Cover not available
Part of
Task-Based Approaches to Teaching and Assessing Pragmatics
Edited by Naoko Taguchi and YouJin Kim
[Task-Based Language Teaching 10] 2018
► pp. 27–54

Chapter 2
Learning of Korean honorifics through collaborative tasks

Comparing heritage and foreign language learners

 | Georgia State University
 | Georgia State University
 | Georgia State University
This study examines the effects of collaborative writing tasks on the development of Korean honorifics among heritage language (HL) and foreign language (FL) learners. Participants were 14 HL learners (HLLs) and 32 FL learners (FLLs) of Korean (i.e., 14 HLL-FLL and 9 FLL-FLL dyads) in beginning-level language classrooms at a university in the U.S.A. They completed a pretest, two collaborative writing tasks, immediate posttests, delayed posttests (administered three weeks after immediate posttests), and a post-interaction questionnaire in their regular classes. Learning outcomes were measured by discourse completion tests and acceptability judgment tests. Interactions of HLL-FLL and FLL-FLL dyads were analyzed for the occurrence of pragmatic related episodes (PREs; Taguchi & Kim, 2016). Findings indicated that both HLLs and FLLs developed their receptive and productive knowledge of Korean honorifics over time. It was also found that HLLs in HLL-FLL dyads had an advantage over FLLs in FLL-FLL dyads in improving their productive knowledge of Korean honorifics in the immediate posttests, but not in the delayed posttests. In terms of PRE occurrences, both HLL-FLL and FLL-FLL dyads focused more on honorific nouns and honorific verb suffixes than honorific verbs and honorific subject particles. In addition, HLLs and FLLs alike had positive attitudes towards their partners in completing collaborative tasks. This study highlights the benefits of collaborative writing tasks for learning pragmatics in FL classrooms where HLLs and FLLs coexist.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Background
    • Pragmatics and Task-Based Language Teaching
    • Heritage language learners during collaborative tasks
    • Purpose of the study
  • Methods
    • Participants
    • Target pragmalinguistic forms: Korean honorifics
    • Instructional materials: Collaborative writing tasks
    • Assessment of learning outcome: Discourse completion test and acceptability judgment test
    • Exploration of student perception: Post-interaction questionnaire
    • Data collection procedure
    • Pragmatics-Related Episode (PRE) coding
    • Statistical analysis
  • Results
    • Development of productive knowledge of Korean honorifics
    • Development of receptive knowledge of Korean honorifics
    • Occurrence of PREs during collaborative tasks
    • Student perceptions of interactions
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 15 August 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.10.02kim
References (41)
References
Alcón-Soler, E. (2007). Fostering EFL learners’ awareness of requesting through explicit and implicit consciousness-raising tasks. In M. P. García-Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 221–241). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Baralt, M. (2013). The impact of cognitive complexity on feedback efficacy during online versus face-to-face interactive tasks. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(4), 689–725. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2009). Conventional expressions as a pragmalinguistic resource: Recognition and production of conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics. Language Learning, 59, 755–795. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blake, R., & Zyzik, E. (2003). Who’s helping whom? Learner/heritage speakers’ networked discussions in Spanish. Applied Linguistics, 24(4), 519–544. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowles, M. (2011). Exploring the role of modality: L2-heritage learner interactions in the Spanish language classroom. Heritage Language Journal, 8(1), 30–65.Google Scholar
Bowles, M. A., Adams, R. J., & Toth, P. D. (2014). A comparison of L2-L2 and L2-heritage learner interactions in Spanish language classrooms. Modern Language Journal, 98(2), 497–517. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cho, Y. -M., Lee, H. -S., Schulz, C., Sohn, H. -M., & Sohn, S. -O. (2010). Integrated Korean: Beginning 2 (2nd ed.). Hawaii, HI: University of Hawaii Press. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2007). Skill acquisition theory. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 94–113). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Henshaw, F. (2015). Learning outcomes of L2-heritage learner interaction: The proof is in the posttests. Heritage Language Journal, 12(3), 245–270.Google Scholar
Jeon, E. H., & Kaya, T. (2006). Effects of L2 instruction on interlanguage pragmatic development. In J. M. Norris, & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 165–211). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R. (2002). Pragmatic development in a second language. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kim, Y. (2011). The role of task-induced involvement and learner proficiency in L2 vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 61, 100–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Y., & McDonough, K. (2008). The effect of interlocutor proficiency on the collaborative dialogue between Korean as a second language learners. Language Teaching Research, 12, 211–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Y., & Taguchi, N. (2015). Promoting task-based pragmatics instruction in EFL classroom contexts: The role of task complexity. Modern Language Journal, 99, 656–677. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016). Learner-learner interaction during collaborative pragmatic tasks: The role of cognitive and pragmatic task demands. Foreign Language Annals, 49, 42–57.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kondo-Brown, K. (2005). Differences in language skills: Heritage language learner subgroups and foreign language learners. Modern Language Journal, 89(4), 563–581. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, E. (2011). A study of instructional content of honorific expressions in Korean language education. Korean Grammar Education, 13, 281–315.Google Scholar
Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Long, M. (2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Mochizuki, N., & Ortega, L. (2008). Balancing communication and grammar in beginning-level foreign language classrooms: A study of guided planning and relativization. Language Teaching Research, 12(1), 11–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S. (2010). How similar are L2 learners and heritage speakers? Spanish clitics and word order. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31, 167–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S., & Perpiñán, S. (2011). Assessing differences and similarities between instructed heritage language learners and L2 learners in their knowledge of Spanish tense-aspect and mood (TAM) morphology. Heritage Language Journal, 8(1), 90–133.Google Scholar
Mueller, J., & Jiang, N. (2013). The acquisition of the Korean honorific affix (u)si by advanced L2 learners. Modern Language Journal, 97(2), 318–339. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Park, E. (2006). Grandparents, grandchildren, and heritage language use in Korean. In K. Kondo-Brown (Ed.), Heritage language development: Focus on East Asian immigrants (pp. 57–87). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Kim, Y. (2016). Task-based learner production: A substantive and methodological review. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 73–97.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Potowski, K. (2002). Experiences of Spanish heritage speakers in university foreign language courses and implications for teacher training. ADFL Bulletin, 33, 35–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rose, K. R., & Ng, K. F. (2001). Inductive and deductive teaching of compliments and compliment responses. In K. R. Rose, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 145–169). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sato, M., & Ballinger, S. (Eds.). (2016). Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shin, S. -Y., Lidster, R., Sabraw, S., & Yeager, R. (2015). The effects of L2 proficiency differences in pairs on idea units in a collaborative text reconstruction task. Language Teaching Research, 20(3), 366–386.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sohn, H. -M. (1999). The Korean language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Storch, N. (2002). Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning, 52, 119–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2001). Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks, second language learning and testing (pp. 99–118). Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Watanabe, Y. (2013). Collaborative dialogue as a source of learning. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistic (pp. 3218–3225). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2011). Teaching pragmatics: Trends and issues. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 289–310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies were, are, and should be going. Language Teaching, 48(1), 1–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taguchi, N., & Kim, Y. (2016). Collaborative dialogue in learning pragmatics: Pragmatic-related episodes as an opportunity for learning request-making. Applied Linguistics, 37, 416–437.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Takahashi, S. (2010). Assesing learnability in second language pragmatics. In A. Trosborg (Ed.), Handbook of pragmatics VII (pp. 391–421). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Valdés, G. (2001). Heritage language students: Profiles and possibilities. In J. Peyton, J. Ranard, & S. McGinnis (Eds.), Heritage languages in America: Preserving a national resource (pp. 37–80). McHenry: The Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta Systems.Google Scholar
Van den Branden’s, K. (2006). Task-based language education: From theory to practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van den Branden, K. (2016). Task-based language teaching. In G. Hall (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of English language teaching (pp. 238–251). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Van den Branden, K., Bygate, M., & Norris, J. M. (Eds.). (2009). Task-based language teaching: A reader. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (8)

