Home Linguistics & Semiotics “Stop doing this at once!”: The preferred use of modality for advice-giving by English language learners
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

“Stop doing this at once!”: The preferred use of modality for advice-giving by English language learners

  • Liya Zalaltdinova

    Liya Zalaltdinova has earned her degree in Theory and Methodology of Teaching Foreign Languages and Cultures from the Linguistic University of Nizhny Novgorod in 2008. Right after her graduation, she taught at Kazan National Research Technical University. In 2011, she was awarded a Fulbright Scholarship to study and teach at Oberlin College, OH. She is a Ph.D. candidate in Curriculum and Instruction at SUNY Albany. Her research focuses on modality as a reflection of pragmatic competence.

    EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: July 28, 2018
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

This study seeks to explore (1) how English Language Learners (ELLs) of Chinese, German and Brazilian backgrounds develop their pragmatic knowledge of modality use for advice/suggestion-giving in English, and (2) if they demonstrate some common or diverse pattern(s) of its use.

For that purpose, a dataset was developed by analyzing 270 advise-giving ELLs’ essays from the EF-Cambridge Open Language Database for the use of modal devices by learners at elementary, intermediate and advanced proficiency levels; from China, Germany, and Brazil. Three main statistical analyses were performed: MANOVA, VanValen’s test, and Discriminant Function Analysis.

The results of this study indicate that the development of pragmatic knowledge of modality use is not a linear process; and that ELLs demonstrate common patterns of modality use regardless of the sociocultural background they belong to.

About the author

Liya Zalaltdinova

Liya Zalaltdinova has earned her degree in Theory and Methodology of Teaching Foreign Languages and Cultures from the Linguistic University of Nizhny Novgorod in 2008. Right after her graduation, she taught at Kazan National Research Technical University. In 2011, she was awarded a Fulbright Scholarship to study and teach at Oberlin College, OH. She is a Ph.D. candidate in Curriculum and Instruction at SUNY Albany. Her research focuses on modality as a reflection of pragmatic competence.

Acknowledgements

I am very grateful to Dr Adam Gordon for his help. I would like to offer my special thanks to Dr Monika Kirner-Ludwig and the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback on the paper.

References

Abolfathiasl, Hossein & Ain Nadzimah Abdullah. 2015. Pragmatic consciousness-raising activities and EFL Learners’ speech act performance of ‘Making suggestions’. Journal of Language Teaching and Research 6(2). 333–342.10.17507/jltr.0602.13Search in Google Scholar

Alexopoulou, Theodora, Jeroen Geertzen, Anna Korhonen & Detmar Meurers. 2015. Exploring big educational learner corpora for SLA research: Perspectives on relative clauses. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 1(1). 96–129.10.1075/ijlcr.1.1.04aleSearch in Google Scholar

Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen. 1999. Exploring the interlanguage of interlanguage pragmatics: A research agenda for acquisitional pragmatics. Language Learning 49. 677–713.10.1111/0023-8333.00105Search in Google Scholar

Bensaid, Mohsine. 2015. Arab ESL learners and modals. Arab World English Journal 6(4). 90–97.10.2139/ssrn.2843929Search in Google Scholar

Boncea, Irina J. 2014. Hedging patterns used as mitigation and politeness strategies. Annals of the University of Craiova. Series: Philology, English 2. 7–23.Search in Google Scholar

Bryan FJ, Manly & Jorge A Navarro Alberto. 2016. Multivariate statistical methods: A primer. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.10.1201/9781315382135Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan L & Suzanne Fleischman. 1995. Modality in grammar and discourse, vol. 32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/tsl.32Search in Google Scholar

Celce-Murcia, Marianne & Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 1999. The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher’s course. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 1978. Language and unconscious knowledge. In Joseph H Smith (ed.), Psychoanalysis and language, psychiatry and the humanities, 3–44. New Haven: Yale University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Coates, Jennifer. 1987. Epistemic modality and spoken discourse. Transactions of the philological society 85(1). 110–131.10.1111/j.1467-968X.1987.tb00714.xSearch in Google Scholar

Council of Europe. 2001. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning,Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Dittmar, Norbert & Heiner Terborg. 1991. Modality and second language learning. In Charles A Ferguson & Thom Huebner (eds.), Crosscurrents in second language acquisition and linguistic theories, 347–384. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/lald.2.19ditSearch in Google Scholar

Education First. 2012. Englishtown. http://www.englishtown.com/.Search in Google Scholar

EFCamDat. EF‐Cambridge Open Language Database, EF Research Unit, Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, University of Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar

Elsamman, Marwan. 2014. A program based on the pragmatic theory to develop grammatical structure comprehension skills for foreign learners of Arabic. Education 134(4). 529–536.Search in Google Scholar

Fordyce, Kenneth. 2014. The differential effects of explicit and implicit instruction on EFL learners  use of epistemic stance. Applied Linguistics 35(1). 6–28.10.1093/applin/ams076Search in Google Scholar

Gablasova, Dana, Vaclav Brezina, Tony McEnery & Elaine Boyd. 2017. Epistemic stance in spoken L2 English: The effect of task and speaker style. Applied Linguistics 38(5). 613–637.10.1093/applin/amv055Search in Google Scholar

Gabriele Kasper & Rose R. Kenneth. 2002 (eds.). Pragmatic development in a second language, 159–190. Malden, MA: Blackwell.10.1111/j.1467-1770.2002.tb00026.xSearch in Google Scholar

