1 | Course Title: | PRAGMATICS AND LANGUAGE TEACHING |
2 | Course Code: | ING6117 |
3 | Type of Course: | Optional |
4 | Level of Course: | Third Cycle |
5 | Year of Study: | 1 |
6 | Semester: | 1 |
7 | ECTS Credits Allocated: | 3 |
8 | Theoretical (hour/week): | 2 |
9 | Practice (hour/week) : | 0 |
10 | Laboratory (hour/week) : | 0 |
11 | Prerequisites: | none |
12 | Recommended optional programme components: | None |
13 | Language: | Turkish |
14 | Mode of Delivery: | Face to face |
15 | Course Coordinator: | Dr. Ögr. Üyesi ÇİĞDEM KARATEPE |
16 | Course Lecturers: | |
17 | Contactinformation of the Course Coordinator: |
Dr Öğr Üyesi Çiğdem KARATEPE ozlem1@uludag.edu.tr +224 2942264 Bursa Uludağ Universitesi Eğitim Fakültesi İngiliz Dili Eğitimi ABD Nilüfer Bursa |
18 | Website: | |
19 | Objective of the Course: | the aim of this course is to learn some of the notable theories (e.g. Speech Acts and Politeness Theory) in pragmatics and to understand the relationship between these theories and daily language use. It also aims to anable students to relate what they learned into EFL teaching. Another aim is to understand the studies about pragmatics and develop a critical stance. |
20 | Contribution of the Course to Professional Development | Recent research in the field have shown that EFL education cannot be limited to vocabulary and grammar teaching. This course in the PhD programme highlights the importance of Pragmatics to motivate PhD candidates to analyse the literature from the perspective of researcher-teacher so that they can too contribute to the field. By doing this the study aims to increase the number of young researchers in the field. |
21 | Learning Outcomes: |
|
22 | Course Content: |
Week | Theoretical | Practical |
1 | Introducing the course content. | |
2 | Explaining the concept of context of situation and its relationship to pragmatics. | |
3 | Introduction to research techniques in pragmatics. | |
4 | The Speech Act Theory | |
5 | The analysis of the studies on pragmatics. | |
6 | The studies on the Interlanguage speech acts. | |
7 | The Politeness Theory. | |
8 | The studies on interlanguage speech acts and politeness theory. | |
9 | Instructed pragmatics 1 | |
10 | Instructed pragmatics 2 | |
11 | The place of pragmatics in EFL coursebooks | |
12 | Developing teaching material for intsructed pragmatics and help learner gain pragmatics awareness. | |
13 | Assessment and evaluation pragmatics ability. | |
14 | Digital tools for instructed Pragmatics and the use of social media platforms for teaching. |
23 | Textbooks, References and/or Other Materials: |
Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Mahan-Taylor, R. (2003). Introduction to teaching pragmatics, English Teaching Forum, 37-39. Hilliard, A. (2017) Twelve activities for teaching the pragmatics of complaining to L2 learners. English Teaching Forum, pp.3-13. Karatepe, Ç. (2016) Indirectness in requests in complaint letters to the higher institution by Turkish EFL students. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, Vo. 232, pp. 354-361. Doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.050 Lo Castro, V. (2003). An introduction to pragmatics: Social action for language teachers. Michigan, USA: The University of Michigan Press. McConachy, T. (2009). Raising sociocultural awareness through contextual analysis: Some tools for teachers. ELT Journal. 63(2), 116-125. Doi: 10.1093/elt/ccno18 McConachy, T., & Hata, K. (2013). Addressing textbook representations of pragmatics and culture. ELT Journal, 67(3), 294–301. Ren, W. & Han, Z. (2016). The representation of pragmatic knowledge in recent ELT textbooks. ELT Journal. ??(?), 1-11 Roever, C. (2011). Testing of second language pragmatics: Past and future. Language Testing, 28(4), 463-481. Siegel, J. (2016). Pragmatic Activities for the speaking classroom. English Teaching Forum, 12-19. Tatsuki, D. (Ed.) (2019). Instructional material development in L2 pragmatics. In Taguchi, N. (Ed.) (2019). The Routledge Handbook of Second Langugae Acquisition and Pragmatics. London: Routledge. Taguchi, N. (2015). Instructed pragmatics at a glance: where instructional studies were, are, and should be going. Language Teaching 48(1), 1–50. Taguchi, N. (2011). Teaching pragmatics: Trends and issues. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 289-310. |
24 | Assesment |
TERM LEARNING ACTIVITIES | NUMBER | PERCENT |
Midterm Exam | 1 | 40 |
Quiz | 0 | 0 |
Homeworks, Performances | 1 | 30 |
Final Exam | 1 | 30 |
Total | 3 | 100 |
Contribution of Term (Year) Learning Activities to Success Grade | 70 | |
Contribution of Final Exam to Success Grade | 30 | |
Total | 100 | |
Measurement and Evaluation Techniques Used in the Course | One presentation and one final project. | |
Information | NORM-REFERENCED EVALUATION |
25 | ECTS / WORK LOAD TABLE |
Activites | NUMBER | TIME [Hour] | Total WorkLoad [Hour] |
Theoretical | 14 | 2 | 28 |
Practicals/Labs | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Self Study and Preparation | 7 | 6 | 42 |
Homeworks, Performances | 1 | 2 | 2 |
Projects | 1 | 5 | 5 |
Field Studies | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Midtermexams | 1 | 6 | 6 |
Others | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Final Exams | 1 | 6 | 6 |
Total WorkLoad | 95 | ||
Total workload/ 30 hr | 2,97 | ||
ECTS Credit of the Course | 3 |
26 | CONTRIBUTION OF LEARNING OUTCOMES TO PROGRAMME QUALIFICATIONS | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
LO: Learning Objectives | PQ: Program Qualifications |
Contribution Level: | 1 Very Low | 2 Low | 3 Medium | 4 High | 5 Very High |