D I N A R U D O L P H YO S H I M I

EXPLICIT INSTRUCTION AND JFL LEARNERS’ USE OF INTERACTIONAL

DISCOURSE MARKERS

• Can explicit instructional approach with expanded opportunities for communicative practice and feedback facilitate learners’ development of the targetlike use of Japanese discourse markers in the production of extended tellings?

Interactional markers of Japanese reported in this study

• N desu• N desu kedo• N desu neThese markers play important roles in organizing the presentation of an extended telling, and in expressing the speaker’s interpersonal orientation in such telling. They make telling more coherent and engaging for the listener.

STUDY DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

• pretest\posttest experimental design• Third year Japanese major students• Experimental group (n=5) control group (n=12) • All students NSs of English, except for 3 NSs of

Chinese

EXPLICIT INSTRUCTION 1. Explanatory Handout

Information about the function and use of the target items2. NS Model

Exposure to native models of informal, extended discourse and the use of the target items in such discourse3. The Planning Session

Opportunities for planning the production of informal, extended discourse4. Communicative Practice Session

Opportunities for communicative practice of the target items in conjunctions with extended discourse5. Corrective Feedback Sessions

Feedback on the use of target items and the production of extended discourse

CONTROL GROUP INSTRUCTIONAL TREATMENT

• Language of instruction was Japanese, as in experimental group• Regular, in-class opportunities for spoken

interactions with NSs Japanese

DATA AND ANALYSIS• The data were gathered from pretests and

posttests results of both groups and experimental groups’ tellings in CP session.

Mean frequency of use of interactional markers by groups for pretest and posttest (Clause with IM/Total Clause)

Group Pretest Posttest

Experimental .02(1/62) .39(25/64)

Control .02(2/108) .00(0/168)

Research Questions1. Does explicit instruction result in increased use

of interactional markers?2. Does explicit instruction result in accurate use of

interactional markers?3. Are some functions of interactional markers

more beneficially affected by or resistant to explicit instruction?

SUCCESS RATE FOR INTERACTIONAL MARKER USE (ACCEPTABLE USES/TOTAL USES) ON

THE POSTTEST FOR LEARNERS IN THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP

There is an increased use of interactional markers by experimental group • Because of explicit instruction• With a reasonably good degree of accuracy and

frequency

N desu: provides the glue that holds a story together and draws the listener into the story. It means that you haven’t finished what you are saying. Generally it combines one part to another.

N desu kedo: sets up a single point of background information which the listener requires to understand the subsequent content of the story. It means ‘what you have just said is background information, rather than a new development in or an important part of the story itself. This marker has more restricted use compared to ‘n desu’ in extended tellings but 16 of the 19 uses were accurate in the study.

N desu ne: invites the listener to pay attention to the next piece of the story, often a piece that is central to the point or meaning of the story itself. It makes sure that the listener is following before the teller moves on to the next part of the story. This marker also has more restricted use compared to ‘n desu’. And it was the least frequently produced marker in the study.

THE BENEFICIAL EFFECTS OF EXPLICIT INSTRUCTION

• Learners made overall success on the use of interactional markers.• The instructional approach also increased

learner attention to the interactional demands of the task even in areas where no explicit instruction was provided.• Explicit instruction (combined with

communicative practice and feedback) heightens learners' ability to attend to the interactional needs of the addressee.