The learners’ questionnaire included 23 which can be classified into five categories, each including four items as follows;
The last three questions target: a) importance of skills to learn, b) necessity of learning speech acts, and c) how movies facilitated learning speech acts. Thus the main results will be discussed under six sub-sections.
4.1.10. Comparing Usefulness of Explicit vs. Implicit Learning of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Invitations
Table 10 compares the EFL learners’ perceptions towards the usefulness of the explicit vs. implicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts of invitations. The results indicated that the EFL learners believed that speech acts invitations were useful irrespective of the method of teaching. The mean score for both explicit and implicit learning of the pragmatic features of the speech acts of invitations were 4. That is to say, the participants unanimously agreed that learning speech acts of invitations were very useful. The frequencies and percentages further supported this conclusion. All EFL learners (100%) selected the “very useful” choice when asked about the usefulness of the learning of speech acts of invitation. Consequently; the results of independent-samples t-test indicated that there was no difference between two means (t = 0.00, p = 1.00).
Table 10
Descriptive Statistics; Usefulness of Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Invitations by Groups
|
N
|
Fairly Useful
|
Very Useful
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
|
How useful is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of invitations in a target language?
|
Explicit
|
66
|
0
|
0.00
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
.00
|
Implicit
|
66
|
0
|
0.00
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
.00
|
|
Independent t-test = 0.00, p = 1.00
|
4.1.11. Comparing Usefulness of Explicit vs. Implicit Learning of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Apologies
The seventh item of the questionnaire asked EFL learners how useful they believed learning the pragmatic features of speech acts of apologies was. All 66 students believed that explicit and implicit learning of the pragmatic features of speech acts of apologies was “very useful”. That was why the results displayed in Table 11 indicated that 100 percent of respondents agreed with the usefulness of the explicit vs. implicit learning of speech acts of apologies. The results of independent-samples t-test; consequently, indicated that there was no difference between two means (t = 0.00, p = 1.00).
Table 11
Descriptive Statistics; Usefulness of Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Apologies by Groups
|
N
|
Fairly Useful
|
Very Useful
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
|
How useful is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of apologies in a target language?
|
Explicit
|
66
|
0
|
0.00
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
0.00
|
Implicit
|
66
|
0
|
0.00
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
0.00
|
|
Independent t-test = 0.00, p = 1.00
|
4.1.12. Comparing Usefulness of Explicit vs. Implicit Learning of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Request
Table 12 compares the EFL learners’ perceptions towards the usefulness of the explicit vs. implicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts of request. The results indicated that the EFL learners believed that speech acts of request were useful irrespective of the method of teaching. The mean score for both explicit and implicit learning of the pragmatic features of the speech acts of request were 4. That is to say, the participants, without any opposition, agreed that learning speech acts of request were very useful. The frequencies and percentages further supported this conclusion. All EFL learners (100%) selected the “very useful” choice when asked about the usefulness of the learning of speech acts of request. Consequently; the results of independent-samples t-test indicated that there was no difference between two means (t = 0.00, p = 1.00).
Table 12
Descriptive Statistics; Usefulness of Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Request by Groups
|
N
|
Fairly Useful
|
Very Useful
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
|
How useful is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of requests in a target language?
|
Explicit
|
66
|
0
|
0.00
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
0.00
|
Implicit
|
66
|
0
|
0.00
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
0.00
|
|
Independent t-test = 0.00, p = 1.00
|
4.1.13. Motivation in Explicit Learning of Speech Acts
Items 9 to 12 of the students’ questionnaire targeted how motivating it was to learn pragmatic features of speech acts in general, and also specific speech acts of invitations, apologies and requests. The following will discuss the results related to stimulation in explicit vs. implicit learning of speech acts.
Table 13 displays the frequencies, percentages and descriptive statistics for the items related to “stimulation in explicit learning of speech acts”. Based on these results it can be concluded that all EFL learners believed that the explicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts (Mean = 4), speech acts of invitation (Mean = 4) and speech acts of requests (Mean = 4) were “very motivating”. However, they were not unanimous on their motivation regarding the explicit learning of speech acts of apologies (Mean = 3.67).
Table 13
Descriptive Statistics: Motivation in Explicit Learning of Speech Acts
|
|
Fairly Motivating
|
Very Motivating
|
|
|
|
N
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
How motivating is it to learn the pragmatic features of the specific speech acts?
|
66
|
0
|
0
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
.00
|
How motivating is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of invitations in a target language?
|
66
|
0
|
0
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
.00
|
How motivating is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of apologies in a target language?
|
66
|
22
|
33.3
|
44
|
66.7
|
3.67
|
.475
|
How motivating is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of requests in a target language?
|
66
|
0
|
0
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
.00
|
Naturally, 100 percent of respondents believed that explicit learning of speech acts in general and speech acts of invitations and request were “very motivating”; however, 33.3 percent of respondents believed that explicit learning of speech acts of apologies was “fairly motivating”, and another 66.7 percent found explicit learning of speech acts of apologies was “very motivating”.