Cited by eight other publications

Róg, Tomasz
2024. Teaching L2 pragmatics: The effects of different types of task implementation vs a PPP framework. Neofilolog :62/2 ► pp. 502 ff. DOI logo
Torres, Julio
2023. Heritage language learners’ written texts across pair types and interaction mode. Language Teaching Research 27:1 ► pp. 5 ff. DOI logo
Torres, Julio
2024. Heritage language education. In Multifaceted Multilingualism [Studies in Bilingualism, 66], ► pp. 270 ff. DOI logo
Castro, Leonardo Sarmento Travincas de
2022. Integrating Task-Based Learning and Pragmatics. BELT - Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal 13:1 ► pp. e42606 ff. DOI logo
Cho, Hyejin & YouJin Kim
2022. Learning Korean honorifics through individual and collaborative writing tasks and written corrective feedback . Applied Linguistics Review 13:1 ► pp. 19 ff. DOI logo
Cho, Hyejin, YouJin Kim & Seyoung Park
2022. Comparing students’ responses to synchronous written corrective feedback during individual and collaborative writing tasks. Language Awareness 31:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Taguchi, Naoko & Soo Jung Youn
2022. Pragmatics. In Research methods in instructed second language acquisition [Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 3], ► pp. 149 ff. DOI logo
Wang, Hye-Sook
2019. Comprehension of the Honorifics System by Learners of Korean. The Korean Language in America 23:1 ► pp. 53 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 december 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.