Keywords
reverse discourse completion task
intercultural competence
sociolinguistic competence
How to Cite
Number of views: 613
Number of downloads: 433
Abstract
This paper proposes a prototypic assessment tool for intercultural communicative competence. Because traditional discourse completion tasks (DCTs) focus on illocutionary competence rather than sociolinguistic competence, a modified version of a DCT was created to target sociolinguistic competence. The modified DCT employs speech acts as prompts and asks respondents to write about a situation in which a given speech act would be appropriate. This new tool is named a reverse discourse completion task (R-DCT). The task was given to learners of Turkish as a second language. Data from 12 participants were analyzed for their provision of sociopragmatic factors such as power, distance and imposition and also with respect to whether the situation was relevant to a given speech act. Responses from the participants show that R-DCTs can be used to assess intercultural competence as they help reveal respondents’ knowledge of sociolinguistic context in which a given speech act may be appropriate. By removing the need for comparison with native speaker data and the limitations that emerge from the lack of linguistic formula at respondents’ disposal, R-DCT is a promising elicitation task to assess sociolinguistic competence, an integral part of Byram’s (1997) model of intercultural communicative competence.References
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Blum-Kulka, S. (1982). Learning to say what you mean in a second language: A study of the speech act performance of learners of Hebrew as a second language. Applied Linguistics, 3, 29-59.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1984). Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP). Applied Linguistics, 5, 196-213.
Bou Franch, P., & Lorenzo-Dus, N. (2008). Natural versus elicited data in crosscultural speech act realization: The case of requests in Peninsular Spanish and British English. Spanish in Context, 5(2), 246-277.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 2-27). London: Longman.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
Cohen, A. D. (2004). Assessing speech acts in a second language. In D. Boxer & A. D. Cohen (Eds.), Studying speaking to inform second language learning (pp. 302-327). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Cohen, A. D., & Olshtain, E. (1981). Developing a measure of socio-cultural competence: The case of apology. Language Learning, 31(1), 113-134.
Cohen, A. D., Paige, M. R., Shively, R. L., Emery, H. A., & Hoff, J. G. (2005). Maximizing study abroad through language and culture strategies: Research on students, study abroad program professionals, and language instructors (Final report to the International Research and Studies Program, Office of International Education, DOE). Minneapolis, MN: Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition, University of Minnesota. Retrieved from http://www.carla.umn.edu/maxsa/documents/MAXSAResearchReport.pdf
Cohen, A. D., & Shively, R. L. (2002). Measuring speech acts with multiple rejoinder DCT’s. Language Testing Update, 32, 39-42.
Deardorff, D. K. (2004). The identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization at institutions of higher education in the United States (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). North Carolina State University, Raleigh, USA.
Deardorff, D. K. (2006). Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies in International Education, 10, 241-266.
Deardorff, D. K. (2009). Implementing intercultural competence assessment. In D. K. Deardorff (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 477-491). Los Angeles: Sage.
Deardorff, D. K. (2011). Assessing intercultural competence. New Directions for Institutional Research, 149, 65-79.
Fantini, A. (2009). Assessing intercultural competence: Issues and tools. In D. K. Deardorff (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 456-476). Los Angeles: Sage.
Golato, A. (2003). Studying compliment responses: A comparison of DCTs and recordings of naturally occurring talk. Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 90-121.
Hinkel, E. (1997). Appropriateness of advice: DCT and multiple choice data. Applied Linguistics, 18(1), 1-26.
Hudson, T., Detmer, E., & Brown, J. D. (1995). Developing prototypic measures of cross-cultural pragmatics. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press.
Johnston, B., Kasper, G., & Ross, S. (1998). Effect of rejoinders in production questionnaires. Applied Linguistics, 19(2), 157-182.
Kanik, M. (2011). The effect of content instruction in L2 on L1 pragmatics. Research in Language, 9(2), 93-110.
Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.
Roever, C. (2006). Validation of a web-based test of ESL pragmalinguistics. Language Testing, 23, 229-256.
Rose, K. R. (1992). Speech acts and questionnaires: The effect of hearer response. Journal of Pragmatics, 17(1), 49-62.
Rose, K. R. (1994). On the validity of discourse completion tests on nonwestern contexts. Applied Linguistics, 15(1), 1-14.
Rose, K. R., & Ono, R. (1995). Eliciting speech act data in Japanese: The effect of questionnaire type. Language Learning, 45(2), 191-223.
Ruhi, S., Schmidt, T., Wörner, K., & Eryilmaz, K. (2011, September). Annotating for precision and recall in speech act variation: The case of directives in the spoken Turkish corpus. Poster presented at the biennial conference of the German Society for Computational Linguistics and Language Technology, Hamburg, Germany. Retrieved from http://std.metu.edu.tr/wp/wpcontent/uploads/2009/05/hamburg_poster_abstract.pdf
Sasaki, M. (1998). Investigating EFL students’ production of speech acts: A comparison of production questionnaires and role plays. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 457-484.
United Nations World Tourism Organization. (2013). UNWTO tourism highlights 2013 edition. Retrieved from http://dtxtq4w60xqpw.cloudfront.net/sites/all/files/pdf/unwto_highlights13_en_hr.pdf
Van Ek, J. A. (1986). Objectives for foreign language learning. Vol. 1: Scope. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Retrieved from http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/SourcePublications/Scope_VanEk_EN.doc
Varghese, M., & Billmyer, K. (1996). Investigating the structure of discourse completion tests. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 12(1), 39-58.
Wilson, D., & Sperber, D. (2004). Relevance theory. In G. L. Ward & L. R. Horn (Eds.), The handbook of pragmatics (pp. 607-632). Oxford: Blackwell.
Yuan, Y. (2001). An inquiry into empirical pragmatics data-gathering methods: Written DCTs, oral DCTs, field notes, and natural conversations. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(2), 271-292.
Zuskin, R. D. (1993). Assessing L2 sociolinguistic competence: In search of support from pragmatic theories. Pragmatics and Language Learning, 4, 166-182.
License
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.