4.1.14. Motivation in Implicit Learning of Speech Acts
As displayed in Table 14, the EFL learners, without opposition, believed that they implicit learning of speech acts in general, and also speech acts of invitations and request were “very motivating”. The mean scores for the pragmatic features of speech acts, speech acts of invitations and requests were all equal to 4. However, the EFL learners were not unanimous in implicit learning of speech acts of apologies. Their mean score was 3.80.
Table 14
Descriptive Statistics: Motivation in Implicit Learning of Speech Acts
|
|
Fairly Motivating
|
Very Motivating
|
|
|
|
N
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
How motivating is it to learn the pragmatic features of the specific speech acts?
|
66
|
0
|
0
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
.00
|
How motivating is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of invitations in a target language?
|
66
|
0
|
0
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
.00
|
How motivating is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of apologies in a target language?
|
66
|
13
|
19.7
|
53
|
80.3
|
3.80
|
.401
|
How motivating is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of requests in a target language?
|
66
|
0
|
0
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
.00
|
Consequently, all respondents (100%) believed that implicit learning of speech acts in general and speech acts of invitations and request were “very motivating”; however, 19.7 percent of respondents believed that implicit learning of speech acts of apologies was “fairly motivating”, and another 80.3 percent found explicit learning of speech acts of apologies was “very motivating”.
4.1.15. Comparing Motivation in Explicit vs. Implicit Learning of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts
Table 15 compares the EFL learners’ perceptions towards the motivation in explicit vs. implicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts. The results indicated that the EFL learners, with an accord, believed explicit (Mean = 4) and implicit (Mean = 4) learning of pragmatic features of speech acts were “very motivating”. The percentages also supported this conclusion. All participants (100 %) believed that explicit and implicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts were motivating. Consequently, the results of independent-samples t-test indicated that there was no difference between two means (t = 0.00, p = 1.00).
Table 15
Descriptive Statistics; Motivation in Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts by Groups
|
N
|
Fairly Motivating
|
Very Motivating
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
|
How motivating is it to learn the pragmatic features of the specific speech acts?
|
Explicit
|
66
|
0
|
0
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
.00
|
Implicit
|
66
|
0
|
0
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
.00
|
|
Independent t-test = 0.00, p = 1.00
|
4.1.16. Comparing Motivation in Explicit vs. Implicit Learning of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Invitations
Table 16 compares the EFL learners’ perceptions towards the motivation in the explicit vs. implicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts of invitations. The results indicated that the EFL learners believed that speech acts invitations were motivating irrespective of the method of teaching. The mean score for both motivation in explicit and implicit learning of the pragmatic features of the speech acts of invitations were 4. That is to say, the participants unanimously agreed that learning speech acts of invitations were “very motivating”. The frequencies and percentages further supported this conclusion. All EFL learners (100%) selected the “very motivating” choice when asked about the motivation in the learning of speech acts of invitation. Consequently; the results of independent-samples t-test indicated that there was no difference between two means (t = 0.00, p = 1.00).
Table 16
Descriptive Statistics; Motivation in Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Invitations by Groups
|
N
|
Fairly Motivating
|
Very Motivating
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
|
How motivating is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of invitations in a target language?
|
Explicit
|
66
|
0
|
0.00
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
.00
|
Implicit
|
66
|
0
|
0.00
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
.00
|
|
Independent t-test = 0.00, p = 1.00
|
4.1.17. Comparing Motivation in Explicit vs. Implicit Learning of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Apologies
The results displayed in Table 17 indicated that the EFL learners believed that implicit learning of speech acts of apologies was more motivating (Mean = 3.80) than the using an explicit method (Mean = 3.67). The frequencies and percentages further supported EFL learners’ preference over an implicit method. The results showed that 19.7 percent of respondents believed that implicit learning of apologies was “fairly motivating”, and another 80.3% agreed with the idea that implicit learning of apologies was “very motivating”; while the percentages for the explicit learning were 33.3 and 66.7. Despite the differences discussed above, the results of independent-samples t-test indicated that there was not any significant difference between two means (t = 1.78, p = .077).
Table 17
Descriptive Statistics; Motivation in Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Apologies by Groups
|
N
|
Fairly Motivating
|
Very Motivating
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
|
How motivating is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of apologies in a target language?
|
Explicit
|
66
|
22
|
33.3
|
44
|
66.7
|
3.67
|
.475
|
Implicit
|
66
|
13
|
19.7
|
53
|
80.3
|
3.80
|
0.401
|
|
Independent t-test = 1.78, p = 0.077
|
4.1.18. Comparing Motivation in Explicit vs. Implicit Learning of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Request
Table 18 compares the EFL learners’ perceptions towards the motivation in the explicit vs. implicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts of request. The results indicated that the EFL learners believed that learning speech acts of request was motivating irrespective of the method of teaching. The mean score for both explicit and implicit learning of the pragmatic features of the speech acts of request were 4. That is to say, the participants, without any opposition, agreed that learning speech acts of request were “very motivating”. The frequencies and percentages further supported this conclusion. All EFL learners (100%) selected the “very motivating” choice when asked about the motivation in the learning of speech acts of request. Consequently; the results of independent-samples t-test indicated that there was no difference between two means (t = 0.00, p = 1.00).
