k's Final Frankena Model

8/2/2019 k's Final Frankena Model

1/26

ENHANCING THE PRAGMATIC COMPETENCE OF KOREAN ESL LEARNERS IN

ATHENA ENGLISH LANGUAGE CENTER

FRANKENA MODEL

KHRISTINE HAZEL B. FERRERIA

1996-57053

EDFD 201

Submitted to:

PROF. DONNE JONE SODUSTA

I am trying to free your mind Neo. But I can only show you the door. Youre the one that has togo through it.

(Berman & Wachowski, 1999)


2/26

ULTIMATE AIMS

Being a teacher means to foster learning among students in order for them to reach their

own potentials and what they aim for as they traverse the road to a bigger and more real world.

The most important role of a teacher is to guide the students to find the right paths for

themselves, setting as a model for the learners to follow. As one of those who lead the way to

learning, I take responsibility for the awakening of the desire of my students to learn and fully

understand English. I always think that learning is a never-ending process, thus, even if I am a

provider of knowledge and a guide, I still learn as I teach just as what is being expected of an

idealist teacher (Bigge, 1982). It has been my job for a long time now that I do not only consider

teaching as a way of imparting what I know to my students, but also a process where I learn to be

an emotional being who knows how to sympathize and be a friend to them if they allow. As I

enjoy teaching English to my Korean students, I make it a point that I make them feel that

learning a second language is not at all that bad. In fact, I always encourage them to let English

be an exciting new adventure to discover. By this I mean that for them to be able to be competent

speakers of the English language, they should not solely depend on the rules that govern the

correct structure and usage of words and sentences of the language; they should also learn how to

properly communicate in conversational settings with native speakers.

In a world where everybody is competitive these days, it is of vital importance that

second language learners (SLLs) such as Koreans must be given a shot at proving to others that

they too, can compete with people from around the globe. South Korean society is composed of

people who strictly follow the teachings of Confucius. Their consciousness is a by-product of

Confucianism, closely practicing codes of proper behavior for interaction with people and

society as a whole. Actions which they think are threats to their ways are considered


3/26

inappropriate or wrong. Moreover, each and every one of them believes that if their leaders fail

to perform their duties, disaster and catastrophe in any form will surely be consequences

(Korean Confucianism, 2008). Since those times they were conquered and abused by the

Japanese and suffered greatly from poverty after the war against North Korea, South Koreans

have never thought of giving up. Their country still stands as one nation. They have fought a

hard battle to get to where they are now.

Their national identity encompasses self-reliance and mistrust for anything that is not

Korean. But with the dawn of globalization and the unbounded changing of the times, their

government finally decided to open its doors to the world to allow better opportunities for their

country and the people. With this pivotal change came the need for the learning of the English

language.

The Philippines has been a witness to how Koreans drove in multitudes to our country to

get that English education they badly need. For two decades now, many Filipinos have benefitted

from doing business with them. Korean ESL students are goal-driven and very competitive since

this is how they are shaped by their beliefs.

What baffles foreigners too is the Koreans tendency to consider material

wealth especially money as a direct indicator of education, general ability, social

status, and sometimes even intelligence (Korean Confucianism, 2008).

With these Korean characteristics in mind, imagine them in the classroom. You see them

armed with their books, notebooks, pens, dictionaries, and a gigantic expectation that will learn

English from their teachers so they can dazzle the world with their expertise. And thus, Athena

English Language Center was born. Because of that great need of Koreans to learn English,


4/26

Jonna Ann Jeong and Myeong Jun Jeong put up the school to cater to these needs. It officially

opened on May 21, 2003. During the first years of Athena, it concentrated on teaching only adult

students such as university students with different majors, professionals from various fields, and

Christian missionaries. In the years that followed, it widened its range of students to include

teenagers and kids and even mothers who were with their children here.

Athena English Language Center has a very extensive way when it comes to teaching the

four macro skills of English, especially with great emphasis on the English grammar. It deals

with the technicalities in order to ensure that it produces students who are adept and well-

rounded when they go out to the bigger world. It is the schools mission to help the students fully

grasp the English language by teaching it to them, not only for them to have a conceptual

knowledge of the language, but also for them to be able to use it in any practical situations

especially those which involve interactions with foreigners.

Furthermore, the schools logo is a circle with the picture of the Parthenon at the center

and around it the name of the school. The Parthenon was chosen since it is a Greek temple for

Pallas Athena. It embodies our purpose to give quality education from teachers who convey real

knowledge to our students. The pillars of the Parthenon represent the teachers who are the

foundations of the school because it is us teachers who keep the quality of English teaching.

It is fitting to mention early on in this paper that pragmatic competence is not just the

only skill lacking among my Korean students. It is actually just one of the several competency

problems that they have. I have chosen to address this distinct concern for the reason that I wish

my students to avoid uncomfortable encounters when they face native and non-native speakers

who know exactly which are appropriate things to say or not in any given situation.


