The effect of instruction on conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics

System

Volumn 40, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 77-89

  Bardovi Harlig, Kathleen ^a   Vellenga, Heidi E ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Awareness; Conventional expressions; Formulas; Instruction; Noticing; Pragmatics

Indexed keywords

EID: 84858615485     PISSN: 0346251X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2012.01.004     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Andersen R.W. The one-to-one principle of interlanguage construction. Language Learning 1984, 34:77-95.
2. Bardovi-Harlig K. Assessing familiarity with pragmatic formulas: planning oral/aural assessment. Pragmatics: Teaching Natural Conversation 2011, 7-22. TESOL, New York. D. Tatsuki, N. Houck (Eds.).
3. Bardovi-Harlig K. Conventional expressions as a pragmalinguistic resource: recognition and production of conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics. Language Learning 2009, 59:755-795.
4. Bardovi-Harlig K., Mahan-Taylor R. Teaching Pragmatics 2003, United States Department of State, Washington, DC. http://exchanges.state.gov/englishteaching/resforteach/pragmatics.html.
5. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences 1988, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. second ed.
6. Coulmas F. Conversational Routine: Explorations in Standardized Communication Situations and Prepatterned Speech 1981, Mouton, The Hague.
7. Eisenstein M., Bodman J.W. 'I very appreciate': expressions of gratitude by native and non-native speakers of American English. Applied Linguistics 1986, 7:167-185.
8. House J. Developing pragmatic fluency in English as a foreign language: routines and metapragmatic awareness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 1996, 18:225-252.
9. Jones M., Haywood S. Facilitating the acquisition of formulaic sequences: an exploratory study in an EAP context. Formulaic Sequences: Acquisition, Processing and Use 2004, 269-300. Benjamins, Amsterdam. N. Schmitt (Ed.).
10. Kecskes I. Conceptual fluency and the use of situation-bound utterances. Links & Letters 2000, 7:145-161.
11. Olshtain E., Cohen A.D. The learning of complex speech act behaviour. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL du Canada 1990, 7:46-65.
12. Quaglio, P.M., 2004. The Language of NBC's Friends: A Comparison with Face-to-Face Conversation. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Northern Arizona University.
13. Quaglio P.M. Television Dialogue: The Sitcom Friends vs. Natural Conversation 2009, Benjamins, Philadelphia.
14. Rose K. On the effects of instruction in second language pragmatics. System 2005, 33:385-399.
15. Scarcella R. Watch up!. Working Papers in Bilingualism 1979, vol. 19:79-88.
16. Schmitt N., Dörnyei Z., Adolphs S., Durow V. Knowledge and acquisition of formulaic sequences: a longitudinal study. Formulaic Sequences: Acquisition, Processing and Use 2004, 55-86. Benjamins, Amsterdam. N. Schmitt (Ed.).
17. Pragmatics: Teaching Natural Conversation 2011, TESOL, New York. D. Tatsuki, N. Houck (Eds.).
18. Valentine J.C., Cooper H. Effect Size Substantive Interpretation Guidelines: Issues in the Interpretation of Effect Sizes 2003, What Works Clearinghouse, Washington, DC, (accessed 09.05.11.). http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/essig.pdf.
19. Vellenga, H.E., 2008. Instructional Effectiveness and Interlanguage Pragmatics. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Northern Arizona University.
20. Yorio C. Idiomaticity as an indicator of second language proficiency. Bilingualism across the Lifespan 1989, 55-72. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. K. Hyltenstam, L.K. Obler (Eds.).