L2 (IM)POLITENESS IN THE SYNCHRONOUS CHAT OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEARNERS

• Authors: Craig D. Howard , Jaewoo Do
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Participation in interactive games, especially those in immersive environments, is often employed in learning contexts to stochastically develop L2 learners’ language ability. However, typical measures of language ability often do not reflect pragmatic competencies. This study juxtaposes two elementary school ESL learners’ language ability, and facility with the media, with their politeness measures. Data was collected from out-of-school gameplay chat in a virtual environment designed for elementary school learners. Results suggest learners can express pragmatic miscues to interlocutors in the lean media of synchronous chat.

Keywords

EN

chat; CMC; politeness

• Publisher: IATEFL Poland Computer Special Interest Group & University of Nicosia
• Journal: Teaching English with Technology
• Year: 2017
• Volume: 17
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 17-45

Contributors

author

Craig D. Howard

• The University of Tennessee Knoxville

author

Jaewoo Do

• The University of Tennessee Knoxville

References

• Abrams, Z. I. (2003). The effect of synchronous and asynchronous CMC on oral performance in German. The Modern Language Journal, 87, 157–167.
• Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Barab, S., Thomas, M., Dodge, T., Carteaux, R., & Tuzun, H. (2005). Making learning fun: Quest Atlantis, a game without guns. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53, 86–107.
• Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1996). Pragmatics and language teaching: Bringing pragmatics and pedagogy together. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED400702
• Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2015). Operationalizing conversation in studies of instructional effect in L2 pragmatics. System, 48, 21-34.
• Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Do language learners recognize pragmatic violations? Pragmatic versus grammatical awareness in instructed L2 learning. TESOL Quarterly, 32, 233–259.
• Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Vellenga, H. E. (2012). The effect of instruction on conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics. System, 40, 77–89.
• Beebe, L. M., Takahashi, T., & Uliss-Weltz, R. (1990). Pragmatic transfer in ESL refusals. Developing Communicative Competence in a Second Language, 55-73.
• Belz, J., (2007). The role of computer mediation in the instruction and development of L2 pragmatic competence. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 27, 45–75.
• Belz, J., & Vyatkina, N. (2005). Learner corpus analysis and the development of L2 pragmatic competence in networked inter-cultural language study: The case of German modal particles. Canadian Modern Language Review, 62, 17-48.
• Biesenbach-Lucas, S. (2004). Speech acts in e-mail: A new look at pragmatic competence. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the American Association of Applied Linguistics, Portland, OR.
• Biesenbach-Lucas, S. (2006). Making requests in email: Do cyber-consultations entail directness? Toward conventions in a new medium. Pragmatics and Language Learning, 11, 81–108.
• Biesenbach-Lucas, S. (2007). Students writing emails to faculty: An examination of e-politeness among native and non-native speakers of English. Language Learning & Technology, 11, 59–81.
• Biesenbach-Lucas, S., & Weasenforth, D. (2002). Virtual office hours: Negotiation strategies in electronic conferencing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15, 147–165.
• Blake, R. (2000). Computer mediated communication: A window on L2 Spanish interlanguage. Language Learning & Technology, 4, 120–136.
• Bloch, J. (2002). Student/teacher interaction via email: The social context of Internet discourse. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11, 117-134.
• Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1999). Politeness: Some universals in language use. Retrieved from http://repository.ubn.ru.nl/handle/2066/105623
• Chalak, A., Eslami-Rasekh, Z., & Eslami-Rasekh, A. (2010). Communication strategies and topics in e-mail interactions between Iranian EFL students and their instructors. International Journal of Language Studies, 4, 129–147.
• Chen, C. F. E. (2001). Making e-mail requests to professors: Taiwanese vs. American students. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED461299
• Chun, D. M. (1998). Using computer-assisted class discussion to facilitate the acquisition of interactive competence. In J. Swaffar, S. Romano, P. Markley, & K. Arens (Eds.), Language learning online: Theory and practice in the ESL and L2 computer classroom (pp. 57–80). Austin, Texas: The Daedalus Group.
• Cunningham, D. J., & Vyatkina, N. (2012). Telecollaboration for professional purposes: Towards developing a formal register in the foreign language classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 68, 422-450.
• Economidou-Kogetsidis, M. (2011). “Please answer me as soon as possible”: Pragmatic failure in non-native speakers’ e-mail requests to faculty. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 3193–3215.
• Economidou-Kogetsidis, M. (2015). Teaching email politeness in the EFL/ESL classroom. ELT Journal, 69, 415-424.
• Eslami, Z., & Eslami-Rasekh, A. (2008). Enhancing the pragmatic competence of non-native English-speaking teacher candidates (NNESTCs) in an EFL context. In E. Alcon Soler, & A. Martínez-Flor (Eds.), Investigating Pragmatics in Foreign Language Learning, Teaching and Testing (pp. 178-197). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
• Eslami, Z., & Liu, C. N. (2013). Learning pragmatics through computer-mediated communication in Taiwan. International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 1, 52–73.
• Eslami, Z. R., Mirzaei, A., & Dini, S. (2015). The role of asynchronous computer mediated communication in the instruction and development of EFL learners’ pragmatic competence. System, 48, 99–111.
