Journals / Dil ve Dilbilimi Çalışmaları Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 3

A comparative sociopragmatic analysis of the dialogues in Turkish and Azerbaijani B1-B2 EFL textbooks

Pages
1500–1522
Publication Date
2020-10-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

By this study, we aspired to draw textbook writers’ attention to such inadequacies elimination of which may result in sociopragmatically more adequate textbooks, and attract second- or foreign language teachers and learners’ attention on the significance of sociopragmatic competence for appropriate language use.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Öz Different communities assess social distance, social power, rights and obligations, and degree of imposition used in specific speech acts differently.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The results of the investigation revealed that there are some significant differences between Turkish and Azerbaijani textbooks regarding representation of speech acts, vertical distance, and strength of socially defined rights and obligations.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:By this study, we aspired to draw textbook writers’ attention to such inadequacies elimination of which may result in sociopragmatically more adequate textbooks, and attract second- or foreign language teachers and learners’ attention on the significance of sociopragmatic competence for appropriate language use.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Anahtar Kelimeler competence · cross-culture · EFL

Özet

Öz Different communities assess social distance, social power, rights and obligations, and degree of imposition used in specific speech acts differently. As a result of this difference, foreign language learners are likely to make sociopragmatic failure. This kind of failure is harder to correct because of the learners’ justifiable sensitivity in social (or political, religious, and moral) matters. Nevertheless, the research has proven the effectiveness of instruction on development of learners’ awareness of sociopragmatic aspects of language use. However, there is almost no investigation on the representation of sociopragmatic variables in second or foreign language textbooks. Considering that textbooks are essential for providing input for the learners in development of their sociopragmatic competence, we compared EFL textbooks designed for and employed in public schools of Turkey with those designed for and employed in public schools of Azerbaijan, to evaluate how sociopragmatic and related variables have been addressed in dialogues present in these textbooks. The results of the investigation revealed that there are some significant differences between Turkish and Azerbaijani textbooks regarding representation of speech acts, vertical distance, and strength of socially defined rights and obligations. These differences, on the other hand, can be accounted for by the inadequate representation of speech situations. By this study, we aspired to draw textbook writers’ attention to such inadequacies elimination of which may result in sociopragmatically more adequate textbooks, and attract second- or foreign language teachers and learners’ attention on the significance of sociopragmatic competence for appropriate language use.

🔖

Cite This Article

BABABAYLI, I., KIZILTAN, N. (2020). A comparative sociopragmatic analysis of the dialogues in Turkish and Azerbaijani B1-B2 EFL textbooks. Dil ve Dilbilimi Çalışmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 3, 1500–1522. https://ajindex.com/articles/99176

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Achiba, M. (2003). Learning to request in a second language: A study of child interlanguage pragmatics. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Akdağ, E., Baydar Ertopcu, F., Kaya, T., Umur Özadalı, S., & Uyanık Bektaş, K. (2018). Secondary education silver lining 11 student’s book. 1st edn. Edited by Kenan Dikilitaş. Ankara, Turkey: MEB. Aslanova, G., Quliyeva, Q., & Rüstəmova, X. (2018). English 11 student’s book. Edited by Nailə Bağırova. Baku, Azerbaijan: Kövsər. August, K. J., & Rook, K. S. (2013). Social relationships. In M.D. Gellman & J.R. Turner (Eds.), Encyclopedia of behavioral medicine (pp. 1838-1842).
  2. New York, USA: Springer-Verlag New York Inc. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1996). Pragmatics and Language Teaching: Bringing Pragmatics and Pedagogy Together. In L.F. Bouton (Ed.), Monograph Series: Vol. 7. Pragmatics and Language Learning (pp. 21-39). Illinois: English as an International Language, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1999). Exploring the interlanguage of interlanguage pragmatics: A research agenda for acquisitional pragmatics. Language Learning, 49, 677–713.
  3. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2000). Pragmatics and second language acquisition. In R.B. Kaplan (Ed.) Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics (pp. 182–192).
  4. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  5. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2015). Operationalizing conversation in studies of instructional effect in L2 pragmatics. System, 48, 21-34. Bardovi‐Harlig, K. (2019). Teaching of Pragmatics. In J. I. Liontas & M. DelliCarpini (Eds.), The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching (pp. 1-7).
  6. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2020). Pedagogical linguistics: A view from L2 pragmatics. Pedagogical Linguistics, 1(1), 44-65.
  7. Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B. S. (1993). Learning the rules of academic talk: A longitudinal study of pragmatic change. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(3), 279-304.
  8. Barron, A. (2003). Acquisition in interlanguage pragmatics: Learning how to do things with words in a study abroad context. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1984). Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP). Applied linguistics, 5(3), 196-213.
  9. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Celce‐Murcia, M. (1991). Grammar pedagogy in second and foreign language teaching. TESOL quarterly, 25(3), 459-480.
  10. Cenoz, J. (