Effects of linguistic proficiency on speech act development in L2 Chinese during study abroad

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of different levels of linguistic proficiency on the development of multiple speech acts during study abroad. Participants were 109 American learners of Chinese recruited from a study abroad program in China. They were divided into a higher proficiency (HP) group and a lower proficiency (LP) group based on their scores on a standardized Chinese proficiency test. The participants completed a computerized oral Discourse Completion Test (DCT) that assessed the production of compliment response, refusal, and request as pre- and posttests. The learners’ oral productions were analyzed according to measures of appropriateness rating and speech rate. Linguistic analysis was performed to examine changes in strategy preference and distribution across the three speech acts. Results revealed a complex relationship between proficiency, speech act type, pragmatic performance measure (e.g., appropriateness, speech rate), and ways that pragmatic changes are evaluated (e.g., developmental trajectory, amount of gain).

English Preparatory School Learners’ Pragmatic Motivation in a StudyAbroad Setting

“…Similarly, the results revealed that there was no statistically significant difference between the scores of the students who participated in the study from the General Pragmatic Motivation Questionnaire (GPMQ) according to their English level. While some studies suggest the influence of English proficiency level on students’ pragmatic Motivation (Li et al, 2022; Kieseier et al, 2022), our study found otherwise. These findings are insightful in guiding teachers in their classroom practices.…”

“…Knowledge of speech acts may help effective communication. Research shows that speech acts aid language cognitive processes (Li et al, 2022; M. F. Lin et al, 2022; Panahzadeh & Asadi, 2019; Sharqawi & Anthony, 2020).…”

When In Rome: Maximizing L2 Pragmatic Development in Study Abroad

“…Nevertheless, it is difficult to compare or generalize the findings from these studies, considering that they differ in languages studied, duration of time abroad, student profile, and even how they operationalized and measured pragmatic development. Different speech acts may even develop at different rates (Li et al, 2022;Taguchi, 2013). The common thread they share is their examination of the development of uninstructed students.…”

“…The common thread they share is their examination of the development of uninstructed students. However, Shively (2010) warns that "uninstructed L2 learners typically make only minor gains in target-like pragmatic competence" (p. 106), bearing in mind that pragmatic development is dependent on a myriad of complex factors such as L2 proficiency (Barron, 2020;Li et al, 2022), social contact (Sánchez-Hernández & Alcón-Soler, 2019Taguchi et al, 2016), and identity (Liu et al, 2022;Masuda, 2011;Morris, 2017;Shively, 2011). Adding COVID to this list of factors only further muddies the waters.…”

The Development of Pragmatic Markers in English as a Second Language: Do Age and Learning Context Matter?

“…As regards the pragmatic moves analyzed, speech acts have been extensively investigated (Li et al 2022), as in many studies in interlanguage pragmatics (ILP), leaving other pragmatic aspects generally unexplored. This is the reason why the present study focuses on pragmatic markers (PMs), which have been mainly examined among adult learners (e.g., Magliacane and Howard 2019).…”