پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 161 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,532 |
| تعداد مقالات | 70,501 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 124,115,846 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 97,220,222 |
توانش کاربرد‌شناسی در زبان انگلیسی در فراگیران دو‌زبانه (فارسی-بلوچی) و تک‌زبانه (فارسی): تمرکز بر مجموعه کنش گفتاری امتناع | ||
| پژوهشهای زبانشناختی در زبانهای خارجی | ||
| دوره 11، شماره 4، دی 1400، صفحه 741-762 اصل مقاله (1.11 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: علمی پژوهشی(عادی) | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jflr.2021.322890.835 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| فرخ لقا حیدری* 1؛ مهری ایزدی2؛ ناهید یار‌احمد‌زهی3 | ||
| 1دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان | ||
| 2دکتری آموزش زبان انگلیسی، استاد مدعو گروه زبان و ادبیات انگلیسی، دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان، زاهدان، ایران | ||
| 3استاد‌یارزبانشناسی، گروه زبان انگلیسی، دانشگاه دریا‌نوردی چابهار، چابهار، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| پژوهش حاضر سعی بر بررسی توانش کاربرد‌شناسی فراگیران فارسی و فارسی-بلوچ در ضمن یادگیری زبان انگلیسی به‌عنوان زبان دوم و زبان سوم‌شان داشت. کاربرد راهبردهای امتناع با توجه به شأن و مقام طرف صحبت (پایین‌تر، مساوی و بالا‌تر) و انواع کنش‌های انگیزشی (درخواست، دعوت، پیشنهاد، توصیه) مورد بررسی قرار‌گرفت. افزون بر این، تشخیص راهبردهای امتناعِ مناسب در زبان انگلیسی با توجه به فاصلۀ اجتماعی بین افراد، رابطۀ قدرت آنها و میزان تحمیل امتناع مورد مطالعه قرار‌گرفت. از 36 فراگیر زبان انگلیسی فارسی-بلوچ و 33 فارسی‌زبان خواسته‌شد تا به آزمون تکمیل گفتمان نوشتاری و آزمون تکمیل گفتمان چند‌گزینه‌ای پاسخ دهند. نتایجِ پژوهش تفاوتهایی را در فراوانی و تناوب قواعد معنایی بکار‌برده‌شده توسط شرکت‌کنندگان بلوچ و فارس نشان داد. فراگیران فارسی‌زبان بیشتر از فرمولهای غیر‌مستقیم و راهبردهای حفظ وجهه در پاسخ‌هایشان استفاده کردند، در حالیکه فراگیران فارسی-بلوچ انواع مستقیم‌تری از قواعد معنایی را با درجات مختلف فراوانی مورد استفاده قرار‌دادند. به‌استثنای ردِ پیشنهاد که در آن فرار از موقعیت و امتناعِ مستقیم بیشترین کاربرد و بیان تأسف کمترین کاربرد را دارا بودند، در سایر موارد، رایج‌ترین قاعده‌های معنایی عذر/توجیه، بیان تأسف و امتناع مستقیم بودند. بهرحال، در ارتباط با تشخیص راهبرد امتناعِ مناسب، فراگیران بلوچ توانش کاربرد‌شناسی بهتری نسبت به فارسی‌زبان‌ها بروز ندادند، به‌نحوی که تفاوت بین دو گروه در تشخیص راهبردهای مناسب معنا‌دار گزارش نشد. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| توانش کاربرد‌شناسی؛ کنش گفتاری امتناع؛ فارسی‌زبان؛ بلوچ‌زبان؛ دو‌زبانه؛ تک‌زبانه | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| The Iranian Bilingual (Persian-Baluchi) and Monolingual (Persian) Learners' English Pragmatic Competence: A focus on Refusal Speech Act Sets | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Farrokhlagha Heidari1؛ Mehri Izadi2؛ Nahid Yarahmadzehi3 | ||
| 1Assistant Professor of TEFL, Department of English Language and Literature, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran. | ||
| 2Ph.D. of TEFL, Part-time Lecturer of Department of English Language and Literature, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran. | ||
| 3Assistant Professor of Linguistics, Department of English Language, Chabahar Maritime University, Chabahar, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| The present study aimed to explore the pragmatic competence of Iranian Persian- and Persian-Baluchi-speaking learners learning English as their second and third languages, respectively. The realization of refusal strategies with respect to the status of interlocutors (lower, equal & higher) and the types of eliciting acts (requests, invitations, offers, & suggestions) were studied. Moreover, the perception of appropriate refusal speech act sets with regard to the social distance between the participants, their power relationship and the degree of imposition of refusal were explored. 36 Persian-Baluchi-speaking and 33 Persian-speaking learners of English were asked to complete a written Discourse Completion Test (DCT) and a Multiple-Choice Discourse Completion Test (MDCT). Results of the study revealed variations in frequency and shift of semantic formulas employed by Baluch and Persian subjects. Persian-speaking English learners were found to use more indirect formulas and more face-saving strategies per response, while Persian-Baluchi-speaking English learners were found to use more direct types of semantic formulas at different degrees of frequency. Except for 'offer' in which ‘off the hook’ along with ‘direct refusals’ were used more and ‘regret’ was used less, in other situations, 'excuse/explanation', 'regret' and 'direct refusals' were more frequent. However, Baluch subjects did not reveal better pragmatic competence over Persian subjects as the differences between the two groups in recognizing appropriate refusal strategies were found to be insignificant. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Pragmatic Competence, Refusal Speech Act, Persian, Baluch, Bilingual, Monolingual | ||
|
سایر فایل های مرتبط با مقاله
|
||
| مراجع | ||
|
Aliakbari, M., & Changizi, M. (2012). On the realization of refusal strategies by Persian and Kurdish speakers. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 36(5), 659-668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2012.04.009
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(1), 385-406. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.07.010
Barjasteh Delforooz, B. (2010). Discourse features in Balochi of Sistan, Oral Narratives. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Uppsala University. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277772688_Discourse_Features_in_Balochi_of_Sistan_Oral_Narratives
Barnes, J. (2006). Early Trilingualism: A Focus on Questions. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303346884_Early_Trilingualism_A_Focus_on_Questions
Barron, A. (2003). Acquisition in Interlanguage Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamin's Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.108
Beebe, L. M., Takahashi, T., & Uliss-Weltz, R. (1990). Pragmatic transfer in ESL refusals. In R. C. Scarcella, E. Andersen, & S. D. Krashen (Eds.), Developing communicative competence in a second language (pp. 55–73). New York: Newbury House. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309352845_Pragmatic_Transfer_in_ESL_Refusals
Bialystok, E. (2001). Bilingualism in development: Language, literacy and cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press. http://doi.org/ 10.1017/CBO9780511605963
Bialystok, E., McBride-Chang, C., & Luk, G. (2005). Bilingualism, language proficiency, and learning to read in two writing systems. Journal of educational psychology, 97(4), 580-590. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.4.580
Cenoz, J. (2000). Research on multilingual acquisition. In J. Cenoz & U. Jessner (Eds.), English in Europe: The acquisition of a third language. (pp. 39-53). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309910207_English_in_Europe_the_Acquisition_of_a_Third_Language
Cenoz J. (2003). The additive effect of bilingualism on third language acquisition: A review. International Journal of Bilingualism. 7(1), 71-87. http://doi.org/10.1177/13670069030070010501
Cenoz, J. (2007). The acquisition of pragmatic competence and multilingualism in foreign language contexts. In Intercultural language use and language learning (pp. 123-140). Springer Netherlands. http://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-1-4020-5639-0_7
De Bot, K. (2012). Rethinking Multilingual Processing: From a Static to a Dynamic Approach. In Third Language Acquisition in Adulthood, In J. C. Amaro, S. Flynn, & J. Rothman (Eds.), 79–94. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co. http://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.46.07bot
Fouser, R. J. (1997). Pragmatic transfer in highly advanced learners: Some preliminary findings. Center for Language and Communication Studies Occasional Papers, 50, 1– 44. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED415677
Gottfried, A.W., Gottfried, A.E., Bathurst, K., Guerin, D.W., & Parramore, M.M. (2003). Socioeconomic status in children’s development and family environment: Infancy through adolescence. In M.H. Bornstein & R.H. Bradley (Eds.), Socioeconomic status, parenting and child development (pp. 189–207). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hoffmann, Ch., & Stavans, A. (2007). The evolution of trilingual codeswitching from infancy to school age: the shaping of trilingual competence through dynamic language dominance. International Journal of Bilingualism, 11, 55-72. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069070110010401
Hudson, T. (2001). Indicators for pragmatic instruction: Some quantitative tools. In K. R. Rose and G. Kasper (Eds.): Pragmatics in Language Teaching (pp. 283-300). New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524797.019
Hudson, T, Detmer, E. & Brown, J.D. (1992). A framework for testing cross-cultural pragmatics. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Hudson, T, Detmer, E. & Brown, J.D. (1995). Developing prototypic measures of cross-cultural pragmatics. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Jahani, C. (2019). A Grammar of Modern Standard Balochi. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.
