İngilizce Öğretiminde İngilizce Öğrenenlerin İşaret Zamiri Hakkındaki Dil Farkındalıkları

Öz

İngilizce öğretiminde dört beceride anlam büyük önem taşımaktadır. Anlam yeterince aktarılmadığında, İngiliz-ce öğrenenler dili öğrenmede zorluklarla karşılaşabilirler. Bu zorluklar, öğrencilerin dil kullanımı hakkında da-ha fazla ilgili olmalarına yardımcı olacak edimbilimin yardımıyla ortadan kaldırılabilir. Bu nedenle, bu eylem araştırması, öğrencilerin deixis ile ilgili dil farkındalıklarına dikkat çekmek için yapılmıştır. Deixis, bir ifadeyi bir zaman, yer veya kişiyle ilişkilendiren, dil sınıflarında öğrenenler için önemini araştıran ve edimbilimin dil far-kındalığı yaratmadaki katkısını vurgulayan bir kelime veya deyim için kullanılan bir terimdir. Araştırmanın katı-lımcıları orta düzey hazırlık sınıfında öğrenim gören üniversite öğrencileridir. Araştırmanın yöntemi, dil farkın-dalığının önemini anlamak için daha geniş bir yol yelpazesi sunmak için nicel (sayılar) ve nitel verileri (göz-lemler ve odak grup tartışması) içeren karma yöntemli bir çalışmadır. Bu ampirik çalışma, edimbilim yoluyla far-kındalığın, yeterli bilgi sağlandığında diğer dil becerilerinin yanı sıra iletişim becerilerine ve kavramaya önemli ölçüde katkıda bulunduğunu kanıtlamıştır. Bu nedenle, İngilizce öğrenenler ve Afrika dilleri gibi diğer dil öğre-nenlerin yanı sıra edimbilim yoluyla farklı bağlamlarda dil pratiği yapmak için fırsatları kullanmaya teşvik edil-melidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İngilizce Öğretimi
• edimbilim
• dil bilgisi
• işaret zamiri
• bağlam

Language Awareness of the English Learners about Deixis in English Language Teaching

Öz

In the teaching of English language, meaning is of great importance in four skills. When meaning is not conveyed adequately, English learners may face difficulties in learning the English language. These challenges could be eliminated with the help of pragmatics by assisting learners to become more concerned about language and language use. Hence, this action research was carried out to draw attention to learners' language awareness about deixis. Deixis is a term for a word or phrase relating an utterance to a time, place, or person, investigating its importance for the learners in language classes, and highlighting the contribution of pragmatics to create language awareness. The participants of the study were university students in the intermediate-level preparatory class. The method of the research was a mixed-method study involving quantitative (numbers) and qualitative data (observations and focus group discussion) to give a broader spectrum of ways to understand the significance of language awareness. This empirical study proved that awareness via pragmatics contributes significantly to communicative skills and comprehension as well as other language skills when adequate knowledge is provided. Hence, English learners as well as other language learners such as African languages should be encouraged to use opportunities in order to practice language in different contexts via pragmatics.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• ELT
• pragmatics
• linguistic knowledge
• deixis
• context

Kaynakça

1. ALCON-SOLER, Eva (2005), “Does instruction work for learning pragmatics in the EFL context?”, System 33, pp. 417-435.
2. AL-SAIF, Fahed Hussein Ahmed (2008), “Deixis in English and Arabic: A semantic-pragmatic study and its pedagogical implications (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Institute of Advanced Studies in English, University of Pune.
3. BACHMAN, Lyle. (1990), “Fundamental considerations in language testing”, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. BANGUOĞLU, Hasan Tahsin (2011), “Türkçenin Grameri”, Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
5. BARDOVI-HARLIG, Kathleen (1996), “Pragmatics and language teaching: Bringing pragmatics and pedagogy together”, Lawrence F Bouton (Ed). Pragmatics and Language Learning. University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign, pp. 21-39.
6. BAR-HILLEL, Yehoshua (1954), “Indexical Expressions”, Mind 63, pp. 359-379.
7. BARRON, Anne (2003), “Acquisition in interlanguage pragmatics: Learning how to do things with words in a study abroad context”. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
8. BARSS, Andrew (Ed.) (2003), “Anaphora: A reference guide”. Oxford: Blackwell.