• Hartford, B. S., & Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1996). “At Your Earliest Convenience:” A Study of Written Student Requests to Faculty. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED400704
• Hendriks, B. (2010). An experimental study of native speaker perceptions of non-native request modification in e-mails in English. Intercultural Pragmatics, 7, 221–255.
• Herring, S. C. (1994). Politeness in computer culture: Why women thank and men flame. In Cultural performances: Proceedings of the third Berkeley women and language conference (pp. 278–294). Berkeley Women and Language Group.
• Herring, S. C. (2004). Computer-Mediated Discourse Analysis: An Approach to Researching Online Behavior. In S. A. Barab, R. Kling, & J. H. Gray (Eds.), Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning (pp. 338-376). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Herring, S. C., Das, A., & Penumarthy, S. (2005, October). Adult-child discourse in a multi-user virtual environment: Scaffolding complexity. Paper presented at Internet Research 6.0, Chicago, IL.
• Hirotani, M. (2009). Synchronous versus asynchronous CMC and transfer to Japanese oral performance. CALICO Journal, 26, 413–438.
• House, J. (2003). Teaching and learning pragmatic fluency in a foreign language: The case of English as a lingua franca. Pragmatic Competence and Foreign Language Teaching, 13, 133–160.
• Howard, C.D. (2012). An instructional paradigm for the teaching of CMC. Instructional Science, 40(3), 493-513.
• Ifantidou, E. (2013). Pragmatic competence and explicit instruction. Journal of Pragmatics, 59, 93–116.
• .
• 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/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
• Kakegawa, T. (2009). Development of the use of Japanese sentence final particles through email correspondence. In N. Taguchi (Eds.). Pragmatic competence (pp. 301-334). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Kasper, G. (2001a). Classroom research on interlanguage pragmatics. In K. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 33-60). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Kasper, G. (2001b). Four perspectives on L2 pragmatic development. Applied Linguistics, 22, 502–530.
• Kasper, G., & Blum-Kulka, S. (1993). Interlanguage Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R. (2001). Pragmatics in Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R. (2002). Pragmatic Development in a Second Language. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
• Kern, R. G. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 457–476.
• Kim, J. (2014). How Korean EFL learners understand sarcasm in L2 English. Journal of Pragmatics, 60, 193–206.
• Kim, T. Y. (2006). Motivation and attitudes toward foreign language learning as socio-politically mediated constructs: The case of Korean high school students. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 3, 165–192.
• Kim, T. Y. (2009). The dynamics of L2 self and L2 learning motivation: A qualitative case study of Korean ESL students. English Teaching, 64, 49–70.
• Koike, D. A., & Pearson, L. (2005). The effect of instruction and feedback in the development of pragmatic competence. System, 33, 481–501.
• Lin, W.-C., Huang, H.-T., & Liou, H.-C. (2013). The effects of text-based SCMC on SLA: A meta analysis. Language Learning & Technology, 17, 123–142.
• Malley, S. B. (2006). Whose digital literacy it is, anyway? Essential Teacher, 3, 50-52.
• Nguyen, T. T. M., Pham, T. H., & Pham, M. T. (2012). The relative effects of explicit and implicit form-focused instruction on the development of L2 pragmatic competence. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, 416-434.
• Park, J. (2001). Korean EFL Learners’ Politeness Strategies in Their Complaints. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal, 9, 185–209.
• Park, M. Y., Dillon, W. T., & Mitchell, K. L. (1998). Korean business letters: Strategies for effective complaints in cross-cultural communication. Journal of Business Communication, 35, 328–345.
• Payne, J. S., & Whitney, P. J. (2002). Developing L2 oral proficiency through synchronous CMC: Output, working memory, and interlanguage development. CALICO Journal, 20, 7–32.
• Reinders, H. (2012). Digital games in language learning and teaching. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Reinhardt, J., & Sykes, J. (2014). Special issue commentary: Digital game and play activity in L2 teaching and learning. Language Learning & Technology, 18, 2–8.
• Rose, K. R. (2005). On the effects of instruction in second language pragmatics. System, 33, 385-399
• Satar, H., & Özdener, N. (2008). The effects of synchronous CMC on speaking proficiency and anxiety: Text versus voice chat. The Modern Language Journal, 92, 595–613.
• Schauer, G. (2009). Interlanguage Pragmatic Development: The Study Abroad Context. London: Continuum..
• Suh, J. S. (1999). Pragmatic perception of politeness in requests by Korean learners of English as a second language. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 37, 195–214.
• Sykes, J. M. (2005). Synchronous CMC and pragmatic development: Effects of oral and written chat. CALICO Journal, 22, 399–431.
• Taguchi, N. (2011). Teaching pragmatics: Trends and issues. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 289–310.
• Takahashi, S. (2001). The role of input enhancement in developing pragmatic competence. In K. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 171–199). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Takahashi, T., & Beebe, L. M. (1987). The development of pragmatic competence by Japanese learners of English. JALT Journal, 8, 131–155.
• Weber, H. L. (2011). Missed cues: How disputes can socialize virtual newcomers. Language@ Internet, 8. Retrieved from http://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2011/Weber
• Zarei, G. R., & Mohammadi, M. (2012). E-politeness in Iranian English Electronic Requests to the Faculty. Research in Applied Linguistics, 3, 3–24.
• Zhu, W. (2012). Polite requestive strategies in emails: An investigation of pragmatic competence of Chinese EFL learners. RELC Journal, 43, 217–238.