A CONTEXTUAL-SITUATION-BASED STUDY ON RECOGNITION  AND EVALUATION TOWARD L2 GRAMMAR AND PRAGMATICS – A CASE STUDY OF YERSIN UNIVERSITY

Lê Thị Diệu Duyên; Ngô Trí Cường; Đinh Nguyễn Thụy Khanh

doi:10.34238/tnu-jst.6184

A CONTEXTUAL-SITUATION-BASED STUDY ON RECOGNITION AND EVALUATION TOWARD L2 GRAMMAR AND PRAGMATICS – A CASE STUDY OF YERSIN UNIVERSITY

About this article

Received: 16/06/22 Revised: 16/09/22 Published: 16/09/22

Authors

1. Le Thi Dieu Duyen , University of Yersin Da Lat
2. Ngo Tri Cuong, University of Yersin Da Lat
3. Dinh Nguyen Thuy Khanh, University of Yersin Da Lat

Abstract

This study attempts to reveal pragmatic awareness and pragmatic competence by examining the recognition and evaluation of English-majored students (high-leveled and low-leveled) towards grammar and pragmatics. As the subjects of the study are English-majored students who have hardly studied pragmatics before, the aims of the study are to examine their pragmatic awareness and application and to answer the question whether pragmatics should be officially taught in the Teaching Curriculum. Data were collected via DCT (Discourse Completion Tasks) questionnaire (Bardovi-Harlig & Dornyei, 1998). Independent T-Test was employed for the data analysis. The findings show that the students of high proficiency group could recognize the errors (in general) more than those of low proficiency group (p<.001). Although the high-leveled students can identify the grammatical errors better than the low-leveled ones, there were no significant differences between the students of two groups in pragmatic identification (p=0.19). Hence, both groups have no significant differences in evaluation of the seriousness of pragmatic errors (p=0.54). This can reinforce the need of teaching pragmatics for English-majored students in language classes.

Keywords

Pragmatics; Pragmatic competence; Pragmatic awareness; Grammar; Evaluation; Identification

Full Text:

PDF

References

[1] M. Hussain and A. Aziz, “Cross-cultural pragmatic study of apology strategies in Balochi with reference to Chinese language,” Journal of Nusantara Studies, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 152-169, June 2020.

[2] N. Chomsky, Aspect of the theory of syntax. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 1965.

[3] K. Bardovi-Harlig and Z. Dörnyei, “Pragmatic awareness and instructed L2 learning: An empirical investigation,” Paper presented at the AAAL 1997 Conference, Orlando, 1997.

[4] L. Bachman, Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.

[5] K. Bardovi-Harlig and Z. Dörnyei “Do language learners recognize pragmatic violations? Pragmatic Versus Grammatical Awareness in instructed L2 Learning,” Tesol Quaterly, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 233-259, Summer 1998.

[6] Z. Esami- Rasekh, “Raising the pragmatic awareness of language learners,” ELT Journal, vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 119-208, July 2005.

[7] M. M. Moghaddam, N. Murray, and Y. Mirfenderski, “Pragmatic Competence as a Regulator of Foreign Language Speaking Proficiency,” Porta Linguarum, vol. 33, pp. 163-182, June 2020.

[8] M. Terkourafi, “Pragmatics as an interdisciplinary field,” Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 179, pp. 77-84, July 2021.

[9] T. T. M Nguyen, T. H. Pham, and M. T. Pham “The relative effects of explicit and implicit form-focused instruction on the development of L2 pragmatic competence,” Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 416-434, March 2012.

[10] M. N. Vu, “Teaching pragmatics in English as a Foreign Language at a Vietnamese university: Teachers' perceptions, curricular content, and classroom practices,” Published Doctor of Philosophy dissertation, University of Sydney, 2007.

[11] T. T. Nguyen, “English-majored students’ attitudes towards pragmatic awareness,” VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 120-138, January 2021.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.34238/tnu-jst.6184

Refbacks

There are currently no refbacks.



Remember me