Pragmatic markers

In this study, the use of speech-like pragmatic markers in Iranian EFL students’ academic writing was investigated. Speech-like pragmatic markers, such as I think, well, I guess, actually, anyway, anyhow, etc. are linguistic components that are more specific to conversation than writing, and writers may wrongly include them in their academic writing. To examine the students’ use of speech-like pragmatic markers when writing an essay, samples of Iranian students’ and English native students’ argumentative essays were analyzed using Contrastive Interlanguage Analysis (CIA). Moreover, the overuse or underuse of such items was compared between English native students and Iranian EFL students. Native English data were collected from the Louvain Corpus of Native English Essays (LOCNESS) and non-native English data were gathered from Iranian students’ essays during an academic semester from Islamic Azad University of Najafabad, Islamic Azad University of Abadan and Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz in Iran. Iranian participants were 71 EFL upper-intermediate (based on the Oxford Placement Test) graduate students that were selected randomly from male and female students. A frequency analysis of pragmatic markers indicates significant differences between Iranian students’ and English native students’ use of speech-like pragmatic markers. Quantitative analyses of the non-native corpus data revealed that students apply these spoken components in their argumentative essays, which may adversely affect their text in terms of a correct style and tone. By investigating the results, the language teachers and materials writers are recommended to recognize the features of Iranian English students’ interlanguage and to provide them with planned input about appropriate use of pragmatic markers.

This study was an attempt to see whether the instruction of pragmatic markers in virtual vs. face-to-face classroom settings had any effect on Iraqi EFL learners’ speaking ability. It also attempted to examine the intervening effects of some factors including age (teenagers in the language institute vs. adults in the university), gender, social class, and the learners’ English language proficiency levels.  To achieve these purposes, a group of 224 Iraqi EFL learners at a university and a private language institute in Kufa, Iraq passing conversation courses were selected and randomly divided into four groups. The two experimental groups (both in university and language institute settings) received instruction on pragmatic markers in online vs. face-to-face conversation classrooms while the two control groups (in university and language institute settings) did not receive instruction on pragmatic markers in online vs. face-to-face conversation classrooms. An English language speaking test was given to the learners to assess their oral performance before and after the treatment. The test was randomly selected from IELTS speaking tests. For the teenagers in the language institute, a simplified speaking task was designed based on IELTS criteria for assessing speaking performance. The results indicated that generally those who received pragmatic instruction outperformed those who did not receive such kind of instruction and the participants in face-to-face classrooms outperformed their virtual counterparts in terms of speaking ability. The study also examined the intervening effects of some social and personal factors including age, gender, social class and level of language proficiency. Based on the findings of this study, the male participants and the students from higher proficiency levels outperformed females and their lower proficiency counterparts in terms of speaking ability. However, they did not show any differences with regard to age and social class. This study offers important implications for EFL teachers, learners and material designers, with regard to the promising effect of face-to-face instruction of different pragmatic features of language through speech acts on learners’ speaking skill.