qt15gdinhdinhdinh
New Member
| Luận văn tiếng Anh: | Negative pragmatic transfer in complaining by Vietnamese efl learners = Nghiên cứu về chuyển di ngữ dụng tiêu cực trong hành động ngôn từ phàn nàn của người Việt Nam học tiếng Anh. M.A Thesis Linguistics: 60 22 15 |
| Nhà xuất bản: | University of Languages and International Studies |
| Ngày: | 2013 |
| Chủ đề: | Tiếng Anh Ngữ dụng Ngôn từ phàn nàn Kỹ năng nói |
| Miêu tả: | 80 p. + CD-ROM + tóm tắt M.A. Thesis. English Linguistics -- University of Languages and International Studies: 60 22 15. Vietnam National University, Hanoi, 2013 Although L2 pragmatic competence is essential in intercultural communication, many studies show that most of language learners, even those with advanced grammatical competence, lack necessary knowledge of performing speech acts in the target language. Lack of L2 pragmatic knowledge has led to pragmatic failure or error, which is considered to have more serious consequences than grammatical errors because native speakers tend to see pragmatic errors as offensive and rude rather than simply as demonstrating lack of knowledge. This can lead to misjudgment or miscommunication between them and native speakers. Moreover, the findings of many studies indicate that pragmatic failure or errors are to a large extent caused by the interference of the learners’ pragmatic knowledge in their native language with their performance in the target language, or in other words, the negative pragmatic transfer. Many learners, in performing speech acts in the target language, translate social norms of their native culture or linguistic expressions of their native language into their L2 performance, which are, in most cases, not seen appropriate by native speakers. This study investigates the negative pragmatic transfer in the performance of the face-threatening act of complaining by Vietnamese EFL learners at both pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic level. Pragmalinguistically, the study is aimed at detecting the occurrences of negative transfer in learners’ choices of complaint strategies, external modifications and internal modifications. Sociopragmatically, it seeks to examine the impact of learners’ L1-based perceptions of two contextual factors, including social power (P) and social distance (D), on learners’ realization of the speech act of complaining in the target language. The data were collected via Discourse Completion Test (DCT) questionnaires. The DCT questionnaire was comprised of 6 situations that were picked up based on the results of Metapragmatic Questionnaire (MPQ) on 22 native speakers of English. DCT questionnaires were then administered to 20 native speakers of Vietnamese, 20 native speakers of English, and 20 Vietnamese learners of English, whose English proficiency was assessed as intermediate. The findings of the study have revealed the evidences of negative pragmatic transfer in learners’ interlanguage complaints. At the pragmalinguistic level, negative transfer was most strikingly evident when learners complained to people of lower and equal status. While native speakers of English managed to keep their complaints at a certain level of indirectness across power contexts, learners, just like native speakers of Vietnamese, tended to be very direct and explicit in complaining in higher and equal power contexts. They quite frequently opted for the most direct strategies on the scale and perhaps the most avoided strategies by native speakers of English – Strategy 7 (Explicit Blame on Behavior) and Strategy 8 (Explicit Blame on Person). Another occurrence of negative pragmalinguistic transfer was seen in learners’ modest use of external modifiers in their complaints. It seemed that both native speakers of Vietnamese and learners did not support their complaints as well as native speakers of English. This might have made their complaints sound straight, explicit and even confronting according to the English speakers’ perceptions. At the sociopragmatic level, Vietnamese learners of English appeared to negatively translate their L1 emphasis of power differences into their IL performance. They may have been influenced by their L1-based belief that being polite means highlighting the status differences where they actually exist, whereas native speakers of English may think differently; being polite means denying the power differences even when they actually exist. In highlighting the power differences like that, learners might be judged as insincere, bossy or even rude by the other interlocutors in intercultural communication. The main findings of the study, therefore, provided language teachers, educators and learners with precious information about the possible interferences of L1 with IL performance. This will surely raise their awareness of developing learners’ L2 pragmatic knowledge and pragmatic competence in the English language teaching and learning. Electronic Resources |
| Kiểu: | text |
| Định dạng: | text/pdf |
You must be registered for see links