5/26

THE CONTEXT OF HUMAN NATURE AND CORE BELIEFS

Korean ESL students still have a long way to go to reach the pinnacle of their dreams.

Why is that so? They still have a lot of problems in the different aspects of English such as

pragmatic competence to name just one. Consider the next sentences as an example. This

particular incident happened to me quite recently. It was the 9th

hour of my class and it was

pouring outside. I felt cold and I badly needed to answer the call of nature so I asked my student

if I could excuse myself to go to the toilet. As I was leaving, he good-naturedly replied, I dont

care. I stopped in my tracks about to say something in retort when I saw on his face that what he

meant was a totally different thing. So I jokingly corrected him by saying, I dont mind, you

mean. And he said yes.

This particular instance is just one among the many instances that happens in an ESL

classroom wherein Second Language Learners (SLLs) give inappropriate utterances when

engaged in a conversation. Athena English Language Center is no exception. Athena teachers

have had their own share of this kind of situation which either left them dumbfounded, amused,

frustrated, or in short, riddled with mixed emotions.

It can be explained by Immanuel Kants view on learning. He coined the term noumena

which means the thing in itself (Grier, 2009). What does he mean by it? For instance, we know

what a dog is; that it has that physical form of a dog, we see it, we hear it bark, and so forth. But

for all that it is, it is the dogness of the dog that no human can ever experience for the simple

reason that we are not dogs. Consequently, when we apply it to Second Language Learners

wishing to be native speakers of English, they can never be one because their first language is

not English. What they can be is just be near native speakers.


6/26

The very reason why Korean students and ESL students as a whole, study English is

because they want to communicate using the language. However, it is a sad fact that they do not

have enough pragmatic competence skills to enable them to communicate effectively in the

target language, which in this case is of course English. It was found that even ESL students who

have a mastery of the grammar and lexical technicalities of English lack communicative

competence (Hymes in Kasper, 1997). As a result, they find themselves in an awkward or

embarrassing situation once they see the look on the face of their listener.

According to my students, English became one of the most important subjects in South

Korea in the 1990s. Basically it is first introduced in middle school then continues on to high

school. Unfortunately, it is only taught in university in majors in which it is a prerequisite. A lot

of money is invested in teaching English, however, the root of the matter stems from the way

English is taught. It is true that they have ample knowledge of the language, grammar in

particular, but for all that, their medium of instruction is still Korean which is being taught by

teachers who had very low scores on their English proficiency tests (Miller, 2006). What is even

worse is the fact that proficiency tests have become somewhat of a magic shot for assessing a

persons language ability. They have become a yardstick for measuring their English proficiency

not only for a job placement and promotion, but also as a ticket for academic pursuits in their

country or abroad. These tests have become for many a shortcut to increasing an individuals

English adeptness.

As a consequence, they still fall short of the recommended English skills required in

many of the areas they are applying for. This is because Koreans lack practice and confidence

plus the fact that their English learning is mostly based on books. Aside from English language

institutes that sprout like mushrooms everywhere in their country, all one has to do is walk in any


7/26

bookstore and see for themselves arrays of English language materials such as books, DVDs, and

test reviewers. However, according to Miller (2006), while a lot of them may have had benefits

from these, there are just as many who still cannot put two sentences together after all the hours

they spend reading and studying some expressions or vocabulary book. They are not given

enough chances to put into practice what they learn in the four corners of the classrooms. For

many of the students, English is something that they have to endure because they do not have a

choice. English proficiency test results are more valued than being able to communicate well in

the language.

For these reasons, the Korean owner of Athena, Mr. Jeong, is the one who assigns

students to teachers. He designates students according to their English levels and matches them

to the teachers area of specialization.

In my case, I specialize in teaching grammar, useful expressions, and IELTS and TOEIC

Speaking classes. I teach one-on-one classes to adult students during the day and online classes

in the evening. In my roster of students, one is a 12-year old kid who has been studying English

online with me for a year now. Since I am one of the oldest teachers in Athena who teaches one-

on-one, I handle beginner and intermediate students first before they move on to higher level

group classes. Basically, the most common problems my students have are in grammar,

specifically in sentence constructions, vocabulary, comprehension, speaking, pronunciation, and

of course pragmatic competence. Beginner students tend to make general grammar mistakes in

their sentences such as subject-verb agreement, prepositions, clauses, verb tenses, and the like.

They also have trouble expressing themselves because of their limited vocabulary, lack of self-

confidence in giving their opinions, and the fact that they do not know whether what they say is

correct or not. Many of them also have the tendency to formulate their thoughts first in Korean


8/26

and translate it to English and from English to Korean when I say something or ask them a

question. Korean language or Hanggul has its own set of grammar rules, vocabulary, and

expressions which are, by far very different from English that when they do the translation, most

of their sentences come out wrong, inappropriate, strange, insubstantial, rude, and even

downright offensive and insulting at times. They mean one thing, but they say another thing.

