Improving Learners’ English-Speaking Accuracy by Using Interrogative Constructions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54855/ijte.24428Keywords:
teaching English speaking skills, interrogative constructions, Business EnglishAbstract
English speaking accuracy is one of the most important aspects of Business English. While most studies are conducted to improve English speaking accuracy, they neglect phrasal semantics. This present study involves 30 participants from Phu Em Company. The study employs a mixed-methods design in which the quantitative approach helps quantify the speaking accuracy scores made by learners while the qualitative approach explores how learners perceive the use of interrogative constructions. The instruments are a questionnaire and an interview. Data analysis procedures include a theme analysis of the interview data, a statistical analysis of the test and survey data, and integrated findings. The findings from this research provide evidence that using interrogative constructions does not improve grammatical or phonological accuracy but improves expressing accuracy. The study also reveals that 58% of EG learners provide positive feedback on the use of interrogative constructions in learning English speaking skills. Based on the findings, several suggestions are offered to teachers and learners.References
Aarts B. (2011). New Oxford Modern English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Baicchi, A. (2016). The role of syntax and semantics in constructional priming: Experimental evidence from Italian university learners of English through a sentence-elicitation task. In S. De Knop & G. Gilquin (Ed.). Applied Construction Grammar. Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110458268-009
Bock, K., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1994). Language Production: Grammatical Encoding. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.). Handbook of Psycholinguistics. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Retrieved from https://www.mpi.nl/publications/item61347/language-production-grammatical-encoding
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles. New York: Pearson Education Company.
Bùi, M. H.. (2008). Ngôn ngữ học đối chiếu. Ho Chi Minh City: Vietnam Education Publishing House Limited Company.
Bygate, M (2016). Speaking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (2006). Cambridge grammar of English: a comprehensive guide: spoken and written English grammar and usage. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Chu, Ruili. (2011). Effects of Teacher’s Corrective Feedback on Accuracy in the Oral English of English-Majors College Students. Journals of Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1(5), 454-459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.1.5.454-459
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Dawood, H. (2014). The impact of immediate grammatical error correction on senior English majors’ accuracy at Hebron University. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching & Research, 2(7), 37-46. Retrieved from https://journals.iau.ir/article_557964_1345f74c3b59e57e77b05f3893865c02.pdf
Ellis, R. (2009). The differential effects of three types of task planning on the fluency, complexity, and accuracy in L2 oral production. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 474–509. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp042
Ferraresi, G., & Goldbach, M. (2008). Syntactic reconstruction: methods and new insights. In G. Ferraresi & M. Goldbach (eds.). Principles of syntactic reconstruction, 1(26). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.302.03fer
Foster, P., Tonkyn, A. & Wigglesworth, G. (2000). Measuring spoken language: a unit for all reasons. Applied Linguistics, 21(3), 354–375. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.3.354
Ginzburg, J & Sag, I (2001). Interrogative investigations. CSLI Publications. London: Stanford University.
Goldberg, A. (2006). Constructions at Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kramsch, C. (1994). Teaching Language in Context. In Hadley, A. O. (1993). Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 16(3), 358-359. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100013218
Holme, R. (2010). Construction grammars: Towards a pedagogical model. In Jeannette Littlemore & Constanze Juchem-Grundmann (eds.). Applied cognitive linguistics in second language learning and teaching, 23(1), 115–133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.23.07hol
Krashen, Stephen & Tracy Terrell. (1983). The Natural Approach. Hayward, CA: Alemany.
Krashen, S. D. (1994). The input hypothesis and its rivals. In N. C. Ellis (Ed.). Implicit and explicit learning of languages. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Retrieved from https://www.scribd.com/doc/179355811/Krashen-1994-The-Input-Hypothesis-and-Its-Rivals.
Lambert, C. & Kormos, J. (2014). Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency in Task-based L2 Research: Toward More Developmentally Based Measures of Second Language Acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 35(5), 607-614. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu047
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). The Emergence of Complexity, Fluency, and Accuracy in the Oral and Written Production of Five Chinese Learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 590-619. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml029
Leech G. & Svartvik J. (2008). A communicative grammar of English (3rd ed). London: Longman.
Le, M. T. (2022).The Effects of Collaborative Writing to Learners’ Text in terms of Writing Accuracy from Sociocultural Theory Perspective. International Journal of TESOL & Education, 2(1), 54-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54855/ijte2202014
Littlemore, Jeannette (2009). Applying Cognitive Linguistics to Second Language Learning and Teaching. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Locke, E. A. (2009). Handbook of principles of organizational behavior (2nd ed). New York: Wiley.
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Nakamura, D. (2008). Awareness, input frequency, and construction learning: A replication and extension of Casenhiser and Goldberg (2005) to adult second language acquisition. Cognitive approaches to second/foreign language processing: Theory and pedagogy, 464-481. Landau, Germany: LAUD Linguistic Agency. Retrieved from https://jwcpe.academia.edu/DaisukeNakamura.
Rabiei, S. & Mohammadi, M. (2015). Corrective Feedback Types and Improving Grammatical Accuracy in Spoken Language. Journal of Educational and Management Studies, 5(1), 06-09. Retrieved from https://jems.science-line.com/attachments/article/28/J.%20Educ.%20Manage.%20Stud.,%205(1)%2006-09,%202015.pdf.
Riemer, N. (2010). Introducing semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Polat, B., & Kim, Y. (2014). Dynamics of Complexity and Accuracy: A Longitudinal Case Study of Advanced Untutored Development. Applied Linguistics, 35(2), 184–207. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt013.
Pica, T., Holliday, L., Lewis, N., & Morgenthaler, L. (1989). Comprehensible Output as an Outcome of Linguistic Demands on the Learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11(1), 63-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226310000783X.
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (3nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Skehan, P. & Foster, P. (2008). Complexity, accuracy, fluency and lexis in task-based performance: meta-analysis of the Ealing research. In Van Daele, S., Housen, A., Kuiken, F., Pierrard, M. & Vedder, I. (Eds.). Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluence in Second Language Use, Learning, & Teaching. Brussels: University of Brussels Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.32.09fos
Tawfik, M. (2022).Complexity and Interaction across Oral, Written and Online Discourse. International Journal of TESOL & Education, 2(1), 272-295. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54855/ijte.222117
Traugott, E. C. & Trousdale, G. (2013). Constructionalization and Constructional Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Yan, X., Kim, H. R., & Kim, J. Y. (2021). Dimensionality of speech fluency: Examining the relationships among complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) features of speaking performances on the Aptis test. Language Testing, 38(4), 485-510. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532220951508
Yuan, F., & Ellis, R. (2003). The Effects of Pre‐Task Planning and On‐Line Planning on Fluency, Complexity and Accuracy in L2 Monologic Oral Production. Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 1-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.1.1
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Nguyen Kim Chi An, Le Hoang Dung
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The copyright of all articles published in the International Journal of TESOL & Education (ijte) remains with the Authors, i.e. Authors retain full ownership of their article. Permitted third-party reuse of the open access articles is defined by the applicable Creative Commons (CC) end-user license which is accepted by the Authors upon submission of their paper. All articles in the ijte are published under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license, meaning that end users can freely share an article (i.e. copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and adapt it (i.e. remix, transform and build upon the material) on the condition that proper attribution is given (i.e. appropriate credit, a link to the applicable license and an indication if any changes were made; all in such a way that does not suggest that the licensor endorses the user or the use) and the material is only used for non-commercial purposes.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository, in a journal or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
