Analysis of appropriateness in a speech act of request in L2 English

Naoko Taguchi

Abstract

Fifty-nine Japanese college students of English at two different proficiency levels were evaluated for their ability to produce a speech act of request in a spoken role play task. Learners’ production was analyzed quantitatively by rating performance on a six-point scale for overall appropriateness, as well as qualitatively by identifying the directness levels of the linguistic expressions used to produce requests. Results revealed a significant L2 proficiency influence on overall appropriateness, but only a marginal difference in the types of linguistic expressions used between the two proficiency groups. Moreover, grammatical and discourse control encoded in the rating scale seemed to have affected the quality of speech acts.

Keywords:
Quick links
A browser-friendly version of this article is not yet available. View PDF
ACTFL
(1986) ACTFL proficiency guidelines. In H. Byrnes & M. Canale (eds.), Defining and developing proficiency: Guidelines, implementations, and Concepts. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company.Google Scholar
Bachman, L
(1990) Fundamental considerations in Language Testing. New York: Oxford University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Bachman, L., and A. Palmer
(1996) Language Testing in Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K
(1999) Exploring the interlanguage of interlanguage pragmatics: A research agenda for acquisitional pragmatics. Language Learning 49: 677-713. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., and B. Hartford
(1991) Saying "No": Native and nonnative rejections in English. In L.F. Bouton, & Y. Kachru (eds.), Pragmatics and Language Learning (vol.2). University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign: Division of English as an International Language, pp. 41-57.Google Scholar
(1993a) Learning the rules of academic talk: A longitudinal study of pragmatic change. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 15: 279-304. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1993b) Refining the DCT: Comparing open questionnaires and dialogue completion tasks. In L.F. Bouton & Y. Kachru (eds.), Pragmatics and Language Learning (vol.4). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign: Division of English as an International Language, pp. 143-165.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S., J. House, and G. Kasper
(1989) Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Brown, J.D
(2001) Pragmatics tests: Different purposes, different tests. In K. Rose & G. Kasper (eds.), Pragmatics and language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 301-326. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brown, P., and S. Levinson
(1978) Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In E.N. Goody (ed.), Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 256-289.Google Scholar
Canale, M., and M. Swain
(1980) Theoretical aspects of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics 1: 1-47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, A
(1994) Assessing language ability in the classroom. Rowley, MS: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Cohen, A., and E. Olshtain
(1993) The production of speech acts by ESL learners. TESOL Quarterly 27: 33-56. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
DuFon, M.A
(2001) Triangulation in qualitative SLA research on interlanguage pragmatics. In S. Bonch- Bruevich, W. Crawford, J. Hellermann, C. Higgins, & H. Nguyen (eds.), The past, present, and future of second language research: Selected proceedings of the 2000 second language research forum. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, pp. 251-270.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, M., and J. Bodman
(1993) Expressing gratitude in American English. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 43-57.Google Scholar
Felix-Brasdefer, J.C
(2003) Declining an invitation: A cross-cultural study of pragmatic strategies in American English and Latin American Spanish. Multilingua 22: 225-255. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S.M., and N. Houck
(1999) Interlanguage refusals. Berllin: de Gruyter. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Hartford, B.S, and K. Bardovi-Harlig
(1992) Experimental and observational data in the study of interlanguage pragmatics. In L.F. Bouton (ed.), Pragmatics and language learning (vol.3). University of Illlinois, Urbana-Champaign: Division of English as an International Language, pp. 33-52.Google Scholar
Hill, T
(1997) The development of pragmatic competence in an EFL context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Tokyo: Temple University-Japan.
Hoffman-Hicks, S
(1992) Linguistic and pragmatic competence: Their relationship in the overall competence of the language learner. In L.F. Bouton & Y. Kachru (eds.), Pragmatics and language learning monograph series vol.3. Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois, pp. 66-80.Google Scholar
Hudson, T., E. Detmer, and J.D. Brown
(1995) Developing prototypic measures of cross-cultural pragmatics (Technical Report No.7). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i at Manoa, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.Google Scholar
John, J
(1992) The Ontario test of ESL oral interaction test. System 20: 305-316. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kasper, G., and E. Kellerman
(1997) Communication strategies. London: Longman.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Maeshiba, N., G. Kasper, and S. Ross
(1996) Transfer and proficiency in interlanguage apologizing. In S. Gass & J. Neu (eds.), Speech acts across cultures. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 155-187.  BoPGoogle Scholar
North, B
(1995) The development of a common framework scale of descriptors of language proficiency based on a theory of measurement. System 23: 445-465. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2000) The development of a common framework scale of language proficiency. New York: Peter Lang. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Psathas, G
(1994) Conversation analysis: The study of talk-in-interaction. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Roever, C
(2005) Testing ESL pragmatics. Frankfurt: Gunter Narr. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rose, K.R
(2000) An exploratory cross-sectional study of interlanguage pragmatic development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22: 27-67. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sasaki, M
(1998) Investigating EFL students' production of speech acts: A comparison of production questionnaires and role plays. Journal of Pragmatics 30: 457-484. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Takahashi, S
(1996) Pragmatic transferability. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18: 189-223. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, J
(1995) Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. London: Longman.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Trosborg, A
(1995) Interlanguage pragmatics: Requests, complaints, and apologies. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Wesche, M.B
(1987) Second language performance testing: The Ontario test of ESL as an example. Language Testing 4: 28-47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yamashita, S
(1996) Six measures of JSL pragmatics (Technical Report No. 14). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i at Manoa, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.Google Scholar