“Ah no honestly we're okay:” Learning to upgrade in a study abroad context

Barron, Anne

doi:10.1515/ip.2007.009

Cited by 52 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The use of conventionally indirect strategies (e.g., I was wondering if you could let me change the topic of my paper) as opposed to direct strategies (e.g., I want to change the topic of my paper), as well as a wider repertoire of request modifications and supportive moves, was identified as pragmalinguistic development (following Barron 2007;Rose 2009;Schauer 2007). (Request strategies coding scheme from Blum-Kulka et al [1989] was used.)…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of computer-delivered structured tasks in pragmatic instruction: An exploratory study

Sydorenko

2015

Intercultural Pragmatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the effect of oral practice via computer-delivered structured tasks (CASTs) with native speaker (NS) models and open-ended tasks without NS input (i.e., learner-leaner role-plays) on pragmatic development of second language learners. While prior studies have indicated that structured tasks afford more opportunities for focus on form (FonF) than open-ended tasks (Lee and VanPatten 2003;Lyster 2004;Ranta and Lyster 2007;Skehan and Foster 1999; Tavakoli and Foster 2011), differences between these tasks in pragmatic instruction (PI) have not been examined. Additionally, the effect of practice has been widely examined with regard to oral development, but much less so for pragmatics (e.g., Li 2013; Takimoto 2012a). In this study, one group of ESL learners practiced request speech acts via CASTs, and another group did so via learner-learner open role-plays. Qualitative analysis of participants' output during practice suggests that rehearsal via CASTs promotes FonF and incorporation of NS models into learners' speech, while rehearsal via role-plays results in more creative, but often pragmatically inappropriate, language and content. Additionally, role-plays, but not CASTs, appear to be conducive to humorous language play, metapragmatic discussions, and extended turns similar to those in naturalistic interactions. The study offers insights regarding task types in PI.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of computer-delivered structured tasks in pragmatic instruction: An exploratory study

Sydorenko

2015

Intercultural Pragmatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Instead of seeking global proficiency measures for pragmatics, acquisition studies have utilized measures of development that are appropriate to the research questions posed and the research designs used to investigate them. Development has been assessed by a range of measures including, but not limited to, mitigation (e.g., Barron, 2003), upgrading (Barron, 2007), pragmalinguistics (e.g., conventional expressions and general grammatical knowledge, as in Barron, 2003; Warga & Schölmberger, 2007), intensification (Shardakova, 2005), turn structure and realization of speech acts across turns (Bardovi‐Harlig & Salsbury, 2004; Félix‐Brasdefer, 2004, 2007), and continued investigation of speech acts and semantic formulas (Sabaté i Dalmau & Currell i Gotor, 2007; Shardakova, 2005).…”

Section: Measuring Developing L2 Pragmaticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing L2 Pragmatics

Bardovi‐Harlig

2013

Language Learning

187

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article positions research on the acquisition of pragmatics as an inquiry in the greater field of second language acquisition research. Viewing pragmatics from this intersection, I consider five areas of research that are of interest in both fields and have the potential to make significant contributions to second language pragmatics research. They are: the design and evaluation of pragmatics tasks as simulations of conversation; task design for the study of implicit and explicit knowledge; the measurement of pragmatic development; the interface of the development of grammar and lexicon with pragmatics; and the effect of environment on pragmatic development.

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, studies in L2 pragmatics have persisted in investigating the role of length of stay in development, encouraged by recent study abroad research. More recent studies include production and perception of routines (Barron 2007;Kecskes 2000Kecskes , 2003, production of apologies (Barron 2003;Warga and Schölmberger 2007), refusals (Félix-Brasdefer 2004), requests (Schauer 2007), speech-act performance (Cohen and Shively 2003), pragmatic awareness (Schauer 2006), and pragmatic comprehension (Taguchi 2008).…”

Section: Length Of Staymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the previous research shows that increased length of stay does not guarantee increases in proficiency, controlling for proficiency when investigating length of stay is crucial. Many studies have investigated advanced learners (e.g., Barron 2003Barron , 2006Barron , 2007Félix-Brasdefer 2004;Kecskes 2000;Schauer 2007). In contrast, Schauer (2006) and Warga and Schölmberger (2007) grouped learners of intermediate and advanced proficiency together.…”

Section: Length Of Staymentioning

confidence: 99%

Proficiency, length of stay, and intensity of interaction and the acquisition of conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics

Bardovi‐Harlig¹,

Bastos²

2011

Intercultural Pragmatics

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the contribution of proficiency, length of stay, and intensity of interaction to the recognition and use of conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics by host-environment learners of English. An aural recognition task and an oral production task targeting conventional expressions were completed by 122 learners and 49 native speakers of American English via two computer-delivered tasks: The aural recognition task consisted of 60 conventional and modified expressions, and the oral production task consisted of 32 scenarios pretested to yield conventional expressions (Bardovi-Harlig 2009). Proficiency was determined by scores on a 3.5-hour, four-part placement exam, yielding four low-intermediate to low-advanced levels. Length of stay in the host environment was measured in months. Intensity of interaction was measured by self-report of weekly English language use outside class with native speakers, daily use with other learners, and television viewing. A repeated measures logistic regression model showed significant influence of intensity of interaction on recognition of conventional expressions. A separate repeated measures logistic regression model showed that both proficiency and intensity of interaction have a significant influence in the production of conventional expressions. Length of stay did not have a significant effect on either recognition or production.

show abstract

“Ah no honestly we're okay:” Learning to upgrade in a study abroad context

Cited by 52 publications

References 17 publications

The use of computer-delivered structured tasks in pragmatic instruction: An exploratory study

The use of computer-delivered structured tasks in pragmatic instruction: An exploratory study

Developing L2 Pragmatics

Proficiency, length of stay, and intensity of interaction and the acquisition of conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About