Volume 5, Issue 4 (12-2020)                   IJREE 2020, 5(4): 1-13 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Khandaghi Khameneh A, Fakhraee Faruji L. The Effect of Teaching Discourse Markers (DMs) on Speaking Achievement among Iranian Intermediate EFL Learners. IJREE 2020; 5 (4)
URL: http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-398-en.html
Department of English Language Teaching, Shahr-e-Qods Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract:   (4442 Views)
This study aimed to investigate the effect of teaching discourse markers (DMs) on Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ speaking achievement. In the first step, 60 homogeneous intermediate students out of 110 were chosen from a private English language institute and randomly divided into two equal groups, namely an experimental group and a control group. Then they were pretested through a researcher-made speaking test. During the treatment, the experimental group was taught DMs by conversations. Then, they found the DMs in transcriptions of conversations. Also, the researcher used a researcher-made booklet containing the instructional materials related to DMs to be taught to the learners. On the other hand, there was not any direct instruction to DMs to the students in the control group. They only narrated the assigned storybook, and performed conversations by role play. These posters were used based on the related topics of the learner’s textbooks. After the treatment which took 12 sessions, the researcher administered the modified version of the mentioned pre-test as the post-test to find out the effect of the treatment on the participants’ speaking achievement. When the data were collected, one-way ANCOVA was run to analyze them. The results showed that there was no significant difference between experimental and control group in the post-test. Indeed, the findings indicated that teaching discourse markers (DMs) did not have any effect on Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ speaking achievement.
Full-Text [PDF 490 kb]   (1318 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: General