Table 18
Descriptive Statistics; Motivation in Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Request by Groups
|
N
|
Fairly Motivating
|
Very Motivating
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
|
How motivating is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of requests in a target language?
|
Explicit
|
66
|
0
|
0.00
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
0.00
|
Implicit
|
66
|
0
|
0.00
|
66
|
100
|
4
|
0.00
|
|
Independent t-test = 0.00, p = 1.00
|
4.1.19. Difficulty of Explicit Learning of Speech Acts
Items 13 to 16 of the students’ questionnaire targeted how difficult it was to learn pragmatic features of speech acts in general, and also specific speech acts of invitations, apologies and requests. Unlike all results discussed so far, the EFL learners’ perceptions towards the difficulty of explicit and implicit learning of speech acts show significant differences between the two methods; whose results are discussed below.
Table 19 displays the frequencies, percentages and descriptive statistics for the items related to difficulty of explicit learning of speech acts, and speech acts of invitations, apologies and requests. Based on these results it can be concluded that majority of the EFL learners (60.6%) believed that it was “not very difficult” to learn speech acts. Another 39.4 percent claimed that it was “not at all difficult” to learn speech acts. The mean for the students’ perception on difficulty of learning speech acts was 1.91.
Table 19
Descriptive Statistics: Motivation in Explicit Learning of Speech Acts
|
|
Not at all Difficult
|
Not very Difficult
|
|
|
|
N
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
How difficult is it to learn the pragmatic features of the specific speech acts?
|
66
|
26
|
39.4
|
40
|
60.6
|
1.61
|
.492
|
How difficult is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of invitations in a target language?
|
66
|
26
|
39.4
|
40
|
60.6
|
1.61
|
.492
|
How difficult is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of apologies in a target language?
|
66
|
26
|
39.4
|
40
|
60.6
|
1.61
|
.492
|
How difficult is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of requests in a target language?
|
66
|
26
|
39.4
|
40
|
60.6
|
1.61
|
.492
|
4.1.20. Difficulty of Implicit Learning of Speech Acts
The results displayed in Table 20 are opposite to the ones discussed above for the explicit learning of speech acts. Majority of the EFL learners (65.2%) believed that it was “fairly difficult” to implicitly learn pragmatic features of specific speech acts. Another 34.8 percent estimated implicit learning of pragmatic features of specific speech acts as “very difficult”. Their mean score was 3.35.
Regarding the implicit learning of speech acts of invitations, the results indicated that majority of the EFL learners (98.5%) believed that it was “fairly difficult” to learn pragmatic features of speech acts of invitations implicitly. Another 1.5 percent estimated implicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts of invitation as “very difficult”. Their mean score was 3.02.
Table 20
Descriptive Statistics: Difficulty of Implicit Learning of Speech Acts
|
|
Fairly Difficult
|
Very Difficult
|
|
|
|
N
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
How difficult is it to learn the pragmatic features of the specific speech acts?
|
66
|
43
|
65.2
|
23
|
34.8
|
3.35
|
.480
|
How difficult is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of invitations in a target language?
|
66
|
65
|
98.5
|
1
|
1.5
|
3.02
|
.123
|
How difficult is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of apologies in a target language?
|
66
|
21
|
31.8
|
44
|
66.7
|
1.70
|
.495
|
How difficult is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of requests in a target language?
|
66
|
53
|
80.3
|
13
|
19.7
|
3.20
|
.401
|
The results displayed in Table 4.30 also indicated that majority of the EFL learners (66.7%) believed that it was “very difficult” to learn pragmatic features of speech acts of apologies implicitly. Another 31.8 percent estimated implicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts of apologies as “fairly difficult”. Their mean score was 1.70.
Regarding the implicit learning of speech acts of request, the results indicated that majority of the EFL learners (80.3%) believed that it was “fairly difficult” to learn pragmatic features of speech acts of request implicitly. Another 19.7 percent estimated implicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts of requests as “very difficult”. Their mean score was 3.20.
4.1.21. Comparing Difficulty of Explicit vs. Implicit Learning of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts
Table 21 compares the EFL learners’ perceptions towards the difficulty of explicit vs. implicit learning of pragmatic features of specific speech acts. The results indicated that the EFL learners believed that it was easier to learn pragmatic features of specific speech acts explicitly (Mean = 1.61 vs. Mean = 3.35). The percentages also supported this conclusion; while EFL learners believed that it was “not at all difficult” (39.4 %), and “not very difficult” (60.6 %) to learn specific speech acts explicitly, majority of them believed that it was “fairly difficult” (65.2 %) and “very difficult” (34.8 %) to learn specific speech acts implicitly. The results of independent-samples t-test (t = 20.58, p = .000) indicated that it was significantly easier to learn specific speech acts explicitly.
