Language Teaching Research, 13(4), pp.425~449 (2009)
- Müller, S., "Well you know that type of person’: Functions of well in the speech of American and German students", Journal of Pragmatics, 36(6), pp.1157~1182 (2004)
- Rayson, P., "Extending the Cochran rule for the comparison of word frequencies between corpora", Le poids des mots: Proceeding of the 7th International Conference on Statistical Analysis of Textual Data, pp.926~936 (2004), Presses universitaires de Louvain
- Schiffrin, D., "Discourse markers" (1987), Cambridge University Press
- Shimada, K., "Contrastive interlanguage analysis of discourse markers used by nonnative and native English speakers", JALT Journal, 36(1), pp.47~67 (2014)
- Shimada, K., "Japanese EFL learners’ use of discourse markers in their speech and writing", Language Education & Technology, 56, pp.187~209 (2019)
- Shintani, N., "Input-based tasks and the acquisition of vocabulary and grammar : A process-product study", Language Teaching Research, 16(2), pp.253~279 (2012)
- Smith, M. S, "Input enhancement in instructed SLA : Theoretical bases", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(2), pp.165~179 (1993)
- Svartvik, J., "Studies in English linguistics for Randolph Quirk", pp.167~177 (1980), Longman
- (2020)[URL]
- Yoshimi, D. R., "Pragmatics in language teaching", pp.223~244 (2001), Cambridge University Press