Upper-beginner and intermediate students, on the other hand, still make mistakes in their

grammar. However their mistakes are not as many as when they first started learning English.

Their word bank is much more improved. The same is true with their speaking, comprehension,

pronunciation, and pragmatic competence skills. They can already understand many of the

expressions used in both written and spoken English, yet still far from being rated as close to

native speakers. In my opinion, aside from the problems common to my students, it is a reality

that their Korean intonation is too strong that foreigners still consider them the worst

communicators in English among many Asian countries.

My students have various reasons why they learn English, but mostly, they do it for long

term plans like future or better job opportunities, passing English proficiency tests, and studying

or working in English speaking countries such as Australia, the US, and Canada. They want to be

familiar with and be knowledgeable of the English language for personal and social

advancement.

My role here as a teacher is very important to guarantee that I will be an effective

facilitator in their learning. My teaching style is influenced by Morpheus in the movie Matrix

(1999). It can be perfectly explained by what Morpheus said to Neo, and I quote:


9/26

I am trying to free your mind Neo. But I can only show you the door. Youre the

one that has to go through it.

In other words, I see myself as a guide, a mentor, and an inspiration. I show them the way, but in

the long run, it is them who will have the final say. In the classroom, I allow my students to

study comfortably and as what I always tell them the first time I meet them, I give them my trust,

no matter how small it is and it is up to them to let it grow. I do this because I also want them to

put their trust in me that I can help them learn English in the best way I can. So, for instance,

when I teach them a grammar pattern, I explain it to them by giving the meaning, where and

when they can use it, and then give them example sentences. After I do these, I ask them to make

their own examples which may be from their own experiences and amusing if possible. I have

noticed that if they make sentences using these elements they can easily remember what I teach

them. I never proceed to another lesson until they understand what it is completely.

TARGET COMPETENCIES TO BE IMPROVED

This paper aims to improve the pragmatic competence of my Korean ESL students in

Athena English Language Center. It is imperative then that I first have to define the terms that

will be mentioned here to ensure the full understanding of the concept being stated. In an attempt

to comprehend pragmatic competence, it is best that I define pragmatics first. According to

David Crystal (1985) in Kasper (1997):

Pragmatics is the study of language from the point of view of the users, especially of the

choices they make, the constraints they encounter in using language in social interaction and theeffects their use oflanguage have on other participants in the act of communication.

In simple words, Kasper (1997) defined it as the study of communicative action in its

socio-cultural context. Krisnawati (2011) also quoted her explanation that communicative action


10/26

includes not only speech acts such as apologizing, requesting, and so forth, but also the

engagement of an individual in various types of discourse and the participation in conversations

of varying lengths and complexity.

Researches and studies into communicative competence have found that studying a new

language transcends memorization of vocabulary items and grammatical rules (Canale, 1983 in

Edwards and Csizer, 2001). Pragmatic competence, though most of the time invisible, has played

such a big part in describing communicative competence (Edwards and Csizer, 2001). Bachman

(1990) expounded pragmatic competence as:

the relationships between utterances and functions that speakers intend to

perform those utterances and the characteristics of the context of language use

that determine the appropriateness of utterances. (in Maryam and Rozina, 2009)

Bachman (1990) further stated that pragmatic competence is comprised of illocutionary

competence, later labelled as functional competence (Bachman & Palmer 1996 inKyzlinkova,2007 ), and sociolinguistic competence wherein the former is seen as the understanding of how

language is used with its forms and structures, and latter is concerned with how language is made

clear within a given context (Ahn, 2007). The difference between the two is evocative of Leech

and Thomas division of pragmatics into pragmalinguistics and sociopragmatics. Bachmans

illocutionary competence is similar to Leechs concept of pragmalinguistics in which it is

defined as how speakers perform a variety of language functions through utterances (Leech

1983 in Ahn, 2009). Moreover, Bachmans sociolinguistic competence bears comparison with

Thomas idea ofsociopragmatics wherein it is concerned with how speakers appropriately use

language according to context (Thomas, 1983 in Ahn, 2007).


11/26

In connection with this, Bialystok (1993) proposed three important factors of pragmatic

competence. These are as follows. First, it includes the speakers ability to make use of language

for different purposes such as to make requests, to give instructions, and to effect change.

Second, it takes in the hearers ability to understand the speakers intentions especially when the

statements are implied or indirectly conveyed. This includes statements of indirect requests,

irony, and sarcasms. The last aspect comprises the mastery of rules by which utterances are

looped together to make a discourse (Ahn, 2007).

