DEVELOPING THE PRAGMATIC COMPETENCE OF FOREIGN LEARNERS: GUIDELINES TO USING CONSTATIVES IN MODERN ENGLISH DISCOURSE

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.156658

Keywords:

pragmatic competence, foreign language education, constative, modality, verification, teaching strategies/methods

Abstract

The article is devoted to the problems of foreign language education in linguistic universities, namely to acquiring the pragmatic competence by students. The research questions whether EFL learners are pragmatically competent in using language in a certain communicative situation. The experimental teaching session proves that the special research methods (descriptive, pragmatic, performative analyses) and divergent forms of learning the modal perspective of constatives in discourse can provide students with the appropriate knowledge base. The main conclusions drawn from this research are that EFL learners can have only elementary pragmatic competence without a special training session. Therefore the current study suggests the procedure of training the communicative skills in the appropriate use of constatives in the process of social interaction with the aim of developing the pragmatic competence of students and helping them acquire their proficiency in achieving certain goals in communication. 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Viktoriia Berezenko, Kjiv national linguistic university

Chair of Germanic and finno-ugrian philology

Associate professor

References

  1. Aldhahi, M., Fernández-Parra, M., & Davies, L. (2018). Exploring the Typology of Challenges and Strategies in Translating Culture-Bound Items for Professional Purposes. International Journal of English Linguistics, 8 (3), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v8n3p1
  2. Altınsoy, E. & Okan, Z. (2017). The impact of contextual factors on English language teachers’ beliefs. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 13 (2), 53-70. Retrieved February 10, 2019 from https://www.jlls.org/index.php/jlls/article/view/601/296.
  3. Berezenko, V. M. (2018). Verbal and nonverbal cues to deception in Modern English discourse. Naukovyi visnyk kafedry UNESCO KNLU, 36, 64-71. Retrieved February 10, 2019 from http://ukrfilolog.knlu.ua.
  4. Boyd, M. P., Chiu M. M., Kong Y. (2019). Signaling a language of possibility space: Management of a dialogic discourse modality through speculation and reasoning word usage. Linguistics and Education, 50, 25-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2019.03.002
  5. Brown, D. (2000). Angels and Demons. US : Pocket Books.
  6. Cuneyt, D. (2018). Hedging and academic writing: an analysis of lexical hedges. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 14 (4), 74-92. Retrieved February 11, 2019 from https://www.jlls.org/index.php/jlls/article/view/812/422
  7. Dobrowolska, D. & Balslev, K. (2017). Discursive mentoring strategies and interactional dynamics in teacher education. Linguistics and Education, 42, 10-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2017.09.001
  8. Galsworthy, J. (1975). The Forsyte Saga. To Let, Book Three. Moscow : Progress Publishers.
  9. Hailey, A. (2006). Hotel. Moscow: Airis-press.
  10. Hengevald, K. & Mackenzie, L. (2008). Functional Discourse Grammar. A typologically based theory of language structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199278107.001.0001
  11. Hyland, K. (1998). Boosting, hedging, and the negotiation of academic knowledge. Text, 18(3), 349-382. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1998.18.3.349
  12. Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. London: Longman.
  13. Hyland, K. (2001). Definitely a possible explanation: Epistemic modality in academic argument. In M. Gotti, & M. Dossena (Eds), Modality in Specialized Texts (pp. 291-310). Bergamo: P. Lang.
  14. Kasper, G. (1996). Interlanguage Pragmatics in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 145-148.
    |
  15. Lakoff, G. (1973). Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2 (4), 458-508.
  16. Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640747908400760.
  17. March, W. (1978). Bill’s eyes. In S. V. Shvetsova, & M. A. Romanova (Eds.), Eleven American Stories (pp. 113-121). Moscow: Mezhdunarodniye otnosheniya.
  18. Matruglio, E. (2018). Neutral subjectivity: Facts and evidence in school Modern History writing. Linguistics and Education, 48, 76-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2018.02.002
  19. Potcheptsov, G. G. (1975). Pragmaticheskiy aspect izucheniya: k postroyeniyu teoriyi pragmaticheskogo syntaksysa [The pragmatic aspect of learning: constructing the theory of pragmatic syntax. Inostranniye yazyky v shkole, 6, 15-26.
  20. Rollins, J.K. (2000). Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. London: Bloomsbury.
  21. Salimova, F. (2015). The Various Inclinations to the Questions of Modality and Discourse. International Journal of English Linguistics, 5 (2), 165-171. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v5n2p165
  22. Steiber, E. (1992). 8-th Grade Changes Everything. Troll Associates, USA.
  23. Stevenson, R. (2008). Treasure Island. London: Puffin Classic.
  24. Suckow, R. (1978). A start in life. In S. V. Shvetsova, & M. A. Romanova (Eds.), Eleven American Stories (pp. 96-113). Moscow: Mezhdunarodniye otnosheniya.
  25. Tatarinova, M. N., Shvetsova M. G. (2019). The Model of the Emotionally-Valuable Component of the Content of Primary School Foreign-Language Education: Designing and Testing. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 8(1), 167-186. https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2019.1.167
    |
  26. Thurber, J. (1978). Doc Marlowe. In S. V. Shvetsova, & M. A. Romanova (Eds.), Eleven American Stories (pp. 74-81). Moscow: Mezhdunarodniye otnosheniya.
  27. Tulgar, A. T. (2016). The role of Pragmatic Competence in Foreign Language Education. Turkish Online Journal of English lanhuage Teaching, 1, 10-19. https://doi: 10.32959/tojelt.229304
  28. Tushnet, L. (1978). The Klausners. In S. V. Shvetsova, & M. A. Romanova (Eds.), Eleven American Stories (pp. 16-31). Moscow: Mezhdunarodniye otnosheniya.
  29. Webster, J. (2006). Daddy-Long-Legs. Кyiv: Znannia.
  30. Wilde, О. (2006). The Picture of Dorian Gray. Кiev: Znaniya.
  31. Yang, Y. (2013). Exploring linguistic and cultural variations in the use of hedges in English and Chinese scientific discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 50, 23-36. https://doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2013.01.008

Downloads

Published

2019-11-18

How to Cite

Berezenko, V. (2019). DEVELOPING THE PRAGMATIC COMPETENCE OF FOREIGN LEARNERS: GUIDELINES TO USING CONSTATIVES IN MODERN ENGLISH DISCOURSE. Advanced Education, 6(13), 81–88. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.156658

Issue

2019: Issue 13

Section

ARTICLES

License

Copyright (c) 2019 Viktoriia Berezenko

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

    1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).