Article published in:
Second Language Acquisition of Turkish
Edited by Ayşe Gürel
[Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 59] 2016
► pp. 195–219

Cross-linguistic effects in the use of suggestion formulas by L2 Turkish learners

| Bogaziçi University
| Bogaziçi University

This study investigates the use of suggestions in second language (L2) Turkish produced by first language English speakers. The data were collected via a discourse completion task and essays in the form of a letter to a friend. Participants were 15 advanced L2 Turkish learners and 30 native Turkish speakers. The findings show that suggestions made by L2 participants in both tasks differed considerably from the way these were used by native speakers in terms of sensitivity to social context: the L2 learners were found to be less sensitive to social context than native speakers. Native-nonnative differences in the choice and use of suggestion strategies indicate a particular difficulty associated with the acquisition of speech acts even for high-proficiency learners.

Keywords: acquisition of speech acts, interlanguage pragmatics, L2 Turkish, study abroad context, suggestions
Published online: 25 May 2016
https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.59.08bay
References
Abolfathiasl, H. & Abdullah, A.N
2013 Pragmatic strategies and linguistic structures in making ‘Suggestions’: Towards comprehensive taxonomies. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature 2(6): 237–241. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Alcón-Soler, E. & Codina-Espurz, V
2002 Practice opportunities and pragmatic change in a second language context: The case of requests. Estudios de Lingüística Aplicada 3: 123–138.Google Scholar
Austin, J.L
1962 How To Do Things With Words. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Banerjee, J. & Carrell, P.L
1988 Tuck in your shirt, you squid: Suggestions in ESL. Language Learning 38: 313–364. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bayraktaroğlu, A
2001 Advice-giving in Turkish: “Superiority” or “solidarity”? In Linguistic Politeness: A Case of Greek and Turkish [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 88], A. Bayraktaroğlu & M. Sifianou (eds), 177–208. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bayyurt, Y
2009 Yabancılara Türkçe öğretimi: Öğrenci ve öğretmenlerin ders içeriği ile ilgili görüşlerini inceleyen bir durum çalışması (Perspectives of teachers and learners on the teaching/learning materials of Turkish as a Foreign Language: A case study). In 23. Ulusal Dilbilim Kurultayı Bildirileri (Proceedings of the 23rd National Conference of Linguistics), N. Osam & E. Arkın (eds), 233–250. Gazimağusa: Doğu Akdeniz University Publications.
Bayyurt, Y. & Martı, L
2012 The use of suggestion formulas by nonnative speakers of English in an EFL context. In Teaching English as a Foreign Language: Proposals for the Language Classroom, M.D. Garcia-Pastor (ed.), 157–181. Catarroja, Valencia: Perifèric Edicions.Google Scholar
Bayyurt, Y. & Merdin, E
2012 Yabancı dil olarak Türkçenin öğretiminde öğrenci gereksinimlerinin yeri ve önemi (The significance of needs analysis in teaching Turkish as a foreign language). In Türkçe’nin Eğitimi-Öğretimi Üzerine Çalışmalar (Studies on teaching and learning of Turkish), Y. Engin, M. Gedizli, E. Özcan & Y. Koçmar (eds), 351–359. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.Google Scholar
Bell, J
1998 Teaching Multi-level Classes in ESL. San Diego CA: Dominie Press.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J. & Kasper, G
(eds.)1989 Cross-cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Norwood NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Bordería-García, A.M
2012 Suggestions and advice in English: considerations for foreign language learners. In Teaching English as a Foreign Language: Proposals for the Language Classroom, M.D. Garcia-Pastor (ed.), 183–203. Catarroja, Valencia: Perifèric Edicions.Google Scholar
Brown, P. & Levinson, S
1987 Politeness.Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Decapua, A. & Huber, L
1995 ‘If I were you…’: Advice in American English. Multilingua: Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication 14: 117–132. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eslami, Z.R
2010 Refusals: How to develop appropriate refusal strategies. In Martínez-Flor & Usó-Juan (eds), 217–236. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Félix-Brasdefer, C
2010 Data collection methods in speech act performance: DCTs, role plays and verbal reports. In Martínez-Flor & Usó-Juan (eds), 41–46. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hatipoğlu, Ç
2009 Culture, Gender and Politeness: Apologies in Turkish and British English.Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr. Muller Aktiengesellschaft & Co.Google Scholar
2012 Apologies and gender in Turkish and British English. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi 1: 55–79.Google Scholar
Haverkate, H
1984 Speech Acts, Speakers and Hearers [Pragmatics and BeyondV(4)]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hinkel, E
1997 Appropriateness of advice: DCT and multiple choice data. Applied Linguistics 18(1): 1–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, X
2006 Suggestions: What should ESL students know? System 34(1): 36–54. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kalisz, R
1993 Different cultures, different languages, and different speech acts revisited. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 27: 107–118.Google Scholar
Li, E.S
2010 Making suggestions: A contrastive study of young Hong Kong and Australian students. Journal of Pragmatics 42: 598–616. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Y. & Zhao, J
2007 Suggestions in teacher-student conferences. Arizona Working Papers in SLA and Teaching 14: 59–74.Google Scholar
Martínez-Flor, A
2003 Non-native speakers’ production of advice acts: The effects of proficiency. RESLA 16: 139–153.Google Scholar
2005 A theoretical review of the speech act of suggesting: Towards a taxonomy for its use in FLT. Revistas Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 18: 167–187. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 Suggestions: How social norms affect pragmatic behaviour. In Martínez-Flor & Usó-Juan (eds), 257–274. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
. & Fukuya, Y.J 2005 The effects of instruction on learners’ production of appropriate and accurate suggestions. System 33: 463–480. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Martínez-Flor, A. & Usó-Juan, E
(eds)2010 Speech Act Performance: Theoretical, Empirical and Methodological Issues [Language Learning & Teaching 26]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011 Research methodologies in pragmatics: Eliciting refusals to requests. Estudios de lingüística inglesa aplicada (ELIA) 11: 47–87.Google Scholar
Matsumura, S
2001 Learning the rules for offering advice: A quantitative approach to second language socialization. Language Learning 51: 635–679. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Merdin, E
2013 A Cross-cultural Comparison of Refusing Invitations via E-mail: Strategy Use in Turkish and American-English Refusals. MA thesis, Boğaziçi University.
Rintell, E
1979 Getting your speech act together: The pragmatic ability of second language learners. Working Papers on Bilingualism 17: 97–106.Google Scholar
Rose, K.R
1994 On the validity of discourse completion tests in nonwestern contexts. Applied Linguistics 15(1): 1–14. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J.R
1969 Speech Acts. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sahin, S., Yıldırım, H. Ç. & Alagözlü, N
2010 Türkçenin yabancı dil olarak öğretiminde temel dil bağlamlarında sözeylemlerin kullanılması ve öğretimi (Using and teaching speech acts in main language contexts in teaching Turkish as a foreign language). 10th International Language, Literature, and Stylistic Symposium Proceedings I: 95–105.Google Scholar
Sharifian, F
2011 Cultural Conceptualisations and Language [Cognitive Linguistic Studies in Cultural Contexts 1]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, J
1983 Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics 4(2): 91–112. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1995 Meaning in Interaction. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Usó-Juan, E
2010 Requests: A sociopragmatic approach. In. Martínez-Flor & Usó-Juan (eds), 237–256. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, A
1985 Different cultures, different languages, different speech acts: Polish vs. English. Journal of Pragmatics 9: 145–178. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wolfson, N., Marmor, T. & Jones, S
1989 Problems in the comparison of speech acts across cultures. In Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies, S. Blum-Kulka, J. House & G. Kasper (eds), 174–196. Norwood NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Yuan, Y
2001 An inquiry into empirical pragmatics data-gathering methods: written DCTs, oral DCTs, field notes, and natural conversations. Journal of Pragmatics 33: 271–292. CrossrefGoogle Scholar