Pragmatic competence of teachers: a contrastive case study of native and non-native teachers of English

• Authors: Szczepaniak-Kozak Anna , Wąsikiewicz-Firlej Emilia

Title variants

PL

Kompetencja pragmatyczna nauczycieli: studium porównawcze rodzimych i nierodzimych nauczycieli języka angielskiego

• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The existing studies on pragmatic competence of English teachers, e.g., J. Majer and Ł. Salski (2004), E. Krawczyk-Neifar (2004), M. Savič (2016), A. Szczepaniak-Kozak and E. Wąsikiewicz-Firlej (in press), indicate that it is not varied and requires improvement in certain areas. These deficiencies might be interpreted as a result of not only the absence of pragmatic competence (PC) modules in teachertraining education but also a relatively low frequency of English teachers’ contact with native speakers (NS) of English (A. Szczepaniak-Kozak 2010). Nevertheless, we know very little what shape teacher PC takes, including the way it differs from that represented by NSs. Additionally, to the best of our knowledge, there are no studies based on data collected in naturalistic settings (lessons of English). Consequently, this paper attempts to fill in this gap in research by presenting the methodology and conduct of a case study, based on classroom observation of teachers’ pragmatic performance, to investigate whether there are differences in the PC represented by non-native teachers (NNTs) and native teachers (NTs) of English. The findings indicate that NTs do not hold the upper hand in this regard and that a demonstrable linguistic and pragmatic competence, along with appropriate professional training, are better indicators of diverse pragmatic input. On this basis, we propose that some degree of proficiency in pragmatics and its teaching should be a requirement for a certificate or diploma for future foreign language teachers.

Keywords

EN

pragmatic competence; teacher pragmatic; competence; requests; classroom discourse; teaching of target language pragmatics

PL

Kompetencja pragmatyczna; kompetencja pragmatyczna nauczycieli; prośby; dyskurs klasowy; nauczanie pragmatyki języka docelowego

• Publisher: Instytut Komunikacji Specjalistycznej i Interkulturowej
• Journal: Applied Linguistics Papers
• Year: 2018
• Issue: 25/1
• Pages: 127-142