Geertzen, Jeroen, Theodora Alexopoulou & Anna Korhonen. 2013. Automatic linguistic annotation of large-scale L2 databases: The EF-Cambridge Open Language Database (EFCAMDAT). In Selected proceedings of the 2012 second language research forum. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Search in Google Scholar

Glaser, Karen. 2016. News from the pragmatic classroom: Contrasting the inductive and the deductive approach in the teaching of pragmatic competence. Intercultural pragmatics 13. 4.10.1515/ip-2016-0023Search in Google Scholar

Hinkel, Eli. 1995. The use of modal verbs as a reflection of cultural values*. TESOL Quarterly 29(2). 325–343.10.2307/3587627Search in Google Scholar

Hinkel, Eli. 1997. Indirectness in L1 and L2 academic writing. Journal of pragmatics 27(3). 361–386.10.1016/S0378-2166(96)00040-9Search in Google Scholar

House, Juliane. 1996. Developing pragmatic fluency in English as a foreign language: Routines and metapragmatic awareness. Studies in second language acquisition 18(2). 225–252.10.1017/S0272263100014893Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken & John Milton. 1997. Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 students’ writing. Journal of second language writing 6(2). 183–205.10.1016/S1060-3743(97)90033-3Search in Google Scholar

Hymes, Dell. 1972. On communicative competence. In John Bernard Pride & Janet Holmes (eds.). Sociolinguistics, selected readings, 269–293. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Search in Google Scholar

Ishihara, Noriko & Elaine Tarone. 2009. Subjectivity and pragmatic choice in L2 Japanese: Emulating and resisting pragmatic norms. Pragmatic competence 5. 101.Search in Google Scholar

Kärkkäinen, Elise. 1992. Modality as a strategy in interaction: Epistemic modality in the language of native and non-native speakers of English. Pragmatics and language learning 3. 197–216.Search in Google Scholar

Kasper, Gabriele & Kenneth R Rose. 2002. The development of pragmatics and grammar. In Pragmatic development in a second language, 159–190. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1111/j.1467-1770.2002.tb00026.xSearch in Google Scholar

Kecskes, Istvan. 2010. Dual and multilanguage systems. International journal of multilingualism 7(2). 91–109.10.1080/14790710903288313Search in Google Scholar

Kecskes, Istvan. 2015. How does pragmatic competence develop in bilinguals? International Journal of Multilingualism 12(4). 419–434.10.1080/14790718.2015.1071018Search in Google Scholar

Kecskes, Istvan & Monika Kirner-Ludwig. 2017. “It would never happen in my country I must say”: A corpus-pragmatic study on Asian English learners’ preferred uses of must and should. Corpus Pragmatics 1(2). 91–134.10.1007/s41701-017-0007-xSearch in Google Scholar

Kourilová, Maria. 1998. Communicative characteristics of reviews of scientific papers written by non-native users of English. Endocrine regulations 32. 107–114.Search in Google Scholar

M. Lluïsa Gea, Valor. 2000. A pragmatic approach to politeness and modality in the book review articles 6. Valencia: Universitat de València.Search in Google Scholar

McEnery, Tony & Nazareth A Kifle. 2002. Epistemic modality in argumentative essays of second-language writers. In J. Flowerdew (ed.), Academic discourse. 182–195. Harlow: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Nguyen, Thi & Thuy Minh. 2007. Criticizing and responding to criticism in a foreign language: A study of Vietnamese learners of English. Munich: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar

Nguyen, Thi, Thuy Minh, Thi Hanh Pham & Minh Tam Pham. 2012. The relative effects of explicit and implicit form-focused instruction on the development of L2 pragmatic competence. Journal of Pragmatics 44(4). 416–434.10.1016/j.pragma.2012.01.003Search in Google Scholar

Nuyts, Jan, Pieter Byloo & Janneke Diepeveen. 2010. On deontic modality, directivity, and mood: The case of Dutch mogen and moeten. Journal of pragmatics 42(1). 16–34.10.1016/j.pragma.2009.05.012Search in Google Scholar

Palmer, Frank Robert. 2014. Modality and the English modals. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315846453Search in Google Scholar

Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. Harlow: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Schauer, Gila A. 2006. The development of ESL learners’ pragmatic competence: A longitudinal investigation of awareness and production. Pragmatics and language learning 11. 135–163.Search in Google Scholar

Schmidt, Richard. 1983. Interaction, acculturation, and the acquisition of communicative competence: A case study of an adult. In Elliot Judd & Nessa Wolfson (eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition, 137–174. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Search in Google Scholar

Selinker, Larry. 1972. Interlanguage. International review of applied linguistics 10. 209–231.10.1515/iral.1972.10.1-4.209Search in Google Scholar

Takahashi, Tomoko & Leslie Beebe. 1987. The development of pragmatic competence by Japanese learners of English. JALT journal 8(2). 131–155.Search in Google Scholar

Wortham, Stanton. 2003. Linguistic Anthropology of Education: An Introduction. In Stanton Wortham & Betsy Rymes (eds.), Linguistic Anthropology of Education, 1–29. Westport: Praeger.10.1002/9781118924396.wbiea1471Search in Google Scholar

Youn, Soo Jung. 2014. Measuring syntactic complexity in L2 pragmatic production: Investigating relationships among pragmatics, grammar, and proficiency. System 42. 270–287.10.1016/j.system.2013.12.008Search in Google Scholar

Zufferey, Sandrine. 2014. Acquiring Pragmatics: Social and Cognitive Perspectives. Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge.10.4324/9781315747958Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2018-07-28
Published in Print: 2018-07-26

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 29.12.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/ip-2018-0010/pdf
Scroll to top button