Most human utterances are regarded as actions fulfilling certain functions, and hence, are

referred to as speech acts (Thomas in Kreutel, 2007). The theory of speech act, which was first

introduced by Oxford philosopher J.L. Austin (1962) and was further developed by American

philosopher J.R. Searle (1975), is divided into three components.

First, there is the locutionary act, or the act of 'saying' something. Second, there is the

illocutionary act, or the performance of an act in saying something as opposed to the

performance of an act of saying something. Third, there is the perlocutionary act, for

saying something will often, or even normally, produce certain consequential effects

upon the feelings, thoughts, or actions of the audience, of the speaker, or of otherpersons. In other words, a locutionary act has meaning; it produces an understandable

utterance. An illocutionary act has force; it is informed with a certain tone, attitude,feeling, motive, or intention. A perlocutionary act has consequence; it has an effect upon

the addressee (Henderson and Brown, 1997).

A review of speech act theory would not be complete without a mention of the

classification systems of speech act types. Although Austin had developed such a system, it is

Searles that is most widely used (Barron, 2003 in Schauer, 2009). Searle (1976 IN Schauer,

2009) distinguishes five speech act classes:

Representatives (speakers commit themselves _ to something being true, for example, toboast or to deduce)


12/26

Directives (attempts by speakers to get hearers to do something, for example, to requestor to beg)

Commissives (speakers commit themselves to some future course of action, for example,to promise or to threaten)

Expressives (speakers express their psychological state, for example, to thank or toapologize)

Declarations (speakers bring about correspondence between propositional content and thereality, for example, to christen or to appoint).

KSA MATRIX

KNOWLEDGE ATTITUDE SKILLS

1.Pragmatic Awareness Students should be able to

differentiate the meaning ofa speech act and evaluate

the intensity of a speakers

meaning with sixty percentaccuracy.

The students are required to

be patient and observant ofwhat is being said by the

speaker, both in the literal

sense and of what isinferred.

2.Grammatical Knowledgeof the Target Language

The students should be ableto apply and practice fifty-

five to sixty percent of thebasic and useful Englishgrammatical rules in their

everyday practical

conversations.

The students should be self-confident enough to strike

up a conversation and putinto practice the patternsthey learn in class.

3. Knowledge of the socio-

cultural norms of English

The students should be able

to carry out socio-culturallyacceptable conversations

and express an appropriate

response with fifty-five

percent to sixty percent

accuracy.

The students should first

understand and beconsiderate of the

differences their culture has

from that of the target

culture especially when it

comes to showingappropriateness of what

they say.


13/26

Now that I have defined the relevant terms used in this paper, Id like to proceed to the

KSA matrix or the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of my Korean students which will help them

achieve pragmatic competence in the English language.

I listed down three for each. The first is pragmatic awareness of what is meant by

utterances. Students should be able to differentiate the meaning of a speech act (such as the

distinction between a directive and an expressive) and evaluate the intensity of a speakers

meaning (such as the difference between a warning and a suggestion) with sixty percent

accuracy. This can be achieved if the students are patient and observant not only of the literal

meanings of what is said, but also of what is implied. They should understand that not all

sentences can be understood at face value. Second, I believe that students should have enough

grammatical knowledge of the target language. Here students should be able to apply and

practice fifty-five to sixty percent of the basic and useful English grammatical rules in their

everyday practical conversations. English, as any languages in the world, has its own set of rules

that must be clearly understood and mastered for it to be used in realistic situations. It can be

reached if the students have self-confidence, take studying seriously, memorize patterns, sounds,

and words by practicing them outside classrooms so as to be familiarized with the things they

learned. Lastly, it is important that students have an extensive understanding of the socio-cultural

norms that govern the English language and have the ability to choose which speech acts are

appropriate for the culture involved. In this area, students must be able to carry out socio-

culturally acceptable conversations and express an appropriate response with fifty-five to sixty

percent accuracy. To achieve this, students should first understand and be considerate of the

differences their culture has from that of the target culture especially when it comes to showing

appropriateness of what they say.


14/26

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Most methods employed in teaching second languages are mainly concerned with the

formal structure or technicalities of the target language. In addition, learning a second language

in classrooms is a matter of mastering grammar and pronunciation. As a consequence, little

attention is given to teaching language as a tool for communication in the real world. Based on

my experience, I can say that it is not often enough to just teach and test Second Language

Learners (SLLs) on how to use the structures of the foreign language. Students must also learn to

develop ways of relating these structures to their communicative use in their usage in real life

situations.

The following paragraphs will tackle the different studies done related to the

development of the pragmatic competence of Second Language Learners of English as stated in

the matrix of competencies that should be achieved.