Table 21
Descriptive Statistics; Difficulty of Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts by Groups
|
Not at all
|
Not very
|
Fairly difficult
|
Very Difficult
|
Mean
|
SD
|
How difficult is it to learn the pragmatic features of the specific speech acts?
|
Explicit
|
26
(39.4%)
|
40
(60.6%)
|
0
|
0
|
1.61
|
.492
|
Implicit
|
0
|
0
|
43
(65.2%)
|
23
(34.8%)
|
3.35
|
.480
|
Independent t-test = 20.58, p = .000
|
4.1.22. Comparing Difficulty of Explicit vs. Implicit Learning of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Invitations
Table 22 compares the EFL learners’ perceptions towards the difficulty of explicit vs. implicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts of invitations. The results indicated that the EFL learners believed that it was easier to learn pragmatic features of speech acts of invitations explicitly (Mean = 1.61 vs. Mean = 3.02). The percentages also supported this conclusion; while EFL learners believed that it was “not at all difficult” (39.4 %), and “not very difficult” (60.6 %) to learn speech acts of invitations explicitly, almost all of them believed that it was “fairly difficult” (98.5 %) and “very difficult” (1.5 %) to learn speech acts of invitations implicitly. The results of independent-samples t-test (t = 22.55, p = .000) indicated that it was significantly easier to learn specific speech acts explicitly.
Table 22
Descriptive Statistics; Difficulty of Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Invitations by Groups
|
Not at all
|
Not very
|
Fairly difficult
|
Very Difficult
|
Mean
|
SD
|
|
How difficult is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of invitations in a target language?
|
Explicit
|
26
(39.4%)
|
40
(60.6%)
|
0
|
0
|
1.61
|
.492
|
Implicit
|
0
|
0
|
65
(98.5%)
|
1
(1.5%)
|
3.02
|
.123
|
|
Independent t-test = 22.55, p = .000
|
4.1.23. Comparing Difficulty of Explicit vs. Implicit Learning of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Apologies
The results displayed in Table 23 indicated that the EFL learners believed that explicit and implicit learning of speech acts of apologies was almost equally difficult (Mean = 1.61 vs. Mean = 1.70). The frequencies and percentages further supported the results. Majority of the EFL learners (60.6%) believed that explicit learning of speech acts of apologies was “not very difficult”. The percentage for the implicit learning of apologies was 66.7%. The participants almost equally believed that it was “not at all difficult” to learn speech acts of apologies explicitly (39.4%) nor implicitly (31.8). Despite these minor differences, the results of independent-samples t-test indicated that there was not any significant difference between two means (t = 1.05, p = .292).
Table 23
Descriptive Statistics; Difficulty of Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Apologies by Groups
|
N
|
No at all difficult
|
Not very difficult
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
|
How difficult is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of apologies in a target language?
|
Explicit
|
66
|
26
|
39.4
|
40
|
60.6
|
1.61
|
.492
|
Implicit
|
66
|
21
|
31.9
|
44
|
66.7
|
1.70
|
.495
|
|
Independent t-test = 1.78, p = 0.077
|
4.1.24. Comparing Difficulty of Explicit vs. Implicit Learning of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Request
Table 24 compares the EFL learners’ perceptions towards the difficulty of explicit vs. implicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts of requests. The results indicated that the EFL learners believed that it was easier to learn pragmatic features of speech acts of requests explicitly (Mean = 1.61 vs. Mean = 3.20). The percentages also supported this conclusion; while EFL learners believed that it was “not at all difficult” (39.4 %), and “not very difficult” (60.6 %) to learn speech acts of requests explicitly, majority of them believed that it was “fairly difficult” (80.3 %) and “very difficult” (19.7 %) to learn speech acts of requests implicitly. The results of independent-samples t-test (t = 20.35, p = .000) indicated that it was significantly easier to learn specific speech acts explicitly.
Table 24
Descriptive Statistics; Difficulty of Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Request by Groups
|
Not at all
|
Not very
|
Fairly difficult
|
Very Difficult
|
Mean
|
SD
|
|
How difficult is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of requests in a target language?
|
Explicit
|
26
(39.4%)
|
40
(60.6%)
|
0
|
0
|
1.61
|
.492
|
Implicit
|
0
|
0
|
53
(80.3%)
|
13
(19.7%)
|
3.20
|
.401
|
|
Independent t-test = 20.35, p = .000
|
4.1.25. Importance of Explicit Learning of Speech Acts
Items 17 to 20 of the students’ questionnaire targeted how important it was to learn pragmatic features of speech acts in general, and also specific speech acts of invitations, apologies and requests. The following will discuss the results related to importance of explicit vs. implicit learning of speech acts.
Table 25 displays the frequencies, percentages and descriptive statistics for the items related to “importance of explicit learning of speech acts”. Based on these results it can be concluded that majority EFL learners believed that the explicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts (Mean = 3.88), speech acts of invitation (Mean = 3.88), speech acts of apologies (Mean = 3.88) and speech acts of requests (Mean = 3.89) were important.
