Keywords
directives
pragmatics
How to Cite
Abstract
Teachers represent important pragmatic models for their students (Barón, et al., 2020). While teacher talk has been viewed as providing learners with a limited variety of pragmatic language (e.g., Nikula, 2002), there has also been evidence that it can be pragmatically attuned to the learners’ needs (Martí, Portolés, 2019). The present study is an analysis of directives in the teacher talk of five L1 Croatian teachers working with primary school EFL learners (aged 12/13). Five 45-minute EFL lessons were analysed, one for each teacher, with the aim of identifying and quantifying the occurrences of directives in instructional and regulative classroom discourse. A further qualitative analysis provides insight into how the teachers’ choice of directives relates to contextual matters in respect to their realisation (i.e., degree of directness, use of modifying strategies). The results are in line with previous studies, with teachers showing an overall preference for directness (e.g., Chen, Tseng, 2015; Liu, Hong, 2009). However, all of the teachers used directives to build interaction and scaffold their students’ language, while maintaining a relatively informal atmosphere, which may be linked to their choice of more direct forms. Ultimately, the highly diverse individual styles of the teachers seemed to be reflected most in their preference for particular forms.
References
Basra S., Thoyyibah, L. (2017), A speech act analysis of teacher talk in an EFL classroom. “International Journal of Education”, No 10(1), pp. 73–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/ije.v10i1.6848
Barón J., Roquet, H., Evnitskaya, N., Navarro, N. (2020), Pragmatics in teacher talk: the case of pre-primary education. “English Language Teaching”, No 13(8), pp. 168–177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v13n8p168
Chen C. C., Tseng, D. S. (2015), A pragmatic study on college EFL teachers’ and students’ requesting behaviors in the classrooms. “International Journal of Languages, Literature and Linguistics”, No 1(4), pp. 250–256. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18178/IJLLL.2015.1.4.48
Christie F. (2000), The language of classroom interaction and learning, (in:) Unsworth, L. (ed.), Researching language in schools and communities. Functional linguistics perspectives. London: Cassell, pp. 184–205.
Cohen A. D. (2018), Learning pragmatics from native and nonnative language teachers. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/COHEN9924
Curtain C. (2023), QualCoder 3.2. https://github.com/ccbogel/QualCoder/releases/tag/3.2
Dalton-Puffer C. (2005), Negotiating interpersonal meanings in naturalistic classroom discourse: Directives in content-and-language-integrated classrooms. “Journal of Pragmatics”, No 37(8), pp. 1275–1293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.12.002
Dalton-Puffer C., Nikula, T. (2006), Pragmatics of content-based instruction: Teacher and student directives in Finnish and Austrian classrooms. “Applied Linguistics”, No 27(2), pp. 241–267. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml007
Drew I., Hasselgreen, A. (2008), Young language learner (YLL) research: An overview of some international and national approaches. “Acta Didactica Norge”, No 2(1), pp. 1–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.1024
Ellis R. (1992), Learning to communicate in the classroom: A study of two language learners’ requests. “Studies in Second Language Acquisition”, No 14(1), pp. 1–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100010445
Fasel Lauzon V., Berger, E. (2015), The multimodal organization of speaker selection in classroom interaction. “Linguistics and Education”, No 31, pp. 14–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2015.05.001
Glaser, K. (2018), Enhancing the role of pragmatics in primary English teacher training. “Glottodidactica: An International Journal of Applied Linguistics”, No 45, pp.119–131. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/gl.2018.45.2.06
Ho D. G. E. (2005), Why do teachers ask the questions they ask? “Regional Language Centre Journal”, No 36(3), pp. 297–310. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688205060052
Hosoda Y., Aline, D. (2013), Two preferences in question–answer sequences in language classroom context. “Classroom Discourse”, No 4(1), pp. 63–88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2013.783497
Lee Y.A. (2006), Respecifying display questions: Interactional resources for language teaching. “TESOL Quarterly”, No 40(4), pp. 691–713. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/40264304
Liu Y., Hong, H. (2009), Regulative discourse in Singapore primary English classrooms: teachers’ choices of directives. “Language and Education”, No 23(1), pp. 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500780802152812
LoCastro V. (2012), Pragmatics for language educators. A sociolinguistic perspective. London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203850947
Martí O., Portolés, L. (2019), Is teacher talk for very young language learners pragmatically tuned? Directives in two EAL classrooms, (in:) Salazar-Campillo P., Codina-Espurz V. (eds.), Investigating the learning of pragmatics across ages and contexts. Leiden: Brill, pp. 87–122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004409699_006
Nikula T. (2002), Teacher talk reflecting pragmatic awareness: A look at EFL and content-based classroom settings. “Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA)”, No 12(4), pp. 447–467. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.12.4.03nik
Romero-Trillo J. (2002), The pragmatic fossilization of discourse markers in non-native speakers of English. “Journal of Pragmatics”, No 34(6), pp. 769–784. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00022-X
Sato S. (2008), Use of “please” in American and New Zealand English. “Journal of Pragmatics”, No 40(7), pp. 1249–1278. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.09.001
Schauer G. A. (2022), Teaching L2 pragmatics to young learners: A review study. “Applied Pragmatics”, No 4(2), pp. 137–158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.00006.sch
Waring H. Z., Hruska, B. L. (2012), Problematic directives in pedagogical interaction, “Linguistics and Education”, No 23(3), pp. 289–300. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2012.06.002
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Eva Jakupčević
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors
Authors of texts accepted for publication in Neofilolog are required to complete, sign and return to the Editorial team’s office the Agreement for granting a royalty-free license to works with a commitment to grant a CC sub-license.
Under the agreement, the authors of the texts published in Neofilolog grant Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań a non-exclusive, royalty-free license and authorize the use of Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license.
The authors retain the right to the free disposal of the work.
Users
Interested Internet users are entitled to use works that have been published in Neofilolog since 2017, under the following conditions:
▪ attribution – obligation to provide, together with the distributed work, information about the authorship, title, source (link to the original work, DOI) and the license itself.
▪ no derivatives – the work must be preserved in its original form. Without the author's consent, it is not possible to distribute the modified work in the form of translations, publications, etc.
Copyrights are reserved for all texts published since 2017.
Miscellaneous
Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań retains the property right as a whole (layout, graphic form, title, cover design, logo etc.).