A. PRAGMATIC AWARENESS1. Soler, A. E. and Pitarch, J. P. (2010) made a paper on the benefits of instruction on

learners attention and awareness during the performance of refusals. Thus, based on a

educational proposal for teaching refusals at the discourse level, they focused on the benefits that

this pedagogical proposal could have on the information attended to during the planning and

execution of refusals. Secondly, they also explored whether the instruction made a difference in

learners awareness of refusals. The results showed that instruction did make a difference in

drawing learners attention towards target pragmatic issues in relation to the speech act of

refusals. In line with previous research, the present study also confirmed awareness-raising as an

approach to the teaching of pragmatics. They claimed that learners awareness of


15/26

pragmalinguistics and sociopragmatics increased after the instructional treatment. Findings from

this study showed the benefits of pragmatic instruction on learners attention and awareness of

the pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic issues involved in the production of the speech act of

refusals. Providing learners with opportunities for audiovisual pragmatic input, awareness and

comprehension of different pragmatic meanings, together with opportunities to work with

pragmatic consciousness-raising tasks, made a difference in the learners awareness of refusals.

Awareness of how language should be used in the outside world is necessary to avoid

misunderstandings or any other negative results that can happen if the student does not have any

idea of these things. Teachers should design strategies such as the ones used here when teaching

English to speakers of other languages. In spite of the benefits of instruction on learners

pragmatic awareness, care should be taken not to generalize results from this study. According to

the researchers, it is not possible to take the participants reports as signs of their implicit

pragmatic competence in interaction, since verbal reporting is a very different activity from

engaging in a refusal sequence as a social practice (Soler, A. E. and Pitarch, J. P., 2010).

2. Edwards and Csizer (2001) presented in their article the activities of a four-week program

aimed at developing students pragmatic competence by designing a pragmatic program

involving four activities to provide students with explicit teaching on two speech acts, openings

and closings of conversations such as Hello! - Hi! and Bye! Goodbye! Each activity lasted

about 30 to 45 minutes and comprised follow-up discussions during which students and teachers

discussed the new structures and phrases as well as any problems that arose while completing the

activities. To get information on the usefulness of these activities in EFL classrooms, they


16/26

carried out the experiment involving 92 high school students in Hungary. There purpose was to

investigate whether the program had any effect on how students performed the mentioned speech

acts. It was facilitated by the students regular English teachers, who were provided with

information on the purpose of the study and a detailed description of the activities. They found

out that pragmatic competence can be developed in the classrooms through a range of situations

and activities. They also concluded that pragmatic competence rules that are different from or

non-existent in the students first language need to be given more emphasis. Moreover, they

suggested that comparative studies and needs analyses can be carried out to address the most

challenging pragmatic issues facing particular groups of students.

I totally agree with what they said here especially on rules that are non-existent in their

language. For instance, Koreans give a high regard on politeness especially when they are with

older people of their kind. I am well aware that it is considered disrespectful when younger

Koreans do not use respectful words to address the older ones. However, in English there are

formal and informal ways of speaking be it with people of the same age or not. If the situations

call for it, then speakers should know what to use or say. It is imperative that pragmatic

awareness in the classrooms should be taught so both teachers and students will be able to

discuss these things and find out which rules are present or not in both languages.

B.

GRAMMATICAL KNOWLEDGE

1. Bardovi-Harlig and Dornyei (1998) In the researchers attempt to better understand how L2

learners often develop grammatical competence in the absence of the connection with pragmatic

competence, they explored the extent to which instructed L2 learners of English were aware of


17/26

differences in learners' and target-language production in grammar, which addressed the

accuracy of utterances, and pragmatics, which addressed the appropriateness of utterances given

specific situations, speakers, and content. The researchers used a videotape with 20 scenarios to

test 543 learners and their teachers in two countries, Hungary and the U.S., as well as a

secondary sample of 112 EFL speakers in Italy. The results showed that whereas EFL learners

and their teachers consistently identified and ranked grammatical errors as more serious than

pragmatic errors, ESL learners and their teachers showed the opposite pattern, ranking pragmatic

errors as more serious than grammatical errors. The researchers also discussed the possible

causes of this pattern and its implications for teaching.

I am of the opinion that no matter what kind of English learners we teach, it must follow

that before we can instruct them on how to use language properly when in real situations, their

knowledge of the grammatical structures should be polished first, for how can they make

utterances if they do not know how to make even simple sentences. However, teaching English

to them is also not all about patterns and rules only. Their English skills may be very good, no

more mistakes in the sentences, and the like, yet teachers cannot fully measure how competent

they are if they pragmatic competence is not included in the instructions. So grammar and

pragmatic knowledge should be presented in classes because they work hand in hand.