Table 25
Descriptive Statistics: Importance of Explicit Learning of Speech Acts
|
|
Fairly Important
|
Very Important
|
|
|
|
N
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
How important is it to learn the pragmatic features of the specific speech acts?
|
66
|
8
|
12.1
|
58
|
87.9
|
3.88
|
.329
|
How important is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of invitations in a target language?
|
66
|
8
|
12.1
|
58
|
87.9
|
3.88
|
.329
|
How important is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of apologies in a target language?
|
66
|
8
|
12.1
|
58
|
87.9
|
3.88
|
.329
|
How important is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of requests in a target language?
|
66
|
7
|
10.6
|
59
|
89.4
|
3.89
|
.310
|
The frequencies and percentages further supported the descriptive results discussed above. Regarding the explicit learning of pragmatic features of specific speech acts, and speech acts of invitations and apologies, 87.9 percent of respondents believed that they were “very important”. Furthermore, another 12.1% attached “fairly important” to these speech acts.
However, the percentages for the explicit learning of speech acts of requests were a bit different. Majority of the EFL learners; i.e. 89.4 percent claimed that explicit learning of speech acts of requests was “very important”, and another 10.6 percent estimated it as “fairly important”.
4.1.26. Importance of Implicit Learning of Speech Acts
Table 26 displays the frequencies, percentages and descriptive statistics for the items related to “importance of implicit learning of speech acts”. Based on these results it can be concluded that majority EFL learners believed that the explicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts (Mean = 3.80), speech acts of invitation (Mean = 3.80), speech acts of apologies (Mean = 3.80) and speech acts of requests (Mean = 3.80) were important.
Table 26
Descriptive Statistics: Importance of Implicit Learning of Speech Acts
|
|
Fairly Important
|
Very Important
|
|
|
|
N
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
How important is it to learn the pragmatic features of the specific speech acts?
|
66
|
13
|
19.7
|
53
|
80.3
|
3.80
|
.401
|
How important is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of invitations in a target language?
|
66
|
13
|
19.7
|
53
|
80.3
|
3.80
|
.401
|
How important is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of apologies in a target language?
|
66
|
13
|
19.7
|
53
|
80.3
|
3.80
|
.401
|
How important is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of requests in a target language?
|
66
|
13
|
19.7
|
53
|
80.3
|
3.80
|
.401
|
The frequencies and percentages further supported the descriptive results discussed above. Regarding the implicit learning of pragmatic features of specific speech acts, and speech acts of invitations, apologies and requests, 80.3 percent of respondents believed that they were “very important”; and another 19.7% attached “fairly important” to these speech acts.
4.1.27. Comparing Importance of Explicit vs. Implicit Learning of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts
Table 27 compares the EFL learners’ perceptions towards the importance of explicit vs. implicit learning of pragmatic features of specific speech acts. The results indicated that the EFL learners believed explicit learning of specific speech acts (Mean = 3.88) was more important than its implicit method (Mean = 3.80). The percentages also supported this conclusion. A higher percentage of participants (87.9 %) believed that explicit learning of pragmatic features of specific speech acts were “very important”, while the same percentage for the implicit method was 80.3. Despite these minor differences, the results of independent-samples t-test indicated that there was no difference between two means (t = 1.18, p = .237).
Table 27
Descriptive Statistics; Importance of Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts by Groups
|
N
|
Fairly Important
|
Very Important
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
|
How important is it to learn the pragmatic features of the specific speech acts?
|
Explicit
|
66
|
8
|
12.1
|
58
|
87.9
|
3.88
|
.329
|
Implicit
|
66
|
13
|
19.7
|
53
|
80.3
|
3.80
|
.401
|
|
Independent t-test = 1.18, p = .237
|
4.1.28. Comparing Importance of Explicit vs. Implicit Learning of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Invitations
Table 28 compares the EFL learners’ perceptions towards the importance of explicit vs. implicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts of invitation. The results indicated that the EFL learners believed explicit learning of speech acts of invitation (Mean = 3.88) was more important than its implicit method (Mean = 3.80). The percentages also supported this conclusion. A higher percentage of participants (87.9 %) believed that explicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts of invitations were “very important”, while the same percentage for the implicit method was 80.3. Despite these minor differences, the results of independent-samples t-test indicated that there was no difference between two means (t = 1.18, p = .237).
Table 28
Descriptive Statistics; Importance of Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Invitations by Groups
|
N
|
Fairly Important
|
Very Important
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
|
How important is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of invitations in a target language?
|
Explicit
|
66
|
8
|
12.1
|
58
|
87.9
|
3.88
|
.329
|
Implicit
|
66
|
13
|
19.7
|
53
|
80.3
|
3.80
|
.401
|
|
Independent t-test = 0.00, p = 1.00
|
4.1.29. Comparing Importance of Explicit vs. Implicit Learning of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Apologies
Table 29 compares the EFL learners’ perceptions towards the importance of explicit vs. implicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts of apologies. The results indicated that the EFL learners believed explicit learning of speech acts of apologies (Mean = 3.88) was more important than its implicit method (Mean = 3.80). The percentages also supported this conclusion. A higher percentage of participants (87.9 %) believed that explicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts of apologies were “very important”, while the same percentage for the implicit method was 80.3. Despite these minor differences, the results of independent-samples t-test indicated that there was no difference between two means (t = 1.18, p = .237).
Table 29
Descriptive Statistics; Importance of Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Apologies by Groups
|
N
|
Fairly Important
|
Very Important
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
|
How important is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of apologies in a target language?
|
Explicit
|
66
|
8
|
12.1
|
58
|
87.9
|
3.88
|
.329
|
Implicit
|
66
|
13
|
19.7
|
53
|
80.3
|
3.80
|
.401
|
|
Independent t-test = 1.78, p = 0.077
|
4.1.30. Comparing Importance of Explicit vs. Implicit Learning of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Request
Table 30 compares the EFL learners’ perceptions towards the importance of explicit vs. implicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts of requests. The results indicated that the EFL learners believed explicit learning of speech acts of invitation (Mean = 3.89) was more important than its implicit method (Mean = 3.80). The percentages also supported this conclusion. A higher percentage of participants (89.4 %) believed that explicit learning of pragmatic features of speech acts of apologies were “very important”, while the same percentage for the implicit method was 80.3. Despite these minor differences, the results of independent-samples t-test indicated that there was no difference between two means (t = 1.45, p = .077).
Table 30
Descriptive Statistics; Importance of Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts of Request by Groups
|
N
|
Fairly Important
|
Very Important
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
|
How important is it to learn the pragmatic features of the speech act of requests in a target language?
|
Explicit
|
66
|
7
|
10.6
|
59
|
89.4
|
3.89
|
.310
|
Implicit
|
66
|
13
|
19.7
|
53
|
80.3
|
3.80
|
.401
|
|
Independent t-test = 0.00, p = 1.00
|
4.1.31. Important Skills to be Taught in English Classes
Item 21 asked EFL learners what the most important topics/skills are to leaner in English classes. Based on the results displayed in Table 31 it can be concluded that majority of the respondents believed that “grammar and speaking” were the most important topics/skills to be learnt in English classes both explicitly (83.3%) and implicitly (74.2%). This was followed by “pragmatics and grammar”; i.e. 16.7% explicitly and 25.8% implicitly. None of the respondents attached importance to “vocabulary & reading” and “listening and writing”.
Table 31
Frequencies and Percentages of Important Topics/Skills to be Learnt in English Classes
|
What do you think is important to learn in English class?
|
Total
|
Grammar &
Speaking
|
Vocabulary & Reading
|
Listening & Writing
|
Pragmatics & Grammar
|
Group
|
Explicit
|
Count
|
55
|
0
|
0
|
11
|
66
|
%
|
83.3%
|
0%
|
0%
|
16.7%
|
100.0%
|
Implicit
|
Count
|
49
|
0
|
0
|
17
|
66
|
%
|
74.2%
|
0%
|
0%
|
25.8%
|
100.0%
|
Total
|
Count
|
104
|
0
|
0
|
28
|
132
|
%
|
78.8%
|
0%
|
0%
|
21.2%
|
100.0%
|
4.1.32. Necessity of Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts
Item 22 of the students’ questionnaire targeted if learning pragmatic features of the specific speech acts in English class was necessary. The results, as displayed in Table 32 indicated that the EFL learners believed that explicit learning of pragmatic features of the specific speech acts was more necessary (Mean = 3.85) than the implicit one (Mean = 3.74). The percentages also supported these conclusions. A higher percentage of respondents (84.8% vs. 74.2%) believed that explicit learning of pragmatic features of the specific speech acts was “very necessary” than the implicit one. The results of independent-samples t-test (t = 1.51, p = .133); however, indicated that the differences were not statistically significant.
Table 32
Descriptive Statistics; Necessity of Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts by Groups
|
N
|
Fairly Necessary
|
Very Necessary
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
|
Is learning pragmatic features of the specific speech acts in English class necessary?
|
Explicit
|
66
|
10
|
15.2
|
56
|
84.8
|
3.85
|
.361
|
Implicit
|
66
|
17
|
25.8
|
49
|
74.2
|
3.74
|
.441
|
|
Independent t-test = 1.51, p = .133
|
4.1.33. Suitability of Movies in Learning Pragmatic Features of Speech Acts
Item 23 of the students’ questionnaire targeted if movies were appropriate tools for learning pragmatics. The results, as displayed in Table 33 indicated that the EFL learners believed that movies were more appropriate in explicit classes (Mean = 3.85) than the implicit one (Mean = 3.75). The percentages also supported these conclusions. A higher percentage of respondents (84.8% vs. 74.2%) believed that movies were more appropriate in explicit classes. The results of independent-samples t-test (t = 1.35, p = .177); however, indicated that the differences were not statistically significant.
Table 33
Descriptive Statistics; Suitability of Movies in Learning Pragmatics by Groups
|
N
|
Fairly Necessary
|
Very Necessary
|
Mean
|
Std. Deviation
|
Freq.
|
%
|
Freq.
|
%
|
|
Is the use of movies appropriate in learning pragmatics?
|
Explicit
|
66
|
10
|
15.2
|
56
|
84.8
|
3.85
|
.361
|
Implicit
|
66
|
16
|
24.2
|
49
|
74.2
|
3.75
|
.434
|
|
Independent t-test = 1.35, p = .177
|
Exploring Second Research Question
What are teachers’ perceptions regarding explicit versus implicit speech acts?
A questionnaire with 24 items were distributed among six university teachers. The questionnaire included three sections; demographic information (5 items), perceptions towards teaching and learning pragmatics (13 items) and methods and techniques used in classes (6 items).
The results of the demographic section of the questionnaire indicated that all six participants were female, one of them had a teaching experience less than five years, another one between 6 to 10 years, two had teaching experiences between 10 to 15 years, and other two had taught more than 15 years. Two of the teachers had M.A., and the rest were Ph.D. holders. None of them studied overseas and all of them received knowledge on pragmatics during their studies. Table 34 summarizes the information discussed above.
Table 34
Demographic Information of Teachers
Gender
|
Male
|
Female
|
|
|
0
|
6
|
|
|
Teaching
Experience
|
< 5
|
6 to 10
|
11 to 15
|
> 15
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
Degree
|
B.A.
|
M.A.
|
Ph.D.
|
|
0
|
2
|
4
|
|
Studies
Overseas
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
|
6
|
0
|
|
|
Received
Pragmatics
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
|
0
|
6
|
|
|
Table 35 displays the frequencies and percentages for the EFL teachers’ perceptions towards teaching pragmatics. Based on these results it can be concluded that;
1: Regarding the first question as “I believe learning English means learning grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation” the respondents were divided into two groups; 50% agreed with the idea, while another 50% strongly disagreed.
2: On second question as “I think that linguistic knowledge is as important as the knowledge of how to use the language”, all participants agreed or strongly agreed with it.
3: Answering the third question as “I often correct the mistakes my students make when they use inappropriate words although the sentences are grammatically correct”, 66.7% of teachers agreed and another 33.3% were neutral.
4: When answering the fourth question as “I don’t think I know how to provide students with cultural knowledge and appropriate language use” majority of the teachers; i.e. 83.3% disagreed and strongly disagreed and only 16.7% agreed with this idea.
5: Regarding the fifth question as “I think raising students’ awareness of getting information on culture and appropriate language use is more useful than teaching specific pragmatic knowledge” majority of the teachers (66.7%) agreed or strongly agreed, while 33.3% disagreed with this idea.
6: On the sixth question as “I want my students to speak English like native speakers” 66.7% were neutral and another 33.3% disagreed.
Table 35
Frequencies and Percentages of Teachers’ Perceptions towards Teaching Pragmatics
|
Choice
|
Total
|
Strongly Disagree
|
Disagree
|
Neutral
|
Agree
|
Strongly Agree
|
|
I believe learning English means learning grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation
|
Count
|
3
|
0
|
0
|
3
|
0
|
6
|
%
|
50.0%
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
50.0%
|
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
I think that linguistic knowledge is as important as the knowledge of how to use the language
|
Count
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
4
|
2
|
6
|
%
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
66.7%
|
33.3%
|
100.0%
|
I often correct the mistakes my students make when they use inappropriate words although the sentences are grammatically
|
Count
|
0
|
0
|
2
|
4
|
0
|
6
|
%
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
33.3%
|
66.7%
|
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
I don’t think I know how to provide students with cultural knowledge and appropriate language use
|
Count
|
3
|
2
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
6
|
%
|
50.0%
|
33.3%
|
0.0%
|
16.7%
|
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
I think raising students’ awareness of getting information on culture and appropriate language use is more useful than
|
Count
|
0
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
6
|
%
|
0.0%
|
33.3%
|
0.0%
|
33.3%
|
33.3%
|
100.0%
|
I want my students to speak English like native speakers
|
Count
|
0
|
2
|
4
|
0
|
0
|
6
|
%
|
0.0%
|
33.3%
|
66.7%
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
I think teaching English communicatively is not as important as teaching grammatical points and vocabulary items
|
Count
|
3
|
3
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
6
|
%
|
50.0%
|
50.0%
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
I believe teachers should teach pragmatic knowledge when students reach a certain level of language proficiency
|
Count
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
4
|
1
|
6
|
%
|
0.0%
|
16.7%
|
0.0%
|
66.7%
|
16.7%
|
100.0%
|
I think it is important for learners of English to keep their identity and culture
|
Count
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
4
|
2
|
6
|
%
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
66.7%
|
33.3%
|
100.0%
|
I think learners of English as a second language need to understand other Englishes apart from native English
|
Count
|
1
|
0
|
4
|
1
|
0
|
6
|
%
|
16.7%
|
0.0%
|
66.7%
|
16.7%
|
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
I think native speakers of English need to understand the culture of speakers of English as a second language
|
Count
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
3
|
3
|
6
|
%
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
50.0%
|
50.0%
|
100.0%
|
I think my way of learning and teaching pragmatics in particular and English in general is influenced by my mother tongue
|
Count
|
0
|
0
|
4
|
2
|
0
|
6
|
%
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
66.7%
|
33.3%
|
0.0%
|
100.0%
|
I think the textbooks used at the Faculty contain adequate pragmatic information
|
Count
|
0
|
4
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
6
|
%
|
0.0%
|
66.7%
|
0.0%
|
16.7%
|
16.7%
|
100.0%
|
Total
|
Count
|
10
|
14
|
14
|
29
|
11
|
78
|
%
|
12.8%
|
17.9%
|
17.9%
|
37.2%
|
14.1%
|
100.0%
|
7: All participants; i.e. 100% disagreed or strongly disagreed with the seventh question as “I think teaching English communicatively is not as important as teaching grammatical points and vocabulary items”.
8: On eighth question as “I believe teachers should teach pragmatic knowledge when students reach a certain level of language proficiency” majority of the EFL teachers; i.e. 83.3% agreed or strongly agreed, while 16.7% disagreed with this idea.
9: When answering the ninth question as “I think it is important for learners of English to keep their identity and culture” all participants (100%) agreed or strongly agreed with this idea.
10: Regarding the then question as “I think learners of English as a second language need to understand other Englishes apart from native English” the participants were not unanimous. Majority of the teachers; i.e. 66.7% were neutral, while 16.7% strongly disagreed and another 16.7 agreed with this idea.
11: When answering the eleventh question as “I think native speakers of English need to understand the culture of speakers of English as a second language” all EFL teachers showed their agreement with this idea.
12: Majority of the respondents (66.7%) were neutral, and 33.3% agreed when answering the twelfth question as “I think my way of learning and teaching pragmatics in particular and English in general is influenced by my mother tongue and by other people around me”, and finally,
13: Regarding the last question as “I think the textbooks used at the Faculty contain adequate pragmatic information” majority of the EFL teachers; i.e. 66.7 disagreed; whereas, 33.3% either agreed or strongly agreed with this idea.
Table 36 to Table 41 display frequencies and percentages for the EFL teachers’ answers given to the last six items related to different methods and techniques used in classes. The results indicated that;
1: Majority of the EFL teachers claimed that they taught speech acts to their students. Another 33.3% taught general pragmatic knowledge in their classes and 16.7% taught meta-language.
Table 36
Frequencies and Percentages of Types of Pragmatic Knowledge Taught
|
Frequency
|
Percent
|
General
|
2
|
33.3
|
Speech Acts
|
3
|
50.0
|
Meta-Language
|
1
|
16.7
|
Total
|
6
|
100.0
|
2: Majority of the teachers (57.1%) believed that they taught communicative skills. Another 28.6 percent believed that they taught language use and only 14.3% linguistic skills.
Table 37
Frequencies and Percentages of Skills Taught
|
Frequency
|
Percent
|
Linguistic
|
1
|
14.3
|
Language Use
|
2
|
28.6
|
Communicative Skills
|
4
|
57.1
|
Total
|
72
|
100.0
|
3: Majority of the teachers (42.9%) claimed that they taught cultural knowledge and language use through implementing tasks and activities. Another 28.6% taught them explicitly, and the rest of the teachers either used textbooks (14.3%) or employed supplementary materials (14.3%)
Table 38
Frequencies and Percentages of How Language Use is Taught
|
Frequency
|
Percent
|
Textbooks
|
1
|
14.3
|
Supplementary Materials
|
1
|
14.3
|
Implementing Tasks and Activities
|
3
|
42.9
|
Explicit Instruction
|
2
|
28.6
|
Total
|
7
|
100.0
|
4: Majority of the teachers (42.9%) claimed that they used pair work in their classes. Another 28.6% used role play and the rest (28.6%) employed group discussion.
Table 39
Frequencies and Percentages of Types of Tasks Used
|
Frequency
|
Percent
|
Role Play
|
2
|
28.6
|
Pair Work
|
3
|
42.9
|
Group Discussion
|
2
|
28.6
|
Total
|
7
|
100.0
|
5: Majority of the teachers (66%) claimed that, in order to teach English use, they used awareness raising activities in their classes. Another 33.3% used role play.
Table 40
Frequencies and Percentages of Methods Used to Teach English Use
|
Frequency
|
Percent
|
Role Play
|
2
|
33.3
|
Awareness Raising Activities
|
4
|
66.7
|
Total
|
6
|
100.0
|
6: Majority of the teachers (50%) claimed that they did not emphasis on British no American English, while 33.3% favored American English and 16.7% asked their students to use British English
Table 41
Frequencies and Percentages of Types of English Used
|
Frequency
|
Percent
|
American
|
2
|
33.3
|
British
|
1
|
16.7
|
No Difference
|
3
|
50.0
|
Total
|
6
|
100.0
|
Both findings achieved from the analysis of the data collected through teacher’ and learners’ questioners and the results of the present study are in line with the findings of (Alcón Soler, 2002; Schmidt, 1993), in which they shed light on the effects of explicit instruction on L2 pragmatic competence development. They indicated that with explicit instruction, the teacher provides suggestions and explanations to the class while implicit instruction makes no overt reference to the rules.
In addition, according to Abolfathiasl and Abdullah (2015), consciousness-raising activities effect on EFL learners’ immediate and delayed performance of suggestions. As well, as Zinged, Nourmohammadi and Derakhshan (2014) argued, the relative effectiveness of consciousness-raising listening prompts on the development of the speech act of apology. In addition, Birjandi and Derakhshan (2014) indicated that the relative effectiveness of C-R video-driven prompts on the comprehension of three speech acts on Persian learners of English.