Interlanguage Pragmatics: A Study of Iraqi EFL Learners’ Realization of Complaint Speech Acts
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33367/ijhass.v4i3.4312Keywords:
Interlanguage Pragmatics, Complaint Speech Acts, Iraqi EFL Learners, Arabic Culture, Social VariablesAbstract
This study investigates the interlanguage pragmatic competence of Iraqi EFL learners in the performance of the speech act of complaining. The study explores the semantic components of the complaint speech act produced by Iraqi EFL learners in their interlanguage and compares their performance with that of English native speakers. Additionally, it examines the extent to which social variables such as power and distance influence the performance of the speech act of complaining by both Iraqi EFL learners and English native speakers. The study used a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative and qualitative data. The quantitative data consisted of the results of a discourse completion test (DCT) that was administered to 100 Iraqi EFL learners and 11 English native speakers. The qualitative data consisted of transcripts of interviews with 20 of the DCT participants. The findings of the study showed that Iraqi EFL learners use a variety of strategies to realize complaint speech acts in English. The most frequently used strategies were criticism, demand, and complaint. Justification and request were also used with high frequency. Apology and warning were produced with a relatively low frequency. Explanation of purpose was the least used semantic component in complaining in the EFL group. There were significant differences in the mean scores of the semantic components between Iraqi EFL learners and English native speakers. Iraqi EFL learners need to be more aware of the different semantic components of complaint speech acts in English and how to use them appropriately in different contexts. Additionally, teachers should be sensitive to the cultural differences between English and Arabic when teaching Iraqi EFL learners about complaint speech acts.
References
Bachman, Lyle F. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford university press, 1990.
Bardovi‐Harlig, Kathleen. “Exploring the Interlanguage of Interlanguage Pragmatics: A Research Agenda for Acquisitional Pragmatics.” Language Learning 49, no. 4 (1999): 677–713.
Brown, H D. “Principles of Language Learning and Teaching . White Plains: Pearson Longman,” 2007.
Brown, Penelope, Stephen C Levinson, and Stephen C Levinson. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Vol. 4. Cambridge university press, 1987.
Chabert Ull, Alicia. “A Plurilingual Approach to English Language Teaching from an Ecological Perspective: An International Comparative Study.” Universitat Jaume I, 2020.
Huang, Qian. “Interlanguage Pragmatics Theory and Its Implications for Foreign Language.” Journal of Language Teaching and Research 1, no. 5 (2010): 682.
Hudson, Thom. “Indicators for Pragmatic Instruction: Some Quantitative Tools.” Pragmatics in Language Teaching, 2001, 283–300.
Kasper, Gabriele, and Richard Schmidt. “Developmental Issues in Interlanguage Pragmatics.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18, no. 2 (1996): 149–69.
Lawal, A. “Aspects of Pragmatic Theory.” Unpublished Paper, Institute of Education, Ilorin, University of Ilorin, 1995.
Mao, Tiaoyuan. “Investigation of L2/Ln Pragmatic Competence: Its Core and Route Map.” Frontiers in Psychology 12 (2021): 690550.
Neu, Beth Murphy—Joyce, and B Murphy. “My Grade’s Too Low: The Speech Act Set of Complaining.” Speech Acts across Cultures: Challenges to Communication in a Second Language 11 (1996): 191.
Stadler, Stefanie. “Cross‐cultural Pragmatics.” The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, 2012, 1–8.
Taguchi, N. “Interlanguage Pragmatics: A Historical Sketch and Future Directions. InA. Barron, P. Grundy, & G. Yueguo.” The Routledge handbook of pragmatics, 2017.
Thomas, Jenny A. Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. Routledge, 2014.
Weir, Joseph P. “Quantifying Test-Retest Reliability Using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient and the SEM.” The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 19, no. 1 (2005): 231–40.
Abstract
Views:
105, 
PDF downloads: 82