2. Kreutel (2007) analyzed the devices used by the learners of English as a Second Language

(ESL) in order to perform the speech act of disagreement in their L2. Data collected from 27

ESL learners were gathered by means of discourse completion tests and compared to baseline

data from 27 native speakers of American English. To control gender influences, both


18/26

subsamples consisted of 18 female and 9 male respondents. In addition, both groups were

composed of college students who studied at a large state university in the Midwestern region of

the US. The non-native speaker subgroup consisted of international students from ten countries

representing 8 different L1s. they were assigned to ESL classes based on the ACTFL proficiency

guidelines ranging from high-beginner to low-advanced levels. The Discourse Completion Tests

(DCTs) were questionnaires consisting of written descriptions of selected scenarios. These

scenarios covered a variety of topics and types of situations to avoid the intervening effects of

topic selection. It was found that non-native speakers used mitigational devices such as hedges or

explanations less frequently than native speakers, but often resort to undesirable features such as

message abandonment. The data suggested that high grammar and lexicon proficiency does not

necessarily imply high pragmatic competence.

As what I have mentioned previously, no matter how great the mastery of the student of

the English grammar, there are still instances that they fail in pragmatic competence. I would like

to say that I agree with the findings of this particular study.

C. SOCIO-CULTURAL NORMS

1. Mizne (1997) wanted to enrich the available resources addressing the complex topics of

culture and sociolinguistics through the development of a teaching module that taught concepts

directly to a class of advanced English as Second Language students. The module was taught

during two consecutive one hour class periods and the class consisted of 11adult students - 1

Turkish, 3 Latin American, and 7 Asian. In the first class, the Kluckhohn Model was used to

teach cross-cultural differences to the students. During the second class, the speech act of

compliments was used with emphasis placed on the American rules of usage for these


19/26

compliments, as well as the American values that can be seen through these rules of usage. At

the end of the class period, a survey was given to the students and regular classroom teacher,

asking them to provide some background language information and to evaluate the helpfulness

of the cross-cultural information in their language learning process. They were also asked to rank

a list of speech acts in order of difficulty. The results of the survey showed how the students find

the information helpful, with students being in the United States for more than six months

finding the information very helpful, while students who had been in the United States for less

than six months found the information only marginally helpful. This finding suggested that the

most effective time to teach cultural information in the target language country may be after the

students have had some time to experience the culture they are learning about. The students

listed mainly face-threatening speech acts as being difficult, that is, those speech acts such as

refusals, apologies, and giving advice, all of which require a careful choice of wording due to the

possibility of damaging the other person's face or public image. Also, the teacher's perceptions of

which speech acts were difficult for the students did not match the students perceptions.

The time spent by students studying English truly has a lot to do with their learning of

pragmatic competence. For the first three months, given that the student is a regular learner and

one that takes studying seriously, they are still polishing their grammatical structures and perhaps

already incorporating some of the dos and donts in the socio-cultural context of the language.

Since pragmatic competence is not about structures, students must learn to observe everything

that happens around them. For the teachers, they should also consider the things that they teach

their students such as those that add more to their knowledge at the same time the ones that

address their difficulties.


20/26

2. Amaya (2008) studied several examples that were used to illustrate how pragmatic failures

affected the interpretation of messages and sometimes block communication completely, thus

defeating the principal purpose of L2 acquisition. Guidance was provided to encourage teachers

to incorporate the necessary pragmatic and cultural aspects of L2 learning into their lessons in

order to prevent students from making these types of mistakes. It is the view of the researcher

that teachers should provide students with the necessary tools to make adequate pragmatic

decisions in the L2. Students must learn that the coding of a certain message is subject to the

principle of use and these can vary from one linguistic community to another. For example, it

would be important to make them see in which way the difference between cultures oriented

towards positive politeness, like Spanish and those oriented towards negative politeness, like

English, affects the production of messages.

The main purpose of learning a second language is communication. Nevertheless, many

students are disappointed when they realize that, in spite of having a mastery of the L2 grammar

rules, they have difficulties at interpersonal level when establishing a conversation with native

speakers. It is my opinion that pragmatics is an integral element of language ability for L2

learners therefore English teachers should take into consideration to include teaching how to use

language in the outside setting.

ACTION PLAN

To study a language does not only mean to have a full grasp of the technicalities of that

target language, but to use it appropriately and effectively in social situations; therefore, to learn

one is also a process of nurturing and developing a Second Language Learners pragmatic

competence of this language.


21/26

Students may be adept linguistically when it comes to the English language, yet

pragmatic competence has often been an area in English education which is neglected or ignored.

As a result, most of these students do not know how to use it properly in real life.

In order for my students to achieve pragmatic competence, I would like to prescribe some

plans of action which I deem helpful to the students.

ACTION PLAN SCHEME

Time frame Language

focus

Activity Materials Strategies Evaluation

Week 1 *Specificspeech acts of

asking for anapology

*Useful

expressions in

the restaurant

*Specificvocabulary on

food and in the

restaurant.

*Listening torecorded

conversations*Reading

*Exercise on

the

identification

of formal andinformal way

of apologizing.

*Hand-outs onrelated topics

*Audio tapeson recorded

apologizing

conversations

*Pair work*Role plays

*Reading aloudin class

Studentsshould be able

to identifyspeech acts of

apology. They

should also be

able to use

usefulexpressions in

the restaurant

and master at

least 50 new

vocabularies.

Week 2 *Speech acts

of suggesting

*Grammar

lessons on

patterns used

in suggestions.

*Vocabulary

used in buying

clothes and inthe shops.

*Watching

video clips on

making

suggestions

* Making

example

sentences

exercise

*Dictation

*DVDs

*Printed

materials on

the grammar

lessons

*Dramatization

*Seatwork

*Free

Conversation

*Students

should be able

to construct

grammatically

correct

sentences and

carry out

conversations

of suggestions.

Week 3 *Speech actsof givingcompliments

and gratitude

*Useful

expressions inan ESL

classroom

*Listening torecordedconversations

from TV

dramas

*Composinga dialogue of

giving a

*Audio clips*Handouts onrelated topics

*Dramatization*Grammar andvocabulary

exercise

Studentsshould beable to

perform

appropriate

speech acts ofcompliments

and gratitude


22/26

with students

from different

countries

compliment

on a students

get-up and

givinggratitude for

anotherstudents helpon preparing

for a test

and

successfully

put into

practice newexpressions

andvocabulary inconstructing

their

sentences

* *Audio clips

*Handouts on

related topics

*Dramatization

*Grammar and

vocabulary

exercise

Students

should be

able to

performappropriate

speech acts of

complimentsand gratitude

and

successfullyput into

practice new

expressions

andvocabulary in

constructing

theirsentences

I will use a tree-week time frame for my action plan. For the first week I will teach

speech acts of asking for an apology, teach useful expressions in the restaurant, and specific

vocabulary on food and in the restaurant as my language focus. The activities that I will be using

will include listening to recorded conversations, reading from hand-outs, and exercises on the

identification of formal and informal way of apologizing. My materials will include hand-outs on

related topics and audiotapes on recorded apologizing conversations. The strategies that will be

used are pair work, role plays, and reading allowed in class. Students should be able to identify


23/26

speech acts of apology. They should also be able to use useful expressions in the restaurant and

master at least 50 new vocabularies.

For the second week of my action plan speech acts of suggesting, grammar lessons on

patterns used in suggestions and vocabulary used in buying clothes and in the shops will be

discussed. The activities will be listening to recorded conversations from TV dramas,

composing a dialogue of giving a compliment on a students get-up and giving gratitude for

another students help on preparing for a test. Audio clips and handouts on related topics will be

used as materials and dramatization and grammar and vocabulary exercise for strategies.

Students should be able to perform appropriate speech acts of compliments and gratitude and

successfully put into practice new expressions and vocabulary in constructing their sentences.

Lastly for the third week, I will teach the students speech acts of giving compliments and

gratitude useful expressions in an ESL classroom with students from different countries.

Listening to recorded conversations from TV dramas and composing a dialogue of giving a

compliment on a students get-up and giving gratitude for another students help on preparing for

a test will be the plan for the activities. Audio clips and handouts on related topics are materials

and dramatization, grammar and vocabulary exercises will be given for the strategies. And

finally, Students should be able to perform appropriate speech acts of compliments and gratitude

and successfully put into practice new expressions and vocabulary in constructing their

sentences.


24/26

REFERENCES:

Ahn, S. J. (2007). Korean ESL learners pragmatic competence: motivation, amount of contact,

and length of residence (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from

www.repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/ETD-TAMU-2487/AHN-

DISSERTATION.pdf?sequence=1

Amaya, L. F. (2008). Teaching culture: is it possible to avoid pragmatic failure?Revisita

Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 21, 11-24. Retrieved from

http:/www.rua.ua.es/dspace/bitstream/10045/10393/1/RAEI_21_02.pdf

Bardovi-Harlig, K. and Dornyei, Z. (1998). Do language learners recognize pragmatic

violations? Pragmatic versus grammatical awareness in instructed L2 learning. TESOL

Quarterly, 32(2). Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/pss/3587583

Berman, B. (Producer), Wachowski, A. Wachowski, L. (Directors). (1999). The Matrix [Motion

Picture]. United States: Warner Home Video.

Bigge, M. L. (1982).Educational philosophy for teachers. Columbus, Ohio. Charles E. Merril

Publishing Co.

Edwards, M. and Csizer, K. (2001). Developing pragmatic competence in EFL classrooms.

