The impact of English proficiency on the use of communication strategies: An interaction-based study in Turkish EFL context

Year 2014, Volume: 10 Issue: 2, 0 - 182, 31.12.2014

Mehmet Uztosun İsmail Erten

Abstract

The present study investigated communication strategies employed by Turkish EFL learners and aimed at revealing the relationship between language proficiency and the use of communication strategies. An interaction-based methodology was used in which 17 pairs at different proficiency levels were asked to negotiate on two short movies and stimulated-recall interviews were implemented. The results of Kruskal-Wallis test illustrated that participants use particular strategies such as ‘use of fillers’, ‘self-repair’, and ‘self-repetition’. Proficiency level was not found as a factor influencing learners’ strategy choice but significant differences were found in three strategies: ‘message reduction’, ‘topic avoidance’, and ‘mime’. These findings allow for generating implications for issues to consider in designing classes.

Keywords

Communication strategies; language proficiency, interaction-based methodology, English as a foreign language

References

• Bialystok, E. (1983). Some factors in the selection and implementation of communication strategies. In C. Faerch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in interlanguage communication (pp. 20-60). London: Longman.
• Bialystok, E. (1990). Communication strategies: A psychological analysis of second language use. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Brown, J. D., & Rodgers, T. S. (2002). Doing second language research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Canale, M. (1983). On some dimensions of language proficiency. In J. W. Oiler, Jr. (Ed.), Issues in language testing research (pp. 333-342). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
• Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980).Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
• Chen, S. Q. (1990). A study of communication strategies in interlanguage production by Chinese EFL learners. Language Learning, 40, 155-187.
• Chuanchaisit, S., & Prapphal, K. (2009). A study of English communication strategies of Thai university students. MANUSYA: Journal of Humanities, 17, 100-126.
• Dörnyei, Z. (1995). On the teachability of communication strategies. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 55-85.
• Dörnyei, Z., & Kormos, J. (1998). Problem-solving mechanisms in L2 communication. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 349-385.
• Dörnyei, Z., & Scott, M. L. (1997). Communication strategies in a second language: Definitions and taxonomies. Language learning, 47, 173-210.
• Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1983). Strategies in interlanguage communication. New York: Longman.
• Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: Sage publications.
• Grenfell, M., & Macaro, E. (2007). Claims and critiques. In A. D. Cohen & E. Macaro (Eds.), Language learner strategies: Thirty years of research and practice (pp. 9-28). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Gümüş, P. (2007). A study into the impact of language proficiency on the use of communication strategies by high school students (Unpublished MA thesis). Çanakkale: Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University.
• Hua, T. K., Nor, N. F. M., & Jaradat, M. N. (2012). Communication strategies among EFL students: An examination of frequency of use and types of strategies used. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 12(3), 831-848.
• Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269-293). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
• Kaivanpanah, S., & Yamouty, P. (2009). On the role of instruction, language proficiency, and personality traits in the use of communication strategies by L2 learners. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 31-68.
• Kaivanpanah, S., Yamouty, P., & Karami, H. (2012). Examining the effects of proficiency, gender, and task type on the use of communication strategies. Porta Linguarum, 17, 79-93.
• Khan, S., & Victori, M. (2011). Perceived vs. actual strategy use across three oral communication tasks. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 49, 27-53.
• Khanji, R. (1996). Two perspectives in analyzing communication strategies. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 34, 144-154.
• Kongsom, T. (2009). The effects of teaching communication strategies on Thai learners of English (Unpublished PhD thesis). Great Britain: University of Southampton.
• Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Manchón, R. M. (2000). Fostering the autonomous use of communication strategies in the foreign language classroom. Links and Letters, 7, 13-27.
• Mei, A., & Nathalang, S. (2010). Use of communication strategies by Chinese EFL learners. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 33, 110-125.
• Metcalfe, J., & Noom-Ura, S. (2013). Communication strategy use of high and low proficiency learners of English at a Thai university. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 6(1), 68-89.
• Nakatani, Y. (2005). The effects of awareness‐raising training on oral communication strategy use. The Modern Language Journal, 89, 76-91.
• Nakatani, Y. (2006). Developing an oral communication strategy inventory. The Modern Language Journal, 90, 151-168.
• Nakatani, Y. (2010). Identifying strategies that facilitate EFL learners' oral communication: A classroom study using multiple data collection procedures. The Modern Language Journal, 94, 116-136.
• Nakatani, Y., & Goh, C. (2007). A review of oral communication strategies: Focus on interactionist and psycholinguistic perspectives. Language Learner Strategies, 30, 207-228.
• Nunan, D. (1989). Understanding language classrooms. London: Prentice-Hall.
• Paribakht, T. (1986). On the pedagogical relevance of strategic competence. TESL Canada Journal, 3, 53-66.
• Poulisse, N. (1987). Problems and solutions in the classification of compensatory strategies. Second Language Research, 3, 141-153.
• Poulisse, N. (1990). The use of compensatory strategies by Dutch learners of English. Dordrecht: Foris.
• Poulisse, N. (1993). A theoretical account of lexical communication strategies. In Schreuder, R. & Weltens, B. (Eds.), The Bilingual Lexicon (pp. 157-189). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Tarone, E. (1980). Communication strategies, foreigner talk and repair in interlanguage. Language Learning, 30, 417-431.
• Tarone, E. (1983). Some thoughts on the notion of communication strategies. In C. Farerch, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in interlanguage communication (pp. 61-74). London: Longman.
• Thornbury, S. (2005). How to teach speaking. London: Longman.
• Ting, S., & Phan, G. L. (2008). Adjusting communication strategies to language proficiency. Prospect, 23, 28-36.
• Van Hest, E. (1996). Self-repair in L1 and L2 production. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.
• Viney, P., & Viney, K. (1987). A week by the sea. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Yang, J. Y. (2006). How non-native speakers make do with words when doing things with words? An analysis of communication strategies in storytelling by Mandarin-speaking learners of English (Unpublished PhD thesis). Oxford Brookes University.
• Ya-ni, Z. (2007). Communication strategies and foreign language learning. US-China Foreign Language, 5, 43-48.
• Wiemann, J. M., & Daly, J. A. (1994). Introduction: Getting your own way. In J. A. Daly & J. M. Wiemann (Eds.), Strategic interpersonal communication (pp. vii-xiv). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Willems, G. (1987). Communication strategies and their significance in foreign language teaching. System, 15, 351-364.
• İngilizce yeterliliğin iletişim stratejilerinin kullanımına etkisi:
• Türkiye’de yabancı dil olarak İngilizce bağlamında etkileşim odaklı bir çalışma