ÖNERİ KONULU BİR DERS KİTABI ETKİNLİĞİNİN HYMES’IN SPEAKING ÇERÇEVESİNE GÖRE İNCELENMESI VE UYARLANMASI

Abstract

Söz edimlerini öğretmek ve bu amaçla etkinlikler tasarlamak son yıllarda büyük ilgi görmektedir. Bu yapıların dil kullanımında ve dolayısıyla dil öğretiminde önemli bir rol oynadıkları anlaşılmıştır. Mevcut çalışma, Cutting Edge Pre-Intermediate (2017) seviyesindeki kitaptaki tavsiye verme için tasarlanmış belirli bir materyalin, 1974'te Hymes tarafından önerilen SPEAKING çerçevesine göre iyi tasarlanmış olup olmadığını araştırmaktadır. Bu çerçeve, bir konuşma olayının altında yatan konuşma bileşenleri olan edim bilimsel unsurların dil öğretim materyallerine dahil edilmesine odaklanmaktadır. Bu amaçla, SPEAKING çerçevesi ışığında materyalin detaylı analizinden sonra, ders kitabı materyalinin ortam, katılımcılar, tür ve dil kullanımı gibi belirli edim bilimsel unsurlardan yoksun olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Bu nedenle, materyal uyarlaması yapıldı ve bu materyal uyarlaması, anadili İngilizce olan iki İngilizce eğitmeni ve ana dili İngilizce olmayan beş İngilizce eğitmeni tarafından kontrol edilmiştir. Eğitmenlerden gelen geri bildirimlere dayanarak, materyal daha da değiştirilmiş ve sonlandırılmıştır.

Keywords

• Eğitimsel edim bilim
• Edim bilimsel yetkinlik
• Ders kitabı materyali uyarlama
• Dil eylem
• Öneri.

THE ANALYSIS OF A TEXTBOOK ACTIVITY ON SUGGESTIONS ACCORDING TO SPEAKING FRAMEWORK BY HYMES AND ITS ADAPTATION

Abstract

Teaching speech acts and designing activities for this purpose has gained massive attention in recent years. It is realized that they play an essential role in language use and consequently in language teaching. The current study investigates if a specific material designed to teach suggestions in Cutting Edge Pre-Intermediate (2017) level book is well-designed according to the SPEAKING framework proposed by Hymes in 1974. This framework focuses on the inclusion of pragmatic elements, which are the speech components that underlie a speech event in language teaching materials. To this end, after the detailed analysis of the material in the light of the SPEAKING framework, it was found that the coursebook material lacks certain pragmatic elements such as setting, participants, genre, and language use. Therefore, the material was further adapted, and the material adaptation was checked by two native speaker English language instructors and five non-native English language instructors. Based on the feedback from the instructors, the material was further modified and finalized.

Keywords

• Instructional pragmatics
• Pragmatic competence
• Coursebook material adaptation
• Speech act
• Suggestions

References

1. Abalı, Z. E. (2006). Analysis of Contextual Genuineness of The Dialogues in The Coursebooks Headway, Cutting Edge and Opportunities. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Gazi University.
2. Alcón, E., & Tricker, D. (2000). Teaching discourse competence in the classroom: An example based on the discourse marker well in EFL materials. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference of AEDEAN: Lleida. 17th-19th December 1998 (pp. 61-65). Universitat de Lleida.
3. Alcón, E. (2005). Does instruction work for learning pragmatics in the EFL context? System, 33, 417–435.
4. Alshabeb, A., Alsubaie, F. H., & Albasheer, A. Z. (2017). English for Specific Purposes: A Study Investigating the Mismatch between the'Cutting Edge'Course Book and the Needs of Prince Sultan Air Base Students. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 8(3), 376-391.
5. Alshehri, A. (2016). Textbook evaluation: teachers’ perspectives on cutting edge. International Journal of English Language Education, 4(2), 91-106.
6. Banerjee, J. & Carrell, P.L. (1988). Tuck in your shirt, you squid: Suggestions in ESL. Language Learning, 38, 313-364.
7. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2001). Evaluating the empirical evidence: Grounds for instruction in pragmatics? In K. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 13-32). Cambridge University Press.
8. Bardovi-Harlig K., & R. Mahan-Taylor (2003). Teaching pragmatics. U.S. Department of State Office of English Language Programs.

9. Bardovi-Harlig, K., Hartford, B.A.S., Mahan-Taylor, R., Morgan, M. J., & Reynolds, D. W. (1991). Developing pragmatic awareness: Closing the conversation. ELT Journal, 45, 4-15.
10. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2010). Exploring the pragmatics of interlanguage pragmatics: Definition by design. Pragmatics across languages and cultures, 7, 219-259.
11. Berry, R. (2000). “You-see” friendly metalanguage: What effect does it have on learners of English? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 38, 195-211.
12. Blum-Kulka, S. (1987). Indirectness and politeness in requests: Same or different? Journal of Pragmatics, 11, 131–46.
13. Blum-Kulka, S., House, J. & Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Ablex Publishing Corporation.
14. Blum-Kulka, S. & Olshtain, E. (1986). Too many words: Length of utterance and pragmatic failure. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 8, 165-179.
15. Blum-Kulka, S. (1991). Interlanguage pragmatics: The case of requests. In R. Phillipson, E. Kellerman, L. Selinker, M. Sharwood Smith, & M. Swain (Eds.), Foreign/second language pedagogy research (pp. 255-272). Multilingual Matters.
16. Boxer, D., & Pickering, L. (1995). Problems in the presentation of speech acts in ELT materials: The case of complaints. ELT Journal, 49, 44-58.
17. Bruton, A. (1997). In what ways do we want EFL coursebooks to differ? System, 25(2), 275-284.
18. Chang, Y. F. (2010). ‘I no say you say is boring’: the development of pragmatic competence in L2 apology. Language Sciences, 32(3), 408-424.
19. Cohen, A. D. & Ishihara, N. (2013). Pragmatics. In Tomlinson, B. (Ed.) Applied Linguistics and Materials Development. Bloomsbury.
20. Cortazzi, M., & Jin, L. (2018). Socio-cultural perspectives on coursebook evaluation. In M. Azarnoosh, M. Zeraatpishe, A. Faravani & H.R. Kargozari (eds.), Issues in coursebook evaluation, Eds. (pp. 66-83). Brill.
21. Crandall, E., & Basturkmen, H. (2004). Evaluating pragmatics-focused materials. ELT Journal, 58, 38–49.
22. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed). Sage Publications.
23. Ekin, M. T. Y. (2013). Do current EFL coursebooks work for the development of L2 pragmatic competence? The case of suggestions. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1306-1310.
24. Flores Salgado, E. (2011). The pragmatics of requests and apologies: Developmental patterns of Mexican students. John Benjamins.
25. Garton, S. & Graves, K. (2014). International Perspectives on Materials in ELT. Palgrave Macmillan.
26. Göy, E., Zeyrek, D. & Otcu, B. (2012). Developmental patterns in internal modification of requests: a quantitative study on Turkish learners of English. In M. Economidou Kogetsidis, & H. Woodfield (Eds.), Interlanguage request modification. (pp. 51-6). John Benjamins.
27. Grant, L., & Starks, D. (2001). Screening appropriate teaching materials: Closing from textbooks and television soap operas. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 39, 39-50.
28. Hadley, A.O. (2003). Teaching Language in Context. (3rd Ed.). Boston: Heinle&Heinle.
29. Hansen, J. G., & Liu, J. (2005). Guiding principles for effective peer response. ELT Journal, 59(1), 31-38.
30. Hilliard, A. (2017). Spoken grammar and its role in the English language classroom. English Teaching Forum. Vol. 4: 2-13.
31. Howard, J., & Major, J. (2004). Guidelines for designing effective English language teaching materials. The TESOLANZ Journal, 12(10), 50-58.
32. Hu, Z. (2014). Study on developing Chinese college EFL learners’ pragmatic competence in relation to language proficiency and overseas experience. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 5(2), 391–398. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.5.2.391-398.
33. Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. University of Pennsylvania Press.
34. Ishihara, N. (2010). Adapting textbooks for teaching pragmatics. In N. Ishihara & A. D. Cohen (Ed.), Teaching and Learning Pragmatics: Where Language and Culture Meet (pp. 145-166). Edinburg: Pearson Education.
35. Ishihara, N., & Cohen, A. D. (2010). Teaching and learning pragmatics: Where language and culture meet. Pearson Education.
36. Jiang, X. (2006). Suggestions: What should ESL students know? System, 34, 36-54.
37. Karatepe, Ç. (1998). Teaching pragmalinguistics in Teacher Training. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Liverpool University.
38. Karatepe, Ç. (2001). Pragmalinguistic Awareness in EFL Teacher Training. Language Awareness, 2(3), 178-188.
39. Karatepe, Ç. (2016). Indirectness in requests in complaint letters to the higher institution by Turkish EFL students. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 232, 354-361. Doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.050
40. Karatepe, Ç. & Civelek, M. (2021). A case study on EFL teachers’ views on material adaptation for teaching pragmatics. RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, 23, 894-910. DOI: 10.29000/rumelide.953259
41. Karatepe, Ç., & Yılmaz, D. (2018). Promoting structured reflectivity in teacher education: An innovative approach. Journal of Teacher Education and Educators, 7(1), 57-74.
42. Kasper, G. (1997). Can pragmatic competence be taught?. http://www. nflrc. hawaii. edu/NetWorks/NW06/.
43. Kasper, G. & Rose, K.R. (2001). Pragmatics in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
