The use of linguistic units and their implicatures in the listening section of toefl ibt test
Implicature is a means of conveying what speakers mean linguistically, and it is most commonly used in spoken language. Identifying the possible interpretations and discovering the implied meanings of the information, nevertheless, are really challenging for non-Native English speakers, especially for ESL/EFL test-takers who are under testing pressure. This descriptive study, therefore, aimed to quantitatively and qualitatively explore the language units and their implicatures used in the listening section of TOEFL iBT (Test of English as a Foreign Language versioned Internet-based test). A corpus consisting of 87 lectures, 97 long conversations, and 31 short conversations/adjacency pairs that were sourced from TOEFL iBT materials was developed. The framework employed to analyze data was based on the initial lists of triggers proposed by Gazdar (1979), Grice (1978), Levinson (1993), and Yule (1996). The findings reveal that linking words are the most common linguistic units while set phrases are the least common ones that are used to trigger implicatures in the listening section of TOEFL iBT materials. Additionally, diverse implicatures of linguistic units used in the listening section of TOEFL iBT are uncovered
Le T. N. Lien & Tran Q. Thao. Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh City Open University, 7(4), 47-59 47 THE USE OF LINGUISTIC UNITS AND THEIR IMPLICATURES IN THE LISTENING SECTION OF TOEFL iBT TEST LE THI NHU LIEN Dak Lak Teacher Training College, Vietnam - lethinhulien@gmail.com TRAN QUOC THAO Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology, Vietnam - tq.thao@hutech.edu.vn (Received: July 30, 2017; Revised: August 28, 2017; Accepted: November 29, 2017) ABSTRACT Implicature is a means of conveying what speakers mean linguistically, and it is most commonly used in spoken language. Identifying the possible interpretations and discovering the implied meanings of the information, nevertheless, are really challenging for non-native English speakers, especially for ESL/EFL test-takers who are under testing pressure. This descriptive study, therefore, aimed to quantitatively and qualitatively explore the language units and their implicatures used in the listening section of TOEFL iBT (Test of English as a Foreign Language versioned Internet-based test). A corpus consisting of 87 lectures, 97 long conversations, and 31 short conversations/adjacency pairs that were sourced from TOEFL iBT materials was developed. The framework employed to analyze data was based on the initial lists of triggers proposed by Gazdar (1979), Grice (1978), Levinson (1993), and Yule (1996). The findings reveal that linking words are the most common linguistic units while set phrases are the least common ones that are used to trigger implicatures in the listening section of TOEFL iBT materials. Additionally, diverse implicatures of linguistic units used in the listening section of TOEFL iBