Refusal strategies of Turkish pre-service teachers of English: A focus on gender and status of interlocutor

Yıl 2019, , 1 - 19, 25.03.2019

Hülya Tuncer , Burcu Turhan

https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.547578

Öz

Please fill up the following information accurately. (Please use Times New Roman, 12 pt.
Refusal strategies of Turkish pre-service teachers of English: A focus on gender and status of interlocutor
In today’s world, the great demand for using English entails language users to be pragmatically competent so that they could adopt themselves to differing requirements of various contexts. Within those contexts, some factors such as the culture of the target language, the speech act used in the interaction, status and gender of the interlocutors are accepted as essential components. Refusals, one of the most difficult speech acts to perform based on its face threatening nature, were chosen as the main concern of the present study. In an attempt to find out what kind of refusal strategies are employed by Turkish pre-service teachers of English, 27 first year students (14 males and 13 females) at Çukurova University were randomly chosen. Data for the study were collected via a Written Discourse Completion Test (WDCT) in which the participants were to respond nine scenarios (three lower, three equal and three higher interlocutors). Data analysis concentrated on two main variables: gender of the participants and the status of the interlocutors. In addition to those, refusal combinations utilized by the participants was another focal point of the study. The whole qualitative data were discussed through descriptive statistics and chi-square analyses, and “excuse, reason, explanation” was found to be the most frequent refusal strategy used by the participants. Another important finding is that males were found to directly utter “no” more frequently than females. It was also found that the number of the strategy combinations increase as the status of the interlocutor rises.
Information about Author(s)*
Author 1
Author (Last name, First name)	Tuncer, Hülya
Affiliated institution (University)	Çukurova University
Country	Turkey
Email address	[e-mail]
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No) Write only one corresponding author.	Yes
Author 2
Author (Last name, First name)	Turhan,Burcu
Affiliated institution (University)	Mustafa Kemal University
Country	Turkey
Email address	[e-mail]
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No)	No
Author 3
Author (Last name, First name)
Affiliated institution (University)
Country
Email address
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No)
Author 4
Author (Last name, First name)
Affiliated institution (University)
Country
Email address
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No)

Anahtar Kelimeler

Pragmatics; speech acts; refusal strategies;, written discourse completion test (WDCT);, Turkish pre-service teachers of English.

Kaynakça

• barghoui, M. A. (2012). A comparative study of refusal strategies used by Iranians and Australians. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(11), 2439-2445.
• Asmalı, M. (2013).Cross-cultural comparison of non-native speakers' refusal strategies in English. International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies, 1(3), 111-135.
• Austin, J. L. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Beebe, L., M., Takahashi, T., & Uliss-Weltz, R. (1990). Pragmatic transfer in ESL refusals. In R. C. Scarcelle, E. Anderson, & S. C. Krashen (Eds.), Developing Communicative Competence in a Second Language, (pp. 55-73). Newbury House, New York.
• Chen, H. J. (1996). Cross-cultural comparison of English and Chinese metapragmatics in refusal. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Indiana University, United States.
• Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Çapar, M. (2014). How do Turkish EFL learners say ‘no’?. International Journal of Language Academy, 2(3), 262-282.
• Fraser, B. (1990). Perspectives on politeness. Journal of pragmatics, 14(2), 219-236.
• Gungormezler, T. (2016).An investigation of the refusal speech act of Turkish learners of English. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Kansas State University, USA.
• Hei, K. C. (2009). Moves in refusal: How Malaysians say ‘No’. China Media Research, 5(3), 31-44.
• Humeid, A. A., & Altai, A. A. (2013). Refusal strategies used by Iraqi EFL university students. British Journal of Science, 8 (1), 58-86.
• Ji, P. Y. (2007). Exploring pragmatic knowledge in college English textbooks. Retrieved October, 2017 from http://kb.psu.ac.th/psukb/bitstream/2010/8726/1/363475.pdf
• Martinez-Flor, A., & Alcon-Soler, E.A. (2007).Developing pragmatic awareness of suggestions in the EFL classroom. A focus on instructional effects. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 47-76.
• Moody, M. J. (2011). A study of Turkish and English refusal speech acts with a secondary examination for bi-directional language transferrals. Master’s Thesis, Minnesota State University, Mankato, United States of America. Retrieved from http://cornerstone.lib.mnsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1280&context=etds
• Niezgoda, K., & Röver, C. (2001). Pragmatic and grammatical awareness: A function of the learning environment. In K. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 63-79). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Nikmehr, A., & Jahedi, F. (2014). The effect of status on refusal strategies used by American native speakers of English and Iranian EFL university students. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 3(5), 91-99.
• Pohl, G. (2004). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure and implications for language teaching. Studies in Languages and Language Teaching, 4.
• Rose, K. R., & Kasper, K. (2001).Pragmatics in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Sa’d, H., T. & Mohammadi, M. (2014). Iranian EFL learners’ sociolinguistic competence: Refusal strategies in focus. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 10(2), 48-66.
• Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Smith, C. (1998). Can adults “just say no?": How gender, status and social goals affect refusals. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of South Florida, USA.
• Taguchi, N. (2003). Pragmatic performance in comprehension and production of English as a second language. Dissertation Abstracts International, 65(01).
• Tuncer, H. (2016). Refusal strategies used by Turkish university instructors of English. Novitas-ROYAL Research on Youth and Language, 10(1), 71-90.
• Wannaruk, A. (2008). Pragmatic transfer in Thai EFL refusals. RELC journal, 39(3), 318-337.
• Yang, J. (2008, April). How to say ‘No’ in Chinese: A pragmatic study of refusal strategies in five TV series. In Proceedings of the 20th North American conference on Chinese linguistics Vol. 2, pp. 1041-1058.
• Yuan, Y. (2012). Pragmatics, perceptions and strategies in Chinese college English learning. Doctoral Dissertation, Queensland University of Technology, Australia.
• Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.