Dates

published

2018

Contributors

author

Szczepaniak-Kozak Anna

• Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu

author

Wąsikiewicz-Firlej Emilia

• Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu

References

• Akikawa, K. (2010), Teaching pragmatics as a native speaker and as a non-native speaker. In: B. Brady (ed.), WATESOL NNEST Caucus Annual Review Vol. 1,43–69. (URL https:// www.academia.edu/816235/Students_ appraisal_of_their_native_ and_ non-native_English-speaking_teachers). [Accessed 1.10.2017].
• Bachman, L. (1990), Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford.
• Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2001), Evaluating empirical evidence: Grounds for instruction in pragmatics? In: K.R. Rose/ G. Kasper (eds), Pragmatics in language teaching.Cambridge, 13–32.
• Bardovi-Harlig, K./ B. Hartford (1993), Learning the rules of academic talk: A longitudinal study of pragmatic development. In: “Studies in Second Language Acquisition” 15(3), 279–304.
• Blum-Kulka, S./ J. House/ G. Kasper (eds) (1989), Cross-cultural pragmatics:Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ.
• Cenoz, J. (2008), The acquisition of pragmatic competence and multilingualism inforeign language contexts. In: E. Alcón Soler/ M. Safont-Jordà (eds), Intercultural language use and language learning. Berlin, 123–140.
• Cohen, A. (2016), The teaching of pragmatics by native and nonnative language teachers: What they know and what they report doing. In: “Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching” 6(4), 561–585.
• Droździał-Szelest, K. (2011), Oral skills awareness of advanced EFL learners. In: M. Pawlak/ E. Waniek-Klimczak/ J. Majer (eds), Speaking and instructed foreign language acquisition. Bristol, 131–148.
• Ellis, R. (1992), Learning to communicate in the classroom: A study of two language learners. In: “Studies in Second Language Acquisition” 14(1), 1–23.
• Ellis, R. (2005), Instructed second language acquisition: A literature review.Auckland.
• Eslami-Rasekh, Z. (2005), Enhancing the pragmatic competence of NNEST candidates. In: “NNEST Newsletter” 7(1), 4–7.
• Eslami, Z./ A. Eslami-Rasekh (2008), Enhancing the pragmatic competence of nonnative English-speaking teacher candidates (NNESTCs). In: E. Alcón Soler/A. Martínez-Flor (eds.), Investigating pragmatics in foreign language learning, teaching, and testing. Bristol, 178–197.
• Félix-Brasdefer, J. (2008a), Pedagogical intervention and the development of pragmatic competence in learning Spanish as a foreign language. In: “Issues in Applied Linguistics” 16(1), 47–82.
• Félix-Brasdefer, J. (2008b), Teaching Spanish pragmatics in the classroom: Explicit instruction of mitigation. In: “Hispania” 91(2), 477–492.
• Gomez-Laich, M. (2016), Second language learners’ divergence from target language pragmatic norms. In: “Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching” 6(2), 249–269.
• Ishihara, N. (2011), Co-Constructing pragmatic awareness: Instructional pragmatics in EFL teacher development in Japan. In: “TESL-EJ” 15(2). (URL http://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume15/ej58/ej58a2/). [Accessed 1.10.2017].
• Kachru, B. (1985), Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In: R. Quirk/ H. Widdowson (eds), English in the world: Teaching and learning the language and literatures. Cambridge, 11–30.
• Kasper, G. (2001a), Four perspectives on L2 pragmatic development. In: “Lingwistyka Stosowana/ Applied Linguistics/ Angewandte Linguistik” 22(4), 502–530.
• Kasper, G. (2001b), Classroom research on interlanguage pragmatics. In: K. Rose/ G. Kasper (eds), Pragmatics in language teaching. Cambridge, 33–60.
• Kasper, G./ K. Rose (2002), Pragmatic development in a second language. Oxford.
• Klimczak, A. (2011), British politeness in a Polish ESL/EFL classroom? In: M. Pawlak (ed.), Extending the boundaries of research on Second Language Learning and Teaching. New York, 93–102.
• Krawczyk-Neifar, E. (2004), The role of proficiency factor in the development of pragmatic awareness among Polish learners of English. In: J. Arabski (ed.), Pragmatics and language learning. Kraków, 37–49.
• Majer, J./ Ł. Salski (2004), The pragmatics of classroom discourse: Requests and commands. In: J. Arabski (ed.), Pragmatics and language learning. Kraków, 51–67.
• Martínez-Flor, A. (2007). Analysing request modification devices in films: Implications for pragmatic learning in instructed foreign language context. In: E. Alcón Soler/ M. Safont-Jordà (eds), Intercultural language use and language learning. Dordrecht, 245–280.
• Martínez-Flor, A./ E. Usó-Juan (2010), The teaching of speech acts in second and foreign language instructional contexts. In: A. Trosborg (ed.), Pragmatics across languages and cultures Vol. 7. Berlin, 423–442.
• Niezgoda, K./ C. Rövern (2001), Pragmatic and grammatical awareness: A function of learning environment? In: K.R. Rose/ G. Kasper (eds), Pragmatics in language teaching. Cambridge, 63–79.
• Pawlak, M. (2006), The place of form-focused instruction in the foreign language classroom. Kalisz/ Poznań.
• Savič, M. (2016), Do EFL Teachers in Serbia have what they need to teach L2 pragmatics? Novice teachers’ views of politeness. In: K. Bardovi-Harlig/ C.J. Félix-Brasdefer (eds), Pragmatics & Language Learning Vol. 14. Honolulu, 207–231.
• Schauer, G. (2009), Interlanguage pragmatics development: The study abroad context. London.
• Seedhouse, P. (2001), The case of the missing “no”; The relationship between pedagogy and interaction. In: “Language Learning” 51, Supplement 1, 347–385.
• Shively, R. (2010), From the virtual world to the real world: A model of pragmatics instruction for study abroad. In: “Foreign Language Annals” 43(1), 105–137.
• Szczepaniak-Kozak, A. (2010), Interkulturowa kompetencja komunikacyjna z perspektywy nauczyciela języka angielskiego. In: M. Mackiewicz (ed.), Kompetencja interkulturowa w teorii i praktyce edukacyjnej. Poznań, 125–136.
• Szczepaniak-Kozak, A. (2016), Developmental trends in requests rendered by EFL speakers in Poland. In: “Konińskie Studia Językowe” 4(4), 491–512. (URL http://ksj.pwsz.konin.edu.pl). [Accessed 1.10.2017]
• Szczepaniak-Kozak, A. (in press), Interlanguage pragmatic competence: A longitudinal study of ‘pragmatic accent’ in learning EFL. Poznań.
• Szczepaniak-Kozak, A./ E. Wąsikiewicz-Firlej (in press), Rola różnic indywidualnych w nabywaniu kompetencji pragmatycznej przez nauczycieli języka angielskiego. In: “Neofilolog”.
• Taguchi, N. (2011), Pragmatic development as a dynamic, complex process: General patterns and case histories. In: “Modern Language Journal” 95(4), 605–627.
• Taguchi, N. (2015), Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies were, are, and should be going. In: “Language Teaching” 48(1), 1–50.
• Vásquez, C./ A. Fioramonte (2011), Integrating pragmatics into the MA-TESL program: Perspectives from former students. In: TESL-EJ 15(2), 1–22.
• Wyner, L./ A. Cohen (2015), Second language pragmatic ability: Individual differences according to environment. In: Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 5(4), 519–556.
• Yates, L./ G. Wigglesworth (2005), Researching the effectiveness of professional development in pragmatics. In: N. Bartels (ed.), Applied linguistics and language teacher education. New York, 261–280.

Identifiers

ISSN

2544-9354