从沟通能力过渡到多模式和跨文化能力:系统回顾

IF 1.7 Q2 SOCIOLOGY
Societies Pub Date : 2024-07-08 DOI:10.3390/soc14070115
Khomeshwaree Mootoosamy, Vahid Aryadoust
{"title":"从沟通能力过渡到多模式和跨文化能力:系统回顾","authors":"Khomeshwaree Mootoosamy, Vahid Aryadoust","doi":"10.3390/soc14070115","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The formulation of the construct of communicative competence (CC) was the consequence of the perceived “inappropriateness” of the theory of linguistic competence and performance. To obtain a comprehensive understanding of second language (L2) CC, a systematic review of 85 studies was conducted to assess how empirical studies have defined and operationalized the construct in the context of L2 learning and assessment. Four main themes emerged from the papers: (1) beliefs and perceptions about CC, (2) expansion of CC, (3) mixed specifications of CC, and (4) tests and measures of CC and communicative language ability (CLA). The analysis of these themes foregrounded several significant findings. First, the construct of L2 CC was significantly more prevalent in the body of research compared to L2 CLA. Second, CC has been perceived as a multifarious construct that has been researched from varied perspectives. It was found that older studies were more consistent with traditional approaches to defining CC and CLA, while the construct shifted focus to technology and self-appraisals in more recent studies. Third, there is no consensus amongst the reviewed studies about tests and methods of operationalization of CC, suggesting that the evidence provided is sample-specific and non-replicable. Importantly, it was found that over the years, CC has undergone a gradual evolution. With the multimodal and intercultural turn, CC has branched into new concepts namely intercultural and multimodal communicative competencies. Pertaining to these concepts, new notions such as telecollaboration, digital literacies, and multiliteracies have emerged. CC has also been, for long, analogous to performance, proficiency, social rules of language use, rules of appropriateness, willingness to communicate, self-perceptions of CC, and the goal of being a native speaker, which can add to the confusion surrounding the construct. The implications of the present research synthesis are two-fold. It becomes imperative to adapt world language classrooms to the rising trend in intercultural and multimodal communicative competencies. In addition, further replicable investigations should focus on developing optimal methods of operationalization that are in line with the new contemporary theoretical frameworks of language in the age of digital technologies and artificial intelligence.","PeriodicalId":21795,"journal":{"name":"Societies","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transitioning from Communicative Competence to Multimodal and Intercultural Competencies: A Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"Khomeshwaree Mootoosamy, Vahid Aryadoust\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/soc14070115\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The formulation of the construct of communicative competence (CC) was the consequence of the perceived “inappropriateness” of the theory of linguistic competence and performance. To obtain a comprehensive understanding of second language (L2) CC, a systematic review of 85 studies was conducted to assess how empirical studies have defined and operationalized the construct in the context of L2 learning and assessment. Four main themes emerged from the papers: (1) beliefs and perceptions about CC, (2) expansion of CC, (3) mixed specifications of CC, and (4) tests and measures of CC and communicative language ability (CLA). The analysis of these themes foregrounded several significant findings. First, the construct of L2 CC was significantly more prevalent in the body of research compared to L2 CLA. Second, CC has been perceived as a multifarious construct that has been researched from varied perspectives. It was found that older studies were more consistent with traditional approaches to defining CC and CLA, while the construct shifted focus to technology and self-appraisals in more recent studies. Third, there is no consensus amongst the reviewed studies about tests and methods of operationalization of CC, suggesting that the evidence provided is sample-specific and non-replicable. Importantly, it was found that over the years, CC has undergone a gradual evolution. With the multimodal and intercultural turn, CC has branched into new concepts namely intercultural and multimodal communicative competencies. Pertaining to these