Jessner, U. (2008). Teaching third languages: findings, trends and challenges. Language Teaching, 41(1), 15-56. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444807004739
Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R. (1999). Pragmatics and SLA. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 19, 81– 104. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190599190056
Khany, R., & Haghi, S. (2020). The acquisition of future tense properties by Iranian Persian monolingual and Kurdish-Persian Bilingual learners of English: A generative study. Journal of Foreign Language Research, 10 (3), 542-557. http://doi.org/10.22059/jflr.2020.293047.747
Korn, A. (2003). Balochi and the concept of North-Western Iranian. In C. Jahani & A. Korn (Eds.), The Baloch and Their Neighbours: Ethnic and Linguistic Contact in Balochistan in Historical and Modern Times (pp. 49–60). Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag.
Korn, A. (2006). Counting Sheep and Camels in Balochi. In M. N. Bogoljubov et al. (Eds): Indoiranskoe jazykoznanie i tipologija jazykovyx situacij. Sbornik stat’ej k 75-letiju professora A. L. Grjunberga (1930–1995). St. Petersburg, Nauka, pp. 201–212.
Kwon, J. (2004). Expressing refusals in Korean and in American English. Multilingual-Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication, 23(4), 339-364. https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.2004.23.4.339
Mahmoudzahi, M., Korn, A., & Jahani, C. (2019). Synchronically unexpected /n/ in the Balochi dialect of Iranshahr. Orientalia Suecana, 20-30. http://doi.org/10.33063/diva-389901⟩. ⟨hal-02263585⟩
Mehrpur, S., Ahmadi, M., & Sabourizadeh, N. (2016). Cross–linguistic comparison of refusal speech act: Evidence from trilingual EFL learners in English, Farsi, and Kurdish. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies, 8(2), 159-188.
Modir Khamene, S. (2006). The reading achievement of third language versus second language learners of English in relation to the interdependence hypothesis. International Journal of Multilingualism, 3(4), 280-292. http://doi.org/10.2167/ijm043.0
Okati, F., Helgason, P., Jahani, C., & Ahangar, A. A. (2013). The short vowels /i/ and /u/ in Iranian Balochi dialects. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies, 5(1), 117-154.
Rahimi Domakani, M., & Hashemian, M. (2016). Role of monolingualism/bilingualism on pragmatic awareness and production of apology speech act of English as a second and third language. Iranian Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(1), 91-113.
Rasekh Eslami, Z. (2010). Refusals: How to develop appropriate refusal strategies. In A. Martínez-Flor & E. Usó-Juan (Eds.): Speech Act Performance: Theoretical, empirical and methodological issues (pp.217–236). John Benjamins Publishing Company. http://doi.org 10.1075/lllt.26.13esl /
Safont-Jordà, M. P. (2005). Third language learners: Pragmatic production and awareness (Vol. 12). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Safont-Jordà, M. P. (2011). Early requestive development in consecutive third language learning. International Journal of Multilingualism, 8(3), 256-276. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2011.588332
Safont-Jordà, M. P. (2013). Early stages of trilingual pragmatic development. A longitudinal study of requests in Catalan, Spanish and English. Journal of Pragmatics, 59, 68-80. http://doi.org/ 10.1016/J.PRAGMA.2013.01.007
Zand-Moghadam, A., & Adeh, A. (2020). Investigating pragmatic competence, metapragmatic awareness and speech act strategies among Turkmen-Persian bilingual and Persian monolingual EFL learners: A cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 49(1), 22-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2019.1705876 | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 772 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 842 |
||
