Difference between revisions of "Kecskesetal2018"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Istvan Kecskes; Robert E. Sanders; Anita Pomerantz; |Title=The basic interactional competence of language learners |Tag(s)=E...")
 
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{BibEntry
 
{{BibEntry
 
|BibType=ARTICLE
 
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Istvan Kecskes; Robert E. Sanders; Anita Pomerantz;
+
|Author(s)=Istvan Kecskes; Robert E. Sanders; Anita Pomerantz;
|Title=The basic interactional competence of language learners
+
|Title=The basic interactional competence of language learners
 
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Interactional  competence; Interactional  performance; Nonnative  speakers; Sequential  interconnections; Success  approach; Universals  of  interaction
 
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Interactional  competence; Interactional  performance; Nonnative  speakers; Sequential  interconnections; Success  approach; Universals  of  interaction
 
|Key=Kecskesetal2018
 
|Key=Kecskesetal2018
Line 9: Line 9:
 
|Journal=Journal of Pragmatics
 
|Journal=Journal of Pragmatics
 
|Volume=124
 
|Volume=124
|Pages=88-105
+
|Pages=88–105
|URL=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.10.019
+
|URL=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378216617301145
|DOI=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.10.019
+
|DOI=10.1016/j.pragma.2017.10.019
|Abstract=This study has a theoretical and an empirical part. In the theoretical part, we focus on an issue underlying studies of what language learners must learn to interact competently in L2. These studies do not consider what learners already know that we refer to as basic
+
|Abstract=This study has a theoretical and an empirical part. In the theoretical part, we focus on an issue underlying studies of what language learners must learn to interact competently in L2. These studies do not consider what learners already know that we refer to as basic interactional competence (BIC), a putative universal that begins developing in pre-linguistic infancy as part of human rationality. BIC is knowledge of the way successive utterances/actions can be substantively interconnected that forms them into an interaction and not a random collection. We regard BIC as the basis on which learners infer and adopt the practices and norms of native speakers in a host culture, as well as interact competently with other learners in L2 as a lingua franca. In the empirical part of this study, we examine naturally occurring interactions between learners of English and native speakers to identify some aspects of learners’ participation that rest directly on BIC. We assigned participants a topic they could discuss without asymmetries of knowledge of the topic, or of culture- and institution-specific norms, techniques, practices, and roles. We found that learners took an active part in making their interactions succeed in ways that have gone unnoticed and unheralded. Their responses to questions, self-editing of word choices, and detecting and remedying understanding troubles, are attributable to their having tacitly analyzed the substantive interactions among utterance/actions.
interactional competence (BIC), a putative universal that begins developing in pre-linguistic infancy as part of human rationality. BIC is knowledge of the way successive utterances/actions can be substantively interconnected that forms them into an interaction and not a random collection. We regard BIC as the basis on which learners infer and adopt the practices and norms of native speakers in a host culture, as well as interact competently with other learners in L2 as a lingua franca. In the empirical part of this study, we examine naturally
 
occurring interactions between learners of English and native speakers to identify some aspects of learners’ participation that rest directly on BIC. We assigned participants a topic they could discuss without asymmetries of knowledge of the topic, or of culture- and institution-
 
specific norms, techniques, practices, and roles. We found that learners took an active part in making their interactions succeed in ways that have gone unnoticed and unheralded. Their responses to questions, self-editing of word choices, and detecting and remedying understanding troubles, are attributable to their having tacitly analyzed the substantive interactions among utterance/actions.
 
 
}}
 
}}

Latest revision as of 04:39, 13 January 2020

Kecskesetal2018
BibType ARTICLE
Key Kecskesetal2018
Author(s) Istvan Kecskes, Robert E. Sanders, Anita Pomerantz
Title The basic interactional competence of language learners
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Interactional competence, Interactional performance, Nonnative speakers, Sequential interconnections, Success approach, Universals of interaction
Publisher
Year 2018
Language English
City
Month
Journal Journal of Pragmatics
Volume 124
Number
Pages 88–105
URL Link
DOI 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.10.019
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

This study has a theoretical and an empirical part. In the theoretical part, we focus on an issue underlying studies of what language learners must learn to interact competently in L2. These studies do not consider what learners already know that we refer to as basic interactional competence (BIC), a putative universal that begins developing in pre-linguistic infancy as part of human rationality. BIC is knowledge of the way successive utterances/actions can be substantively interconnected that forms them into an interaction and not a random collection. We regard BIC as the basis on which learners infer and adopt the practices and norms of native speakers in a host culture, as well as interact competently with other learners in L2 as a lingua franca. In the empirical part of this study, we examine naturally occurring interactions between learners of English and native speakers to identify some aspects of learners’ participation that rest directly on BIC. We assigned participants a topic they could discuss without asymmetries of knowledge of the topic, or of culture- and institution-specific norms, techniques, practices, and roles. We found that learners took an active part in making their interactions succeed in ways that have gone unnoticed and unheralded. Their responses to questions, self-editing of word choices, and detecting and remedying understanding troubles, are attributable to their having tacitly analyzed the substantive interactions among utterance/actions.

Notes