1. Asik, A., & Cephe, P. T. (2013). Discourse markers and spoken English: Nonnative use in the Turkish EFL setting. English Language Teaching, 6(12), 144-159. doi: 10.5539/elt.v6n12p144 [DOI:10.5539/elt.v6n12p144]
2. Blakemore, D. (1987). Semantic constrains on relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.
3. Brown, D. H. (2001). Principles of language learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
4. Burns, A., & Joyce, H. (1997). Focus on speaking. Sydney: National Center for English Language Teaching and Research.
5. Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. J. (2006). Cambridge grammar of English: a comprehensive guide to spoken and written grammar and usage. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
6. Celce-Murcia, M. (2014). Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed.). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
7. Chalak, A., & Norouzi, Z. (2014). A contrastive analysis of English and Persian native speakers' use of gambits. Research in English Language Pedagogy, 2(1), 61-70. http://relp.khuisf.ac.ir/article_533607.html
8. Cullen, R., & Kuo, I. C. (2007). Spoken grammar and ELT course materials: A missing link? TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 361-386. [DOI:10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00063.x]
9. Dastjerdi, H. V., & Shirzad, M. (2010). The impact of explicit instruction of metadiscourse markers on EFL learners' writing performance. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 2(2), 1-15. https://www.magiran.com/paper/781388
10. De Klerk, V. (2005). Towards a corpus of Black South African English. Southern African Journal of Linguistics & Applied Language Studies 20(1-2), 25-35. doi: 10.2989/16073610209486296 [DOI:10.2989/16073610209486296]
11. Dickinson, L. (1987). Self-instruction in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. Dontcheva-Navratilova, O. (2012). Discourse Interpretation: Approaches and Applications. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
13. Ellis, R. (1984). Classroom second language development. Oxford: Pergamon.
14. Erman, B. (1987). Pragmatic expressions in English. A study of 'you know' you see' and 'mean' in face-to-face conversation. Stockholm studies in English 69. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.
15. Farhat, J., Asim Rai, M., & Arif, S. (2011). A corpus based study of discourse markers in British and Pakistani speech. International Journal of Language Studies, 5(4), 69-86. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260042226_A_corpus_based_study_of_discourse_markers_in_British_and_Pakistani_speech
16. Fraser, B. (1990). An approach to discourse markers. Journal of Pragmatics 14(3), 383- 395. doi: 10.1016/0378-2166(90)90096-V [DOI:10.1016/0378-2166(90)90096-V]
17. Fuller, J. M. (2003). The influence of speaker role on discourse marker use. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(1), 23-45. [DOI:10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00065-6]
18. Fung, L., & Carter, R. (2007). Discourse markers and spoken English: Native and learner use in pedagogic settings. Applied Linguistics, 28(3), 410-439. [DOI:10.1093/applin/amm030]
19. Hellermann, J., & Vergun, A. (2007). Language which is not taught: The discourse marker uses of beginning adult learners of English. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(1), 157-179. [DOI:10.1016/j.pragma.2006.04.008]
20. Innajih, A. (2007). The effect of conjunctive types on the English language reading comprehension of Libyan university students. [Online] Available: www.ecls.ncl.ac.uk/publish/text/TheEffectofConjunctive/.
21. Jarret, C. (2014). I mean, you know, I'm a conscientious person: links between use of "speech fillers" and personality. http://digest.bps.org.uk/2014/06/women-young-people-and-conscientious.html
22. Jones, C. (2010). Spoken discourse markers: What are they and why teach them? In Recent approaches to teaching and assessing speaking: Selected articles by the presenters of the IATEFL testing, evaluation and assessment special interest group conference in Famagusta, Cyprus 23-
23. 24 October 2009 (pp. 84-89). IATEFL (TEA SIG).
24. Khaghaninejad, M. S., & Mavadat, R. (2015). Using English discourse markers: a comparison of Persian and English dentistry authors. Theory and Practice in Language Studies 5(1), 97-109. http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0501.13 [DOI:10.17507/tpls.0501.13]
25. Lam, P. W. Y. (2009). Discourse particles in corpus data and textbooks: The case of well. Applied Linguistics, 31(2), 260-281. doi: 10.1093/applin/amp026 [DOI:10.1093/applin/amp026]
26. Lazaraton, A. (2001). Teaching oral skills. In Celce-Murcia, M. (Ed), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp.102-115). New York: Heinle and Heinle.
27. Louwerse, M., & Mitchell, H. H. (2003). Towards a taxonomy of a set of discourse markers in dialog: A theoretical and computational linguistic account. Discourse Processes, 35(2), 199-239. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326950DP3503_1 [DOI:10.1207/S15326950DP3503_1]
28. Luoma, S. (2004). Assessing speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511733017]
29. McCarthy, M. (1993). Discourse analysis for language teachers. Cambridge University Press.
30. Muller, S. (2005). Discourse markers in native and non-native English discourse. John Benjamins Publishing Company. [DOI:10.1075/pbns.138]
31. Namaziandost, E., Hosseini, E., & Utomo, D. W. (2020). A comparative effect of high involvement load versus lack of involvement load on vocabulary learning among Iranian sophomore EFL learners. Cogent Arts and Humanities, 7(1). [DOI:10.1080/23311983.2020.1715525]
32. Namaziandost, E., Pourhosein Gilakjani, A., & Hidayatullah (2020). Enhancing pre-intermediate EFL learners' reading comprehension through the use of Jigsaw technique. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 7(1), 1-15. doi: 10.1080/23311983.2020.1738833 [DOI:10.1080/23311983.2020.1738833]
33. Namaziandost, E., Rezvani, E., & Polemikou, A. (2020). The impacts of visual input enhancement, semantic input enhancement, and input flooding on L2 vocabulary among Iranian intermediate EFL learners. Cogent Education, 7(1). doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2020.1726606 [DOI:10.1080/2331186X.2020.1726606]
34. Namaziandost E., & Shafiee, S. (2018). Gender differences in the use of lexical hedges in academic spoken language among Iranian EFL learners: a comparative study. International Journal of Research in English Education (IJREE), 3(4), 64-80. http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-130-en.html [DOI:10.29252/ijree.3.4.63]
35. Namaziandost, E., Shatalebi, V., & Nasri, M. (2019). The impact of cooperative learning on developing speaking ability and motivation toward learning English. Journal of Language and Education, 5(3), 83-101. doi: [DOI:10.17323/jle.2019.9809]
36. Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37. O'Keeffe, A., McCarthy, M., & Carter, R. (2007). From corpus to classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511497650]
38. Östman, J. O. (1981). You know: a discourse functional approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. [DOI:10.1075/pb.ii.7]
39. Pazhakh, A. R., &Karimi, M. (2015). The effect of explicit teaching of discourse markers on Iranian EFL leaners' pragmatic fluency. Research and Analysis Journals, 1(1), 273-291. doi: 10.18535/ijmei/v1i6.04 [DOI:10.18535/ijmei/v1i6.04]
40. Prodromou, L. (2008). English as a lingua franca: a corpus-based analysis. London: Continuum. [DOI:10.1093/elt/ccn064]
41. Quirk, R. (1955). Colloquial English and communication. In B. Evans (ed.) Studies in Communication. London: Secker and Warbug.
42. Rajabi, P., & Salami, S. N. (2016). Gap-fillers instruction and Iranian intermediate EFL learners' speaking performance. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 3(1), 78-85.
43. Sadeghi, B., & Ramezan Yarandi, M. R. (2014). Analytical study on the relationship be-tween discourse markers and speaking fluency of Iranian EFL students. International Journal of Linguistics and Communication, 2(2), 101-123.
44. Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511611841]
45. Schourup, L. (1999). Discourse markers. Lingua, 107(3-4), 227-265. [DOI:10.1016/S0024-3841(96)90026-1]
46. Simin, S., & Tavangar, M. (2009). Metadiscourse knowledge and use in Iranian EFL writing. Asian EFL Journal, 11(4), 230-255. https://www.asian-efl-journal.com/main-editions-new/metadiscourse-knowledge-and-use-in-iranian-efl-writing/
47. Sun, W. (2013). The importance of discourse markers in English learning and teaching. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(11), 2136-2140. doi:10.4304/tpls.3.11.2136-2140 [DOI:10.4304/tpls.3.11.2136-2140]
48. Timmis, I. (2005). Towards a framework for teaching spoken grammar. ELT Journal, 59(2), 117-125. [DOI:10.1093/eltj/cci025]
49. Tsai, P. S., & Chu, W. H. (2017). The use of discourse markers among mandarin Chinese teachers, and Chinese as a second language and Chinese as a foreign language learner. Applied Linguistics, 38(5), 638-665. [DOI:10.1093/applin/amv057]
50. Webb, N. (1982). Student interaction and learning in small groups. Review of Educational Research, 52(3), 421-445. [DOI:10.2307/1170424]
51. Wierzbicka, A. (1991). Cross-cultural pragmatics: the semantics of human interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. [DOI:10.1515/9783112329764]
52. Wray, A. (2000). Formulaic sequences in second language teaching: Principles and practice. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), 463-489. doi: 10.1093/applin/21.4.463 [DOI:10.1093/applin/21.4.463]
53. Yazdizadeh, Z., Shakibaei G., & Namaziandost, E. (2020). Investigating the relationship between Iranian undergraduate TEFL learners' self-regulation and self-efficacy. International Journal of Research in English Education (IJREE), 5(3), 12-23. [DOI:10.29252/ijree.5.3.12]
54. http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-308-en.html

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | International Journal of Research in English Education

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb