![Sample our Language & Literature journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5941/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Language-Literature.jpg"})
Abstract
This study explores L2 learners’ awareness of meaning of L2 conventional expressions and the effect of form-meaning associations on the use of the expressions in L2 pragmatics. Definitions and examples were elicited through an aural Vocabulary Knowledge Scale modified for expressions. Elicited definitions were used to explore the meanings that learners assign to conventional expressions and learners’ examples were used to investigate the use to which they put them in conversation. One hundred and thirteen learners participated in a 22-item task in which all conventional expressions were presented aurally. Learner awareness of the meaning of conventional expressions seems likely to play a role in whether learners use an expression, and which expression among related expressions they use to the exclusion of others. Moreover, plausible meanings may be gradually associated with a conventional expression and refined rather than acquired at the same time as the form of the expression.
Acknowledgements
The author thanks Stephanie Dickinson of the Indiana Statistical Consulting Center, Indiana University, and the Center for Language Technology and Instructional Enrichment (CeLTIE) for providing technical expertise and assistance during the elicitation sessions. Audio-editing was done by Natasha Branch.
Notes
1. Wesche and Paribakht do not report their original instructions, but multiple meanings were not elicited (1996, p. 33).
2. Level 4 is again the exception showing a significant difference (p < 0.001) between examples and definitions in favour of definitions.
3. Levels 4 and 5 score very similarly in the aggregate (. A reviewer noted that Level 5 is not consistently higher than Level 4 on individual expressions (). I have no explanation for Level 5's lack of superiority. Different encounters with expressions in input, varying facility with definitions, lack of a vocabulary measure in the placement battery, or dissimilar educational experiences are all possible factors. The modified VKS is not used here to place students, but to evaluate form-meaning associations during acquisition.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Kathleen Bardovi-Harlig
Kathleen Bardovi-Harlig is a professor in second language studies at Indiana University, where she teaches and conducts research on second-language acquisition, L2 pragmatics, and tense-aspect systems. Her work on pragmatics has appeared in Language Learning, SSLA, and Intercultural Pragmatics. She is a Co-editor of Interlanguage Pragmatics (Erlbaum) and Teaching Pragmatics (http://exchanges.state.gov/englishteaching/resforteach/pragmatics.html).