9. BÜHLER, Karl (1934), “Theory of language: The representational function of language”. New York: Fischer.
10. CANALE, Michael & SWAIN, Merrill (1980), “Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing”, Applied Linguistics 1(1), pp.1-47.
11. CLIBBENS, John (1992), “Comprehension and production of discourse anaphora: A developmental study”. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club Publications.
12. CONGMIN, Zoe (2013), “Classroom interaction and second language acquisition: The more interactions the better?”, Studies in Literature and Language 7(1), pp. 22-26.
13. CRESWELL, John W., & CRESWELL, J. David (2018), “Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.)”. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Incorporated.
14. CRYSTAL, David (2003), “English as a global language”, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. CRYSTAL, David (2008), “A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics” (6th ed.), Oxford: Blackwell.
16. DEMIRCI, Kerim (2010), “Teorik Bir Yaklaşımla Zamirler”, Ankara: Grafiker Yayınları.
17. DOĞAN, Gürkan (2015), “Anlamlandırma Süreçleri”, İstanbul: Kesit Yayınları.
18. ELLIS, Rod (2012), “Language teaching research and language pedagogy”, Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell.
19. ERTON, İsmail (1997), “A contrastive study of Turkish and English interrogatives: A discourse perspective”, (Unpublished MA thesis). Institute of Social Sciences, Hacettepe University.
20. ESLAMI-RASEKH, Zohreh (2005), “Raising the pragmatic awareness of language learners”, ELT Journal 59(3), pp. 199-208. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cci039
21. FILLMORE, Charles.J. (1971), “Santa Cruz lectures on deixis”, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
22. GOODMAN, Nelson (1951), “The structure of appearance”, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23. GRADDOL, David (2006), “English next: Why global English may mean the end of English as a foreign language?”, London: The British Council.
24. GRIGOROGLOU, Myrto, & PAPAFRAGOU, Anna (2017), “Acquisition of pragmatics”. In M. Aronoff (Series Ed.), Oxford research encyclopedia of linguistics. Online edition: Oxford University Press.
25. HANKS, William F. (2005), “Explorations in the Deictic Field.” Current Anthropology, 46(2), pp. 191−220.
26. HEDGE, Tricia (2000), “Teaching and learning in the language classroom”. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27. HELD, David, MCGREW, Anthony G., GOLDBLATT, David, & PERRATON, Jonathan (1999), “Global transformations: Politics, economics and culture”, Stanford: Stanford University Press.
28. HYMES, Dell (1971), “On communicative competence”. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
29. IVANKOVA, Nataliya & WINGO, Nancy (2018), “Applying Mixed Methods in Action Research: Methodological Potentials and Advantages”, American Behavioral Scientist. 62(7), pp. 978-997. doi:10.1177/0002764218772673.
30. JESPERSEN, Otto (1965),“The philosophy of grammar”, New York: WW Norton and Company.
31. KACHRU, Braj B. (1990), “World Englishes and applied linguistics”. World Englishes 9(1), pp. 3-20.
32. KACHRU, Braj B. (1992), “World Englishes: Approaches, Issues and Resources”. Language Teaching 25(1), pp. 1-14. doi:10.1017/S0261444800006583.
33. KARAAĞAÇ, Günay (2012), “Türkçenin Dil Bilgisi”. Ankara: Akçağ.
34. KARAHAN, Lev (2009), “Türkçede Şahıs ve İşaret Zamirlerinin Yönelme Hâlindeki Genişlemeler”, Ahmet Yesevi Üniversitesi III. Uluslararası Türkoloji Kongresi 18-20 Mayıs 2009, Türkistan pp. 124-130.
35. KENNETH, Rose & KASPER, Gabriele (Eds.) (2001),Van “Pragmatics in language teaching”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36. LEECH, Geoffrey (1983), “Principles of Pragmatics”. London: Longman.
37. LEVINSON, Stephen C. (1983), “Pragmatics”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38. LEVINSON, Stephen C. (2004). “Deixis.” In the handbook of pragmatics, edited by Lawrence R..
39. LEVINSON, Stephen, CUTFIELD, Sarah, DUNN, Michael, ENFIELD, MEIRA, Nick Sérgio & WILKINS, David (Eds) (2018), “Demonstratives in cross-linguistic perspective”, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40. LYONS, J. (1977). “Semantics” (2 Volumes). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
41. LYONS, John (1968), “Introduction to theoretical linguistics”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42. MEY, Jacob Louis (1993), “Pragmatics: An introduction”. Oxford: Blackwell.
43. PAPAFRAGOU, Anna (2018), “ Pragmatic Development”, Language Learning and Development, 14:3, 167-169, DOI: 10.1080/15475441.2018.1455791.
44. PEIRCE, Charles Sanders (1932). “Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Volumes I and II: Principles of philosophy and elements of logic”. Ed. C Hartshorne, P Weiss, Harvard University Press.
45. ROEVER, Carsten (2010), “Effects of cultural background in a test of ESL pragmalinguistics: A DIF approach”. (Eds) Kasper, G., Nguyen, H., Yoshimi, DR., Yoshioka, J.K. Pragmatics and language learning. Honolulu, HI: National Foreign Language Resource Center. 12, pp. 187-212.
46. STALNAKER, Robert (1970), “Pragmatics”. Synthese 22, pp. 272-289.
47. STALNAKER, Robert (1972), “Pragmatics”. (Eds). Davidson,D., Harman, G. Semantics of natural language. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Company, pp. 380-397.
48. SUPRIADIN, Supriadin (2017), “The comparison of temporal deixis between English and bima language”, Journal UNSA Progress 22(2), pp. 86-97.
49. TOMLINSON, Brian (2003), “Developing principled frameworks for materials development”. (Ed.) B. Tomlinson. Developing materials for language teaching. London: Continuum, pp. 107-129.
50. VAN ENGELENHOVEN, Aone (2011). “Deixis”. (Ed.) PC Hogan. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the Language Sciences, pp. 247-248. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
51. YULE, George (1996), “Pragmatics”, Oxford: Oxford University Press.