评估非母语英语教师候选人的第二语言语用意识:发现问题就足够了吗?

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Karen Glaser
{"title":"评估非母语英语教师候选人的第二语言语用意识:发现问题就足够了吗?","authors":"Karen Glaser","doi":"10.1515/lpp-2020-0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The assessment of pragmatic skills in a foreign or second language (L2) is usually investigated with regard to language learners, but rarely with regard to non-native language instructors, who are simultaneously teachers and (advanced) learners of the L2. With regard to English as the target language, this is a true research gap, as nonnative English-speaking teachers (non-NESTs) constitute the majority of English teachers world-wide (Kamhi-Stein 2016). Addressing this research gap, this paper presents a modified replication of Bardovi-Harlig and Dörnyei’s (1998) renowned study on grammatical vs. pragmatic awareness, carried out with non-NEST candidates. While the original study asked the participants for a global indication of (in)appropriateness/ (in)correctness and to rate its severity, the participants in the present study were asked to identify the nature of the violation and to suggest a repair. Inspired by Pfingsthorn and Flöck (2017), the data was analyzed by means of Signal Detection Theory with regard to Hits, Misses, False Alarms and Correct Rejections to gain more detailed insights into the participants’ metalinguistic perceptions. In addition, the study investigated the rate of successful repairs, showing that correct problem identification cannot necessarily be equated with adequate repair abilities. Implications for research, language teaching and language teacher education are derived.","PeriodicalId":39423,"journal":{"name":"Lodz Papers in Pragmatics","volume":"16 1","pages":"33 - 65"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/lpp-2020-0003","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the L2 pragmatic awareness of non-native EFL teacher candidates: Is spotting a problem enough?\",\"authors\":\"Karen Glaser\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/lpp-2020-0003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The assessment of pragmatic skills in a foreign or second language (L2) is usually investigated with regard to language learners, but rarely with regard to non-native language instructors, who are simultaneously teachers and (advanced) learners of the L2. With regard to English as the target language, this is a true research gap, as nonnative English-speaking teachers (non-NESTs) constitute the majority of English teachers world-wide (Kamhi-Stein 2016). Addressing this research gap, this paper presents a modified replication of Bardovi-Harlig and Dörnyei’s (1998) renowned study on grammatical vs. pragmatic awareness, carried out with non-NEST candidates. While the original study asked the participants for a global indication of (in)appropriateness/ (in)correctness and to rate its severity, the participants in the present study were asked to identify the nature of the violation and to suggest a repair. Inspired by Pfingsthorn and Flöck (2017), the data was analyzed by means of Signal Detection Theory with regard to Hits, Misses, False Alarms and Correct Rejections to gain more detailed insights into the participants’ metalinguistic perceptions. In addition, the study investigated the rate of successful repairs, showing that correct problem identification cannot necessarily be equated with adequate repair abilities. Implications for research, language teaching and language teacher education are derived.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39423,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lodz Papers in Pragmatics\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"33 - 65\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/lpp-2020-0003\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lodz Papers in Pragmatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/lpp-2020-0003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lodz Papers in Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/lpp-2020-0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

摘要:对外语或第二语言(L2)语用技能的评估通常是针对语言学习者进行的,但很少涉及非母语教师,他们同时也是第二语言的教师和(高级)学习者。就英语作为目标语言而言,这是一个真正的研究缺口,因为非母语英语教师(non- nest)构成了全球英语教师的大多数(Kamhi-Stein 2016)。针对这一研究空白,本文提出了Bardovi-Harlig和Dörnyei(1998)在非nest候选人中进行的关于语法与语用意识的著名研究的改进复制。虽然最初的研究要求参与者对适当性/正确性进行全局指示,并对其严重性进行评级,但本研究的参与者被要求确定违规的性质并提出修复建议。受Pfingsthorn和Flöck(2017)的启发,通过信号检测理论(Signal Detection Theory)对hit、Misses、False Alarms和Correct rejection进行数据分析,以更详细地了解参与者的元语言感知。此外,该研究调查了成功修复的比率,表明正确的问题识别不一定等同于足够的修复能力。对研究、语言教学和语言教师教育的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing the L2 pragmatic awareness of non-native EFL teacher candidates: Is spotting a problem enough?
Abstract The assessment of pragmatic skills in a foreign or second language (L2) is usually investigated with regard to language learners, but rarely with regard to non-native language instructors, who are simultaneously teachers and (advanced) learners of the L2. With regard to English as the target language, this is a true research gap, as nonnative English-speaking teachers (non-NESTs) constitute the majority of English teachers world-wide (Kamhi-Stein 2016). Addressing this research gap, this paper presents a modified replication of Bardovi-Harlig and Dörnyei’s (1998) renowned study on grammatical vs. pragmatic awareness, carried out with non-NEST candidates. While the original study asked the participants for a global indication of (in)appropriateness/ (in)correctness and to rate its severity, the participants in the present study were asked to identify the nature of the violation and to suggest a repair. Inspired by Pfingsthorn and Flöck (2017), the data was analyzed by means of Signal Detection Theory with regard to Hits, Misses, False Alarms and Correct Rejections to gain more detailed insights into the participants’ metalinguistic perceptions. In addition, the study investigated the rate of successful repairs, showing that correct problem identification cannot necessarily be equated with adequate repair abilities. Implications for research, language teaching and language teacher education are derived.
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
Lodz Papers in Pragmatics
Lodz Papers in Pragmatics Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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