Pragmatic Competence of Iranian EFL Learners in the Light of Refusal Speech Act
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1301.07Keywords:
cross-cultural miscommunication, EFL learners, pragmatic instruction, refusal speech actAbstract
In order to communicate accurately and fluently, learners need to know how to produce different speech acts inside and outside the classroom context. Refusal speech act is complicated, and performing refusals successfully needs a higher level of pragmatic competence (Eslami, 2010). This study is done in order to analyze refusal speech act and its responses among Iranian EFL learners. The participants of this study are 120 advanced Iranian EFL learners. These learners are provided with scenarios so that they are exposed to situations where they should both refuse and respond to refusals. The first phase of this paper includes the analysis of refusal strategies. The second phase of the paper deals with refusal responses. It was revealed that female participants are more inclined to use indirect strategies as related to refusals and male participants are more inclined to use direct strategies. For refusal responses, male learners used reinforcing micro functions while female learners used accepting micro functions more frequently. The results of this study contribute to pragmatic instruction in a way to help learners interpret and realize this speech act successfully. I will also investigate possible cross-cultural miscommunication, which its occurrence is also acknowledged in previous research studies (Shishavan & Sharifian, 2016).
References
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching.(5thed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Cutting, J. (2002). Pragmatics and discourse: A resource book for students. London and New York. Routledge.
Eslami, Z. R. (2010). How to develop appropriate refusal strategies. In A. Martínez-Flor & E. Usó-Juan (Eds.), Speech act performance: Theoretical, empirical and methodological issues (pp. 217-236). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Golato, A. (2003). Studying compliment responses: A comparison of DCTs and recordings of naturally. Applied Linguistics, 24, 90–121.
Ishihara, N., & Cohen, A. D. (Eds.) (2010). Teaching and learning pragmatics: Where language and culture meet.UK: Pearson Education Limited.
Jalilimehr, M., Pazhakh, A., & Gorjian, B. (2012). The impact of task variation on request and refusal speech act production in Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Comparative Literature and Culture, 1(1), 1-6.
Kasper, G. (1984). Pragmatic comprehension in learner native speaker discourse.Language Learning, 34(4), 1-20.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2002). Dictionary of language teaching & applied linguistics (3rd ed.). Pearson Education: Longman.
Shishavan, H. B., & Sharifian, F. (2016). The refusal speech act in a cross-cultural perspective: A study of Iranian English-language learners and Anglo-Australian speakers. Language & Communication, 47, 75-88.
Stadler, S. A. (2011). Coding speech acts for their degree of explicitness. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 36-50.
Verschueren, J. (1999). Understanding pragmatics. London: Arnold.
Yule, G. (2006). The study of language (3rded.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
