Abstract
In this chapter, I will first examine the total number of different speech acts contained in four textbooks series (Bumblebee, Ginger, Playway, Sunshine), as this will provide some initial indications on which of the textbooks may enable young EFL learners to encounter a variety of different speech acts and thus different pragmatic functions. I will then analyse requests and responses to requests, greetings and leave-takings, expressions of gratitude and responses to expressions of gratitude, apologies, suggestions and responses to suggestions and expressions of physical and mental states. This will be followed by a summary of the findings of this chapter.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In the curriculum, the categorization system for compulsory language functions is presented in a slightly different way than in this book. For example, the category of requests as defined in this book is represented by several different categories in the curriculum, namely (1) Informationen über Personen einholen [obtaining information about another person], (2) Informationen über Gegenstände einholen [obtaining information about things], (3) sich etwas wünschen/um Erlaubnis bitten [wishing for sth/asking for permission], (4) jemanden um etwas bitten [asking someone for something], (5) eine Person bitten etwas zu tun [asking another person to do something] (Thüringer Ministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft und Kultur 2010, pp. 14–17).
- 2.
I will use instances and occurrences as synonyms for the number of times a particular feature is included in a textbook.
- 3.
Her evaluation of pragmatic input in L2 textbooks several years later, showed that the situation had not improved much (Bardovi-Harlig 2017).
- 4.
Greetings and leave-takings are not included here, as the typical response to a greeting is another greeting and the same also applies to leave-takings. Expressions of mental and physical states are treated as independent utterances in this investigation, since most instances are expressions that are not parts of conversations.
- 5.
The low number of permission requests in the textbooks is particularly problematic for textbooks in use in Thuringia, since these requests are explicitly mentioned in the curriculum as compulsory elements.
- 6.
See Table 3.11 for definitions of address term categories.
- 7.
Since the focus of this investigation is on pragmatics, I will in general not comment on other aspects of textbook design that are also important. However, I would like to emphasize that the very good results overall of the Playway series concerning pragmatic content should not be seen as a general assessment of all other aspects of this series, since there are issues in these books that teachers and parents may find quite troubling. While the inclusion of texts in which the marriage of underage individuals as part of a storyline could be perceived in various ways and could be addressed in different and potentially useful ways in the classroom, other texts in Playway 4 in which a servant is asked to “kill Snow White and bring me her heart”(p.36), then visits a butcher’s and subsequently presents the heart on a dish to the person he works for seem needlessly brutal and disturbing. In addition, the negative portrayal of the step-mother in the same story is – while also true to the fairy tale original – something that could be unhelpful for children living in patchwork families or whose parents are in the process of separating.
- 8.
As the analysis of L2 learners’ greetings in Sect. 7.2.1 will show one learner used Good morning, Herr [Surname]. This indicates that at least some young learners would like to use gender title + surname when greeting an adult in English.
- 9.
I will provide some real-life examples here to illustrate the impact of inappropriate address term use. While still working at a British university, a topic that some of my native speaking colleagues frequently raised to me concerning German speakers studying at our institution was German students’ perceived disregard for colleagues’ academic achievements. If German students addressed colleagues who had doctorates or were professors by their surname, they would often use the gender title + surname and not the academic title + surname. This was perceived to be extremely impolite and inappropriate, because in contrast to German academic titles which actually include the gender title (e.g. Frau Professorin Schauer), in British English the gender title is dropped and generally the highest title is then used (e.g. Professor Schauer or Doctor Smith) if formal address terms are employed. At many German universities, just using the gender title and not using any of the academic titles may be seen as a sign of a good relationship with academic staff (although opinions by university staff members differ with regard to how appropriate they consider the gender title only address term to be). Thus, German students at the British institution were probably just transferring their L1 norms to the L2 and were not at all successful. Some of the comments that I frequently heard were “Why can’t colleagues at German universities teach them English address term use” or even more drastic “Why can’t German colleagues teach them some manners!”. The second example was mentioned to me a little while ago by a highly proficient learner of German who had transferred his L1 norms concerning the use of address terms for unmarried females from his Eastern European native language to German and had been subjected to some unpleasant reactions by the females he addressed. This illustrates that (a) even advanced L2 learners may struggle with address terms and (b) that this is an area that can have negative real-life consequences and should therefore be addressed. Awareness raising in that respect can never start too early. See also DuFon (2010) for an overview of address term issues in L2 pragmatics.
- 10.
All four textbook series clearly display an orientation towards British English by including visual signs (e.g. flags, landmark buildings, images of London, maps of British cities), traditional food choices (e.g. baked beans, fish and chips) and school uniforms.
- 11.
For example, if young learners have lost their parents in a shopping centre or on a beach and have managed to find an official that can help them, this person may say to them Let’s take a look around and see if we can spot your parents somewhere.
- 12.
The two categories included in the curriculum that match my category of expressing physical and mental states are Gefühle/Empfindungen ausdrücken [expressing emotions/feelings] and über das eigene Befinden Auskunft geben [providing information about one’s own physical/mental state] (Thüringer Ministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft und Kultur 2010, p. 16). Since the focus here is on providing information about one’s own physical or mental state, instances in which the physical or mental state of others is described are not included. For example, in Playway 3, there is picture story in which accompanying information is provided about one of the characters next to an image showing his facial expressions and posture, e.g. “Eddie is sad” (P3, p. 54). This was not included because reporting on how third persons are or feel is not part of the curriculum for EFL in Thuringian primary schools.
References
Aijmer, K. (1996). Conversational routines in English: Convention and creativity. London: Longman.
Aliyoun, S. (2018). Managing Hello and Goodbye: Investigating openings and closings in German and Iranian EFL textbooks. Paper presented at the Teaching and Learning L2 Pragmatics Conference at University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK.
Aschkar, S., Beattie, T., Kerler, N., Schröder, C., & Skejic, M. (2015). Sunshine: Pupil’s book 4. Berlin: Cornelsen.
Aschkar, S., Beattie, T., Kerler, N., & Schröder, C. (2016). Sunshine: Pupil’s book 3. Berlin: Cornelsen.
Baker, P. (2010). Sociolinguistics and corpus linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1996). Pragmatics and language teaching: Bringing pragmatics and pedagogy together. In L. F. Bouton (Ed.), Pragmatics and language learning (Monograph Series) (Vol. 7, pp. 21–39). Urbana-Champaign: Division of English as an International Language, Intensive English Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2001). Evaluating the empirical evidence. Grounds for instruction in pragmatics. In K. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics and language teaching (pp. 13–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2017). Acquisition of L2 pragmatics. In S. Loewsen & M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 224–245). Abingdon: Routledge.
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B. (1993). Learning the rules of academic talk: A longitudinal study of pragmatic change. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(3), 279–304. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100012122.
Bieswanger, M. (2015). Variational pragmatics and responding to thanks – revisited. Multilingua, 34(4), 527–546. https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2014-0106.
Caspari-Grote, K., Grandt, I., Kraaz, U., Neuber, C., Simon, C., & Völtz, I. (2013). Ginger: Pupil’s book 3. Berlin: Cornelsen.
Caspari-Grote, K., Grandt, I., Kraaz, U., Neuber, C., Simon, C., & Völtz, I. (2014). Ginger: Pupil’s book 4. Berlin: Cornelsen.
Clyne, M., Norrby, C., & Warren, J. (2009). Language and human relations: Styles of address in contemporary language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, A. D. (2018). Learning Pragmatics from native and nonnative language teachers. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Culpeper, J., & Gillings, M. (2018). Politeness Variation in English: A North-South divide? In V. Brezina, R. Love, & K. Aijmer (Eds.), Corpus approaches to contemporary British speech: Sociolinguistic studies of the Spoken BNC2014 (pp. 33–59). Abingdon: Routledge.
DuFon, M. A. (2010). The acquisition of address in a second language. In A. Trosborg (Ed.), Pragmatics across languages and cultures (pp. 309–333). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Ehlers, G., Kahstein, G., Muth, M., & Tait, H. (2013). Bumblebee: Textbook 3. Braunschweig: Schroedel Westermann.
Ehlers, G., Michailow-Drews, U., Tait, H., Schönau, M., Van Montague, A., & Zeich-Pelsis, A. (2017). Bumblebee: Textbook 4. Braunschweig: Schroedel Westermann.
Felix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2015). The language of service encounters: A pragmatic-discursive approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gerngross, G., Puchta, H., & Becker, C. (2013a). Playway 3: Pupil’s book. Stuttgart: Ernst Klett Verlag.
Gerngross, G., Puchta, H., & Becker, C. (2013b). Playway 4: Pupil’s book. Stuttgart: Ernst Klett Verlag.
Greif, E. B., & Gleason, J. B. (1980). Hi, thanks and goodbye: More routine information. Language in Society, 9(2), 159–166. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500008034.
Jautz, S. (2013). Thanking formulae in English: Explorations across varieties and genres. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Leech, G. (2014). The pragmatics of politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Limberg, H. (2016). Teaching how to apologize: EFL textbooks and pragmatic input. Language Teaching Research, 20(6), 700–718. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815590695.
Martínez Flor, A. (2010). Suggestions: How social norms affect pragmatic behaviour. In A. Martinez Flor & E. Uso Juan (Eds.), Speech act performance: Theoretical, empirical and methodological issues (pp. 257–274). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Mills, S. (2017). English politeness and class. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ninio, A., & Snow, C. E. (1996). Pragmatic development: Essays in developmental science. Boulder: Westview.
Philips, S. (2011). Incredible English: Starter class book “S” (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Philips, S., Grainger, K., Morgan, M., & Slattery, M. (2011). Incredible English: Class book 1 (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Philips, S., Grainger, K., Morgan, M., & Slattery, M. (2012). Incredible English: Class book 2 (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sadeghidizaj, S. (2014). The contribution of explicit instruction vs. implicit instruction to the Acquisition of Requests and Request Responses by EFL Students in Iran. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Lancaster University, UK.
Schauer, G. A., & Adolphs, S. (2006). Expressions of gratitude in corpus and DCT data: Vocabulary, formulaic sequences, and pedagogy. System, 34(1), 119–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2005.09.003.
Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129.
Schmidt, R. W. (1993). Consciousness, learning and interlanguage pragmatics. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage Pragmatics (pp. 21–42). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Temple, R. (2013). Very British problems: Making life awkward for ourselves one rainy day at a time. London: Sphere.
Thüringer Ministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft und Kultur. (2010). Lehrplan für die Grundschule und für die Förderschule mit dem Bildungsgang der Grundschule: Fremdsprache. Erfurt: Thüringer Ministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft und Kultur.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schauer, G.A. (2019). Results: Speech Acts in Textbooks. In: Teaching and Learning English in the Primary School. English Language Education, vol 18. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23257-3_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23257-3_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-23256-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-23257-3
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)