Pragmatic Comprehension of Conversational Implicature in L2 English: Effect of Instruction
3
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Non-native speakers of English are known to have difficulty in interpreting conversational implicatures even though they are advanced level of language proficiency (Cook & Liddicoat, 2002; Roever, 2010). The current study examines the effect of pragmatic instruction on interpreting conversational implicature, focusing on Korean EFL learners. To improve learners’ comprehension, linguistic theory, based on Grice (1975), was incorporated into classroom instruction. Activities from previous studies (Murray, 2009, 2011) were adopted and modified for college-level students. Then a brief survey was conducted to find whether the teaching of conversational implicatures was effective between the pre-test and post-test. The results of the study revealed that the mean differences between the pre-test and post-test were statistically significant. The learners performed better than before receiving the instruction. Among the types of implicatures, Pope Q and relevance-based implicatures were relatively easily recognized by the learners while indirect criticism was difficult, which was consistent with previously identified patterns (Lee, 2002; Taguchi, 2005). Pedagogical implicatures are discussed with reference to the role of linguistic theory in English education.
Abstract
Non-native speakers of English are known to have difficulty in interpreting conversational implicatures even though they are advanced level of language proficiency (Cook & Liddicoat, 2002; Roever, 2010). The current study examines the effect of pragmatic instruction on interpreting conversational implicature, focusing on Korean EFL learners. To improve learners’ comprehension, linguistic theory, based on Grice (1975), was incorporated into classroom instruction. Activities from previous studies (Murray, 2009, 2011) were adopted and modified for college-level students. Then a brief survey was conducted to find whether the teaching of conversational implicatures was effective between the pre-test and post-test. The results of the study revealed that the mean differences between the pre-test and post-test were statistically significant. The learners performed better than before receiving the instruction. Among the types of implicatures, Pope Q and relevance-based implicatures were relatively easily recognized by the learners while indirect criticism was difficult, which was consistent with previously identified patterns (Lee, 2002; Taguchi, 2005). Pedagogical implicatures are discussed with reference to the role of linguistic theory in English education.
참고문헌 (21)
- Abdelhafez, A. M., "The effect of conversational implicature instruction on developing TEFL students’ pragmatic competence and language proficiency", US-China Education Review, 6(8), pp.451~465 (2016)
- Bouton, L. F., "The interpretation of implicature in English by NNS: Does it come automatically without being explicitly taught?", Pragmatics and Language Learning, 3, pp.53~65 (1992)
- Bialystok, E., "Symbolic representation and attentional control in pragmatic competence", Interlanguage Pragmatics, 3(1), pp.43~57 (1993)
- Cook, M., "The development of comprehension in interlanguage pragmatics", Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 25(1), pp.19~39 (2002)
- Fraser, B., "New approaches to hedging", pp.15~34 (2010), Emerald
- Garcia, P., "Developmental differences in speech act recognition : A pragmatic awareness study", Language Awareness, 13(2), pp.96~115 (2004)
- Grice, H. P., "Logic and conversation, reprinted in Studies in the way of words", pp.1~144 (1967), Harvard University Press
- Grice, H. P., "Syntax and semantics: Vol.3", pp.31~58 (1975), Academic Press
- Ishihara, N., "Teaching and learning pragmatics: Where language and culture meet" (2010), Pearson Education
- Kasper, G., "Pragmatics in language teaching" (2001), Cambridge University Press
- 김덕영, "한국 EFL 학생들의 대화함축 이해에 관한 연구", 영어영문학연구, 50(3), pp.57~72 (2008), 한국중앙영어영문학회[DOI]
- Kubota, M., "Teachability of conversational implicature to Japanese EFL learners", IRLT(Institute for Research in Language Teaching)Bulletin, 9, pp.35~67 (1995)
- JinSookLee, "Interpreting Conversational Implicatures:A study of Korean learners of English", Korea TESOL Journal, 5(1), pp.1~26 (2002), 대한영어교육학회
- Murray, N., "Pragmatics, awareness raising, and the cooperative principle", ELT Journal, 64(3), pp.293~301 (2009)
- Murray, J. C., "Do bears fly? Revisiting conversational implicature in instructional pragmatics", TESL-EJ, 15(2), pp.1~30 (2011)
- Nurdiana, N., "Raising pragmatics awareness : How to raise conversational implicature awareness through movies", Journal of English Language and Culture, 2(2), pp.159~173 (2017)
- Roever, C., "Pragmatics language learning Vol. 12", pp.187~212 (2010), National Foreign Language Resource Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa
- Samaie, M., "Comprehension of conversational implicature in an Iranian EFL context : A validation study", Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 14(4), pp.44~62 (2018)
- Taguchi, N., "Comprehending implied meaning in English as a foreign language", The Modern Language Journal, 89(4), pp.543~562 (2005)
- Thomas, J., "Meaning in interaction : An introduction to pragmatics" (1995), Longman
- Wang, H., "Conversational implicature in English listening comprehension", Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(5), pp.1162~1167 (2011)