A Case Study of L1 Interference in Speech Acts among Chinese L2 Students

被引:6
作者
Krish, Pramela [1 ]
May, Oh Chen [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Kebangsaan Malaysia, Fac Social Sci & Humanities, Bangi, Malaysia
[2] Kolej Matrikulasi Negeri Sembilan, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia
来源
3L-LANGUAGE LINGUISTICS LITERATURE-THE SOUTHEAST ASIAN JOURNAL OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE STUDIES | 2020年 / 26卷 / 01期
关键词
L1; interference; Chinese students; L2; students; speech acts; communicative competence;
D O I
10.17576/3L-2020-2601-08
中图分类号
H [语言、文字];
学科分类号
05 ;
摘要
Improving linguistic and communicative competence will minimise challenges faced in Intercultural communication especially with globalisation and technology advancement. The study aimed at identifying potential areas of L1 interference in speech production relating to five speech acts: compliments, requests, refusals, apologies, and complaints. The L1 interference is examined based on four approaches which are Contrastive Analysis, Error Analysis, Interlanguage Analysis, and Contrastive Rhetoric. Data was collected through a discourse completion task comprising five speech acts: compliments, requests, refusals, apologies, and complaints, and an interview to find out students' reasons for committing L1 interferences. The findings revealed lexical, discourse and syntactic interferences in the students' speech where students faced difficulties in understanding the different semantic systems between Chinese and English, were influenced by cultural knowledge and transferred linguistic rules from their L1 to the L2. The main reasons for these interferences were lack of opportunities for practice and limited vocabulary repertoire. Therefore, it is important to develop ways to improve linguistic and communicative competence to minimise misunderstanding and awkward sentences in speech communication.
引用
收藏
页码:106 / 118
页数:13
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]  
Ab Manan NA, 2017, INT J ADV APPL SCI, V4, P101, DOI 10.21833/ijaas.2017.03.016
[2]  
Al-Ghamdi N. A., 2019, 3L SE ASIAN J ENGLIS, V25, P1
[3]  
[Anonymous], THESIS
[4]  
[Anonymous], PRAGMATICS PEDAGOGY
[5]  
Bennui P, 2008, MALAYS J ELT RES, V4, P72
[6]  
Chen Y., 2016, CROSS CULTURAL COMMU, V12, P50
[7]   New directions in contrastive rhetoric [J].
Connor, U .
TESOL QUARTERLY, 2002, 36 (04) :493-510
[8]  
Corder S.P., 1981, Error analysis and interlanguage
[9]  
Darus S., 2009, European Journal of Social Sciences, V8, P483
[10]  
Dipolog-Ubanan GF, 2016, PERTANIKA J SOC SCI, V24, P1835