This study investigated the communicative functions of ‘I think’ and ‘I guess’ in classroom discourse and intra-register variation in their use. Building on research into the multifunctionality of epistemic stance markers, a coding scheme was developed and iteratively applied to a corpus, revealing five macro functions: epistemic stance, softening, personal perspective, discourse organizing, and deciding in real time. The frequency of each macro function differed between the two markers, as did the observed subfunctions. Statistical analyses comparing instructors and students in three disciplines indicated intra-register variation, linked to situational differences. ‘I guess’ was most frequent in student language, and ‘I think’ was most frequent in the humanities. Different patterns were also noted in the use of certain communicative functions. The results suggest the importance of accounting for register variation when describing epistemic stance markers.
L2 pragmatics refers to language learners' acquisition of appropriate linguistic and paralinguistic behaviors for a range of communicative functions, such as making a request or apologizing. In order to identify instructional targets and assess learners' pragmatic competence, the field has traditionally relied on the norms of L1 speakers as a standard. However, a number of problems have been associated with this practice related to the appropriateness of L1 norms for L2 learners and to the conception of those norms in the first place. L1 norms may be incompatible with L2 speakers' identities, inappropriate for their local communicative needs, or both. Moreover, the identification of L1 speaker norms has often overlooked pragmatic differences among L1 speakers, which occur as a result of micro‐ and macrosocial factors. Instead, an idealized and unrealistic view of pragmatic uniformity among L1 speakers is often presented. Given these problems, alternative approaches should be considered for teaching and assessing L2 pragmatic competence.
This qualitative classroom study investigated the development of pragmatic competence in academic discussions through content analysis of student reflective writing. The aims of the study were: to understand the greatest challenges that students faced during the learning process, the causes of those challenges, and the most successful strategies that students employed to overcome the challenges. In addition, the analysis investigated other significant themes in the reflective writing that related to the students’ experiences in developing their pragmatic competence in discussions. Five advanced English for Academic Purposes (EAP) students at a Sino-US institution in China participated over the course of a semester. Results showed that common challenges included: hesitation resulting in missed opportunities to speak, lack of clarity when speaking, inability to repair communication breakdowns, and difficulty with listening comprehension. Self-reflection allowed the learners to understand the various reasons for the challenges they faced and to develop appropriate pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic strategies for coping with them. It also enabled the instructor to make suggestions suited to learners’ specific needs. In addition to revealing specific challenges, causes, and strategies that students employed, themes that emerged through content analysis included the impact of students’ emotional lives on their learning and performance, as well as the value of authentic communication in the development of pragmatic competence for academic discussions. This exploratory classroom investigation provides suggestions for teaching pragmatic competence in academic discussions and for additional classroom explorations that empower learners to develop autonomy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.