44. Kıyançiçek, E. (2023). The relationship between motivation and pragmatic awareness: A case study of Turkish EFL learners. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Bursa Uludağ University. Kiesling, S. F. (2012). Ethnography of speaking. The handbook of intercultural discourse and communication, 77-89.
45. Koral, M. A., & Mirici, İ. H. (2021). Analysis of speaking skills in high school English language curricula and coursebooks in Turkey. International Journal of Education, Technology and Science, 1(3), 61-77.
46. Korkmaz, S., & Karatepe, Ç. (2022) Exploring the Pragmatic Awareness and Competence of EFL Instructors at Tertiary Level. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 13(1), 34-55.
47. Levkina, M. (2018). Developing pragmatic competence through tasks in EFL contexts. Task-based approaches to teaching and assessing pragmatics, 137-158.
48. Loutfi, A. (2016). Pragmatic transfer in Moroccan EFL learners’ requests. Asian Journal of Education and e-Learning (AJEEL) 4 (4), 15-24.
49. Martínez-Flor, A., & Fukuya, Y. J. (2005). The effects of instruction on learners’ production of appropriate and accurate suggestions. System, 33(3), 463–480. McConachy, T. (2009). Raising sociocultural awareness through contextual analysis: Some tools for teachers. ELT Journal, 63(2), 116-125. McConachy, T. & Hata, K (2013). Addressing textbook representations of pragmatics and culture. ELT Journal, 67(3), 294-301.
50. Nitta, R., & Gardner, S. (2005). Consciousness-raising and practice in ELT coursebooks. ELT journal, 59(1), 3-13.
51. Novawan, A. (2020). The use of visual aids in ELT materials. In H. Puji Widodo & L. Savova (Eds.), The Lincom guide to materials design in ELT (pp. 39-54). LINCOM Publishers.
52. Nguyen, M.T.T. (2011). Learning to communicate in a globalized world: To what extent do school textbooks facilitate the development of intercultural pragmatic competence? RELC Journal, 42, 17-30.
53. Opp-Beckman, L., & Klinghammer, S. J. (2006). Shaping the way we teach English: Successful practices the world. Publication Office of English Language Programs, Department of State.
54. Ortactape, D. (2012). The development of conceptual socialization in international students: A language socialization perspective on conceptual fluency and social identity (advances in pragmatics and discourse analysis). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
55. Rintell, E. (1979). Getting your speech act together: The pragmatic ability of second language learners. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 17, 97-106.
56. Santos, D., & Silva, G. V. (2008). Making suggestions in the workplace: Insights from the learner and native speaker discourses. Hispania, 651–664.
57. Schmidt, R., Akihiko, S., Zhigang. W., & Hy-Sook, J. (1996). Suggestions to buy: Television commercials from the U.S., Japan, China, and Korea. In S. M. Gass and J. Neu (Eds.), Speech acts across cultures (pp. 285-316). Mouton de Gruyter. Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied linguistics, 11(2), 129-158.
58. Searle, J. R. (1976). A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society, 1-23.
59. Siegel, J. (2018) Pragmatic activities for the speaking classroom. English Teaching Forum, pp.12- 19. Retrieved from http://www.americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum
60. Siegel, J., Broadbridge, J., & Firth, M. (2019). Saying it ‘just right’: teaching for pragmatic success in ELT. ELT Journal, 73(1), 31-40.
61. Şahin, S. (2020). Developing a checklist for English language teaching course book analysis. International Journal of Education and Research, 8(1), 107-120.
62. Tatsuki, D. (2019). Instructional material development in L2 pragmatics. In N. Taguchi (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of SLA and pragmatics (pp. 322–337). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351164085-21.
63. Tawakol Gaber El-Zaghal, F. (2021). Fields of Text Studies and Discourse Analysis: A Study in light of applying Dell Hymes Speaking Model to Joe Biden's speech on the Middle East (2021). International Journal of Humanities and Language Research, 4(1), 1-39.
64. Tekir, S., & Arıkan, A. (2007). An Analysis of English Language Teaching Coursebooks by Turkish Writers:" Let's Speak English 7" Example. Online Submission, 4(2), 1-18.
65. Tok, H. (2010). TEFL textbook evaluation: From teachers' perspectives. Educational Research and Reviews, 5(9), 508-517.
66. Tomlinson, B. (Ed.) (2008). Language acquisition and language learning materials. In Tomlinson, B. (Ed.) English language learning materials: A critical review (pp. 3-13). Continuum.
67. Tomlinson, B. (2010). Principles for effective materials development. In N. Harwood (Ed.), English language teaching materials: Theory and practice (pp. 81–109). Cambridge University Press.
68. Toprak, T. E. (2020). A Study on the Use of Suggestion Strategies among Turkish EFL Learners. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 11(1), 36-55.
69. Vellenga H (2004). Learning pragmatics from ESL & EFL textbooks: How likely? Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language-Electronic Journal 8, 1–18.
70. Wong, J. (2002). “Applying” conversation analysis in applied linguistics: Evaluating dialogue in English as a second language textbooks. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 40, 37-60.
71. Wyner, L., & Cohen, A. D. (2015). Second language pragmatic ability: Individual differences according to environment. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 5(4), 519-556.
72. Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford University Press.