Article published In: Pragmatics and Society
Vol. 13:4 (2022) ► pp.585–604
The role of prior and actual situational context in conversational routines produced by Chinese learners of English
Published online: 4 November 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.20027.wan
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.20027.wan
Abstract
This study aims to investigate the effects of English proficiency (EP) and study-abroad (SA) experience on routine production among 143 Chinese university English learners. The interplay of learners’ mastery of prior context (PC) and actual situational context (ASC) knowledge reflected their productive competence of routines (PCR). Participants were divided into three groups based on their EP levels and length of SA experience: high EP without SA, low EP without SA, and high EP with SA. A pilot study with 41 American native speakers was conducted to determine the target response set as the baseline. A seven-item computer-animated production task was used to elicit routines that revealed learners’ mastery of ASC and PC knowledge. The findings revealed that EP was only necessary for learners’ PC knowledge and PCR. SA experience, alongside SA and EP interaction, had a significant impact on both sides of ASC and PC knowledge, as well as learners’ overall PCR.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Theoretical framework and literature review
- 2.1Prior context vs. actual situational context
- 2.2Literature review
- 3.Methodology
- 3.1Participants
- 3.2Instrument
- 3.3Experimental procedure
- 3.4Evaluation of productive competence of routines
- 3.5Data collection and analysis
- 4.Results
- 5.Analysis and discussion
- 5.1Effects of English proficiency and study-abroad experience on productive competence of routines
- EP vs. PCR
- SA vs. PCR
- EP and SA interaction vs. PCR
- 5.2Effects of English proficiency study-abroad experience on actual situational context knowledge
- EP vs. ASC knowledge
- SA vs. ASC knowledge
- 5.3Effects of English proficiency and study-abroad experience on prior context knowledge
- EP vs. PC knowledge
- SA vs. PC knowledge
- 5.1Effects of English proficiency and study-abroad experience on productive competence of routines
- 6.Conclusion
- Acknowledgments
- Note
References
References (32)
Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen. 2009. “Conventional expressions as a pragmalinguistic resource: Recognition and production of conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics.” Language Learning 591: 755–795.
. 2012. “Formulas, routines, and conventional expressions in pragmatics research.” Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 321: 206–227.
. 2014. “Awareness of meaning of conventional expressions in second-language pragmatics.” Language Awareness 23(1–2): 41–56.
. 2019. “Routines in L2 pragmatics research.” In Handbook of SLA and pragmatics, ed. by Naoko Taguchi, 47–62. New York: Routledge.
Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen, and Maria-Thereza Bastos. 2011. “Proficiency, length of stay, and intensity of interaction and the acquisition of conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics.” Intercultural Pragmatics 81: 347–384.
Cohen, Jacob. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd Ed.). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dörnyei, Zoltan. 2009. The psychology of second language acquisition. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
Halenko, Nicola. 2018. “Using Computer-assisted Language Learning (CALL) Tools to Enhance Output Practice.” In Practice in Second Language Learning, ed. by Christian Jones, 137–163. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kasper, Gabriele. 2008. “Data collection in pragmatics research.” In Culturally speaking (2nd Ed.), ed. by Helen Spencer-Oatey, 279–303. London & New York: Continuum.
Kecskes, Istvan. 2000. “A cognitive-pragmatic approach to situation-bound utterances.” Journal of Pragmatics 32(6): 605–625.
. 2007. “Formulaic language in English lingua franca.” In Explorations in pragmatics: Linguistic, cognitive and intercultural aspects, ed. by Istvan Kecskes and Laurence R. Horn, 191–218. New York & Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
. 2015. “How does pragmatic competence develop in bilinguals?” International Journal of Multilingualism 12(4): 419–434.
Kecskes, Istvan, Olga Obdalova, Ludmila Minakova, and Aleksandra Soboleva. 2018. “A study of the perception of situation-bound utterances as culture-specific pragmatic units by Russian learners of English.” System 761: 219–232.
Kinginger, Celeste. 2008. “Language learning in study abroad: Case studies of Americans in France.” Modern Language Journal 92, Supplement S1.
Li, Citing, Wendong Li, and Wei Ren. 2021. “Tracking the trajectories of international students’ pragmatic choices in studying abroad in China: a social network perspective”. Language, Culture and Curriculum 34(4): 398–416.
Mackey, Alison, and Susan M. Gass. 2005. Second language research: methodology and design. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
. 2019. “Pragmatic development of Chinese during study abroad: A cross-sectional study of learner requests”. Journal of Pragmatics 1461: 137–149.
Roever, Carsten. 2012. “What learners get for free: Learning of routine formulae in ESL and EFL environments.” ELT Journal 661: 10–21.
Taguchi, Naoko. 2011. “The effect of L2 proficiency and study-abroad experience in pragmatic comprehension.” Language Learning 611: 904–939.
. 2013. “Production of routines in L2 English: Effect of proficiency and study-abroad experience.” System 411: 109–121.
. 2015. Developing interactional competence in a Japanese study abroad context. Bristol & New York: Multilingual Matters.
. 2018. “Contexts and pragmatics learning: Problems and opportunities of the study abroad research.” Language Teaching 51 (1): 124–137.
Taguchi, Naoko, Qiong Li, and Xiaofei Tang. 2017. “Learning Chinese formulaic expressions in a scenario-based interactive environment.” Foreign Language Annals 501: 641–660.
Taguchi, Naoko, Shuai Li, and Feng Xiao. 2013. “Production of formulaic expressions in L2 Chinese: A developmental investigation in a study abroad context.” Chinese as a Second Language Research 21: 23–58.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Wang, Yuqi
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
