Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:42:26.040Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EFFECTS OF PROFICIENCY SUBSKILLS ON PRAGMATIC DEVELOPMENT IN L2 CHINESE STUDY ABROAD

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2018

Feng Xiao ,
Naoko Taguchi  and
Shuai Li
Feng Xiao*
Affiliation:
Pomona College
Naoko Taguchi
Affiliation:
Carnegie Mellon University
Shuai Li
Affiliation:
Georgia State University
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Feng Xiao, Pomona College, Mason 203, 550 Harvard Ave N, Claremont, CA 91711, USA. E-mail: feng.xiao@pomona.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study is the first to examine contributions of proficiency subskills to pragmatic development. We used the latent growth curve modeling to reveal the causal relationships between proficiency subskills and pragmatic competence in 109 American learners of Chinese across two data points over three months abroad in China. Proficiency was measured by a standardized Chinese proficiency test with separate scores for listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Pragmatic competence was measured by a computerized oral discourse completion task assessing speech acts. Findings showed that pragmatic competence accrued along with increased proficiency. Changes of proficiency explained 54.1% of the variance in changes of pragmatic competence. Listening and speaking contributed more to pragmatic development than reading and writing did, indicating that when pragmatic competence is measured by an online spoken task, speaking and listening have stronger impacts.

Type
Research Report
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 41 , Issue 2 , May 2019 , pp. 469 - 483
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allami, H., & Naeimi, A. (2011). A cross-linguistic study of refusals: An analysis of pragmatic competence development in Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 385–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language testing in practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2013). Developing L2 pragmatics. Language Learning, 63, 68–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Bastos, M.-T. (2011) Proficiency, length of stay, and intensity of interaction, and the acquisition of conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics. Intercultural Pragmatics, 8, 347–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Stringer, D. (2017). Unconventional expressions: Productive syntax in the L2 acquisition of formulaic language. Second Language Research, 33, 61–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beaujean, A. (2014). Latent variable modeling using R: A step by step guide. New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronbach, L. (1989). Construct validation after thirty years. In Linn, R. (Ed.), Intelligence: Measurement, theory, and public policy (pp. 147–171). Urbana: University of Illinois.Google Scholar
Dalmau, M., & Gotor, H. (2007). From “sorry very much” to “I’m ever so sorry”: Acquisitional patterns in L2 apologies by Catalan learners of English. Intercultural Pragmatics, 4, 287–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Félix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2007). Pragmatic development in the Spanish as a FL classroom: A cross-sectional study of learner requests. Intercultural Pragmatics, 4, 253–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garcia, P. (2004). Developmental differences in speech act recognition: A pragmatic awareness study. Language Awareness, 13, 96–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. (2015). Language proficiency in native and non-native speakers: Theory and research. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kasper, G., & Rose, K. (2002). Pragmatic development in a second language. Language Learning, 53, 1–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S. (2017). Speech acts. In Huang, Y. (Ed.), Oxford handbook of pragmatics (pp. 199–216). Oxford, UK: Oxford UniversityGoogle Scholar
Li, S. (2012). The effects of input-based practice on pragmatic development of requests in L2 Chinese. Language Learning, 62, 403–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, S. (2014). The effects of different levels of linguistic proficiency on the development of L2 Chinese request production during study abroad. System, 45, 103–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsumura, S. (2003). Modeling the relationship among interlanguage pragmatic development, L2 proficiency, and exposure to L2. Applied Linguistics, 24, 465–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niezgoda, K., & Roever, C. (2001). Pragmatic and grammatical awareness: A function of learning environment? In Rose, K. & Kasper, G. (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 63–79). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roever, C., Wang, S., & Brophy, S. (2014). Learner background factors and learning of second language pragmatics. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 52, 377–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2007). Task difficulty in oral speech act production. Applied Linguistics, 28, 113–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2011). Do proficiency and study-abroad experience affect speech act production? Analysis of appropriateness, accuracy, and fluency. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 49, 265–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2013a). Individual differences and development of speech act production. Applied Research on English Language, 2, 1–16.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2013b). Refusals in L2 English: Proficiency effects on appropriateness and fluency. In Salazar, P. & Marti, O. A. (Eds.), Refusals in instructional contexts and beyond (pp. 101–119). Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N., & Roever, C. (2017). Second language pragmatics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N., Li, S., & Xiao, F. (2013). Production of formulaic expressions in L2 Chinese: A developmental investigation in a study abroad context. Chinese as a Second Language Research, 2, 23–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taguchi, N., Xiao, F., & Li, S. (2016). Effects of intercultural competence and social contact on speech act production in a Chinese study abroad context. The Modern Language Journal, 100, 775–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voelkle, M. (2007). Latent growth curve modeling as an integrative approach to the analysis of change. Psychology Science, 49, 375–414.Google Scholar
Xu, W., Case, R., & Wang, Y. (2009). Pragmatic and grammatical competence, length of residence, and overall L2 proficiency. System, 37, 205–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar