Pragmatic strategies in teaching the Romanian language to international students

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35824/sjrs.v7i1.26151

Keywords:

pragmatics, teaching Romanian language , communication , international students , language education

Abstract

The following paper examines effective language-teaching strategies for international students learning Romanian amidst the increasing globalization. Addressing challenges faced by diverse learners, the study employs a methodology encompassing literature review, classroom observations, and interviews with experienced instructors. Emphasizing the importance of pragmatic elements in language instruction, the research explores the integration of technology, cultural immersion, and real-world applications to enhance pragmatic competence. Grounded in sociolinguistic theories, the article underscores the role of pragmatic competence in effective communication. Beyond linguistic structures, language instructors are urged to incorporate nuanced elements reflecting Romanian culture. Pedagogical strategies tailored to international students include task-based activities, role-playing, and language immersion. Assessment involves qualitative analysis of student performance, feedback, and proficiency assessments. The article also delves into the role of technology, discussing the integration of virtual reality, online platforms, and multimedia resources for immersive learning. The study concludes with implications for educators, curriculum developers, and policymakers, advocating for culturally sensitive language curricula. Overall, it contributes to the discourse on language education by emphasizing the interconnectedness of language and culture, promoting pedagogical approaches that foster cross-cultural communication.

 

Author Biography

Gabriel-Dan Bărbuleț, 1 Decembrie 1918 University, Alba Iulia, Romania

Gabriel Dan Bărbuleț was born in 1974 in Blaj, Alba County, Romania. He graduated from the Faculty of Letters at Babes-Bolyai University of Cluj-Napoca, majoring in English language and literature with a minor in Romanian language and literature. He earned a Ph.D. in philology from Babeș-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, with the dissertation entitled Movie Talk: A Study of Slang in Prison Movies. Currently, he holds the position of Associate Professor at 1 Decembrie 1918 University of Alba Iulia, Romania, and serves as the Dean of the Faculty of History, Letters, and Educational Sciences. His fields of interest include Pragmatics, Semantics, English Syntax, English Methodology, British and American Culture, and Civilization. He has published his research in international journals and proceedings of national and international conferences.

References

Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language assessment in practice: Developing language assessments and justifying their use in the real world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1996). Pragmatics and language teaching: Bringing pragmatics and pedagogy together. In L. F. Bouton (Ed.), Pragmatic and language learning (pp. 21-39). Urbana: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Do language learners recognize pragmatic violations? Pragmatic versus grammatical awareness in instructed L2 learning. TESOL Quarterly, 32(2), 233–262.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2018). Teaching pragmatics: Trends and issues. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 38, 157–178.

Barron, A. (2003). Acquisition in interlanguage pragmatics: Learning how to do things with words in a study abroad context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

Bobda, A. S. (2008). The management of global cultural diversity in ELT materials. In M. Putz & J. N. Aertselaer (Eds.), Developing contrastive pragmatics: Interlanguage and cross-cultural perspectives (103-127). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter

Brown, J. D. (2001). Using surveys in language programs. Cambridge University Press.

Brown, J. (2018). Effectiveness of role-playing activities in language teaching. Language Education Quarterly, 15(2), 123–140.

Chen, S. (2019). Integrating technology into pragmatic language instruction. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(3), 210–225.

Clark, R. (2020). Variations in instructional approaches: A comparative study. Language Teaching Journal, 25(4), 312–330.

Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Eslami, Z. R., & Eslami-Rasekh, A. (2008). Enhancing the pragmatic competence of non-native English-speaking teachers’ candidates (NNESTCs) in an EFL context. In E. A. Soler & A. Martinez-Flor, Investigating pragmatics in foreign language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 178-197). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Félix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2015). Pragmatics in Spanish contexts: Investigating Spanish conversation and interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Garcia, M., & Perez, L. (2021). Challenges in technology-assisted language learning. Journal of Educational Technology, 8(1), 45–58.

Johnson, A., & Lee, K. (2019). Contextual learning and practical application: A case study. Applied Linguistics Review, 30(3), 189–205.

Jones, E., & Taylor, R. (2018). Continuous professional development in language education. Language Teaching and Learning, 12(1), 67–82.

Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R. (2002). Pragmatic development in a second language. Language Learning, 52(S1), 1–62.

Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R. (2003). Pragmatic development in a second language. Language Learning, 53(S1), 1–61.

Miller, D. (2023). Overcoming obstacles in technology integration. International Journal of Educational Technology, 5(2), 98–115.

Nunan, D. (1992). Research methods in language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nguyen, H. (2022). Student engagement concerns in language education. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 10(4), 511–525.

Oppenheim, A. N. (2000). Questionnaire design, interviewing, and attitude measurement. Bloomsbury Academic.

Roever, C. (2014). Testing ESL pragmatics: Development and validation of a web-based assessment battery. Language Testing, 31(2), 231–252.

Rose, K. R. (1997). Pragmatics in the classroom: Theoretical concerns and practical possibilities. In L. F. Bouton (Ed.), Pragmatics and language learning (pp. 267-295). Urbana-Champaign: Division of English as an International Language, Intensive English Institute, University of Illinois.

Rose, K. R. (2005). On the effects of instruction in second language pragmatics. System, 33(3), 385–399.

Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Smith, J. (2017). Theoretical understanding in language classrooms. Modern Language Journal, 102(1), 89–104.

Smith, J., Johnson, A., & Williams, M. (2020). Experiential learning through real-life scenarios. Language Teaching Journal, 28(2), 176–192.

Taguchi, N. (2011). Teaching pragmatics: Trends and issues in research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 289–310.

Taguchi, N. (2015). Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies were, are, and should be going. Language Teaching, 48(1), 1–50.

Wierzbicka, A. (1991). Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co.

Wang, L., & Li, H. (2016). Structural changes in pragmatic language teaching. Language Education Quarterly, 20(3), 245–260.

Downloads

Published

2024-05-15

How to Cite

Bărbuleț, G.-D. (2024). Pragmatic strategies in teaching the Romanian language to international students. Swedish Journal of Romanian Studies, 7(1), 151–160. https://doi.org/10.35824/sjrs.v7i1.26151