English Teaching Forum, 42(3). Retrieved from

http://eca.state.gov/forum/vols/vol42/no3/p16.htm Grier, M. (2009). Kants critique of metaphysics. In E. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of

Philosophy. Retrieved from

http://www.plato.stanford.edu.archives/sum2009/entries/kant-meta/
http://www.jstor.org/pss/3587583http://www.jstor.org/pss/3587583http://www.jstor.org/pss/3587583http://eca.state.gov/forum/vols/vol42/no3/p16.htmhttp://eca.state.gov/forum/vols/vol42/no3/p16.htmhttp://www.plato.stanford.edu.archives/sum2009/entries/kant-meta/http://www.plato.stanford.edu.archives/sum2009/entries/kant-meta/http://www.plato.stanford.edu.archives/sum2009/entries/kant-meta/http://eca.state.gov/forum/vols/vol42/no3/p16.htmhttp://www.jstor.org/pss/3587583


25/26

Henderson, G. E. and Brown, C. (1997). Glossary of Literary Theory. University of Toronto

English Library. Retrieved from

http://www.library.utoronto.ca/utel/glossary/speech_act_theory.html/ Kasper, G. (1997). Can pragmatic competence be taught? Second Language Teaching &

Curriculum Center. Retrieved fromhttp://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/NetWorks/NW06/

Korean Confucianism. (2008). Asia-Pacific-Connections, Ltd. Retrieved from

http://www.asia-pacific-connections.com/confucianism.html

Kreutel, K. (2007). Im not agree with you: ESL learners expressions of disagreement.The

Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 11(3). Retrieved from

http://www.tesl-ej.org./ej43/a1.html Krisnawati, E. (2011). Pragmatic competence in the English spoken classroom. Indonesian

Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 100-110. Retrieved from

http://balaibahasa.upi.edu/wp-content/

Kyzlinkova, L. (2007). On communicative language competence, validity, and different modes of

administration.(Masters Thesis). Retrieved from

http://www.is.muni.cz/th/.../On_Com_Lang_com...doc

Maryam, F. and Rozina, R. (2009). An inter-language pragmatic study of expressions of

gratitude by Iranian EFL Learnersa pilot study.Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 5.

Retrieved fromwww.melta.org.my

Miller, J. (2006). Whats wrong with English education in Korea? GetESLjobs.com website.

Retrieved fromhttp://www.getesljobs.com/newsroom_detail.asp?/newsid=14

Mizne, C. A. (1997). Teaching sociolinguistic competence in the ESL classroom. Senior Thesis

Projects, 1993-2002. Retrieved fromhttp://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20
http://www.plato.stanford.edu.archives/sum2009/entries/kant-meta/http://www.plato.stanford.edu.archives/sum2009/entries/kant-meta/http://www.plato.stanford.edu.archives/sum2009/entries/kant-meta/http://www.plato.stanford.edu.archives/sum2009/entries/kant-meta/http://www.library.utoronto.ca/utel/glossary/speech_act_theory.html/http://www.library.utoronto.ca/utel/glossary/speech_act_theory.html/http://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/NetWorks/NW06/http://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/NetWorks/NW06/http://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/NetWorks/NW06/http://www.asia-pacific-connections.com/confucianism.htmlhttp://www.asia-pacific-connections.com/confucianism.htmlhttp://www.tesl-ej.org./ej43/a1.htmlhttp://www.tesl-ej.org./ej43/a1.htmlhttp://balaibahasa.upi.edu/wp-content/http://balaibahasa.upi.edu/wp-content/http://www.is.muni.cz/th/.../On_Com_Lang_com...dochttp://www.is.muni.cz/th/.../On_Com_Lang_com...dochttp://www.melta.org.my/http://www.melta.org.my/http://www.melta.org.my/http://www.getesljobs.com/newsroom_detail.asp?/newsid=14http://www.getesljobs.com/newsroom_detail.asp?/newsid=14http://www.getesljobs.com/newsroom_detail.asp?/newsid=14http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://www.getesljobs.com/newsroom_detail.asp?/newsid=14http://www.melta.org.my/http://www.is.muni.cz/th/.../On_Com_Lang_com...dochttp://balaibahasa.upi.edu/wp-content/http://www.tesl-ej.org./ej43/a1.htmlhttp://www.asia-pacific-connections.com/confucianism.htmlhttp://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/NetWorks/NW06/http://www.library.utoronto.ca/utel/glossary/speech_act_theory.html/


26/26

Schauer,G. A. (2009). Interlanguage pragmatic development: a study abroad context. New

York: Continuum International Publishing group.

Soler, A. E. and Pitarch, J. P. (2010). The effect of instruction on learners pragmatic awareness:

a focus on refusals. International Journal of English Studies, 10 (1), 65-80.

Retrieved fromwww.um.es/ijes
http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_utk_interstp2/20http://www.um.es/ijeshttp://www.um.es/ijeshttp://www.um.es/ijeshttp://www.um.es/ijes

Documents

k's Final Frankena Model