concepts, new notions such as telecollaboration, digital literacies, and multiliteracies have emerged. CC has also been, for long, analogous to performance, proficiency, social rules of language use, rules of appropriateness, willingness to communicate, self-perceptions of CC, and the goal of being a native speaker, which can add to the confusion surrounding the construct. The implications of the present research synthesis are two-fold. It becomes imperative to adapt world language classrooms to the rising trend in intercultural and multimodal communicative competencies. In addition, further replicable investigations should focus on developing optimal methods of operationalization that are in line with the new contemporary theoretical frameworks of language in the age of digital technologies and artificial intelligence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21795,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Societies\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Societies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/soc14070115\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Societies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/soc14070115","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

交际能力(CC)这一概念的提出是由于人们认为语言能力和表现理论 "不合适"。为了全面了解第二语言(L2)交际能力,我们对 85 项研究进行了系统回顾,以评估实证研究如何在 L2 学习和评估的背景下定义和操作这一概念。论文中出现了四个主题:(1) 关于 CC 的信念和看法,(2) CC 的扩展,(3) CC 的混合规格,(4) CC 和语言交际能力(CLA)的测试和测量。对这些主题的分析得出了几个重要发现。首先,与语言交际能力(L2 CLA)相比,语言交际能力(L2 CC)在研究中更为普遍。其次,CC 被认为是一种从不同角度进行研究的多元建构。研究发现,较早的研究更倾向于用传统方法来定义 CC 和 CLA,而在较新的研究中,这一概念的重点则转向了技术和自我评价。第三,所审查的研究对 CC 的测试和操作方法没有达成共识,这表明所提供的证据是针对特定样本的,不可复制。重要的是,研究发现,多年来,CC 经历了逐步演变。随着多模态和跨文化转向,CC 衍生出了新的概念,即跨文化和多模态交际能力。与这些概念相关,出现了远程协作、数字文学和多元文学等新概念。长期以来,交际能力还与表现、熟练程度、语言使用的社会规则、适当性规则、交际意愿、对交际能力的自我认知以及成为母语使用者的目标相类比,这可能会增加围绕这一概念的混乱。本研究综述有两方面的意义。当务之急是使世界语言课堂适应跨文化和多模态交际能力的上升趋势。此外,在数字技术和人工智能时代,进一步的可复制调查应侧重于开发与新的当代语言理论框架相一致的最佳操作方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Transitioning from Communicative Competence to Multimodal and Intercultural Competencies: A Systematic Review
The formulation of the construct of communicative competence (CC) was the consequence of the perceived “inappropriateness” of the theory of linguistic competence and performance. To obtain a comprehensive understanding of second language (L2) CC, a systematic review of 85 studies was conducted to assess how empirical studies have defined and operationalized the construct in the context of L2 learning and assessment. Four main themes emerged from the papers: (1) beliefs and perceptions about CC, (2) expansion of CC, (3) mixed specifications of CC, and (4) tests and measures of CC and communicative language ability (CLA). The analysis of these themes foregrounded several significant findings. First, the construct of L2 CC was significantly more prevalent in the body of research compared to L2 CLA. Second, CC has been perceived as a multifarious construct that has been researched from varied perspectives. It was found that older studies were more consistent with traditional approaches to defining CC and CLA, while the construct shifted focus to technology and self-appraisals in more recent studies. Third, there is no consensus amongst the reviewed studies about tests and methods of operationalization of CC, suggesting that the evidence provided is sample-specific and non-replicable. Importantly, it was found that over the years, CC has undergone a gradual evolution. With the multimodal and intercultural turn, CC has branched into new concepts namely intercultural and multimodal communicative competencies. Pertaining to these concepts, new notions such as telecollaboration, digital literacies, and multiliteracies have emerged. CC has also been, for long, analogous to performance, proficiency, social rules of language use, rules of appropriateness, willingness to communicate, self-perceptions of CC, and the goal of being a native speaker, which can add to the confusion surrounding the construct. The implications of the present research synthesis are two-fold. It becomes imperative to adapt world language classrooms to the rising trend in intercultural and multimodal communicative competencies. In addition, further replicable investigations should focus on developing optimal methods of operationalization that are in line with the new contemporary theoretical frameworks of language in the age of digital technologies and artificial intelligence.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Societies
Societies SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
9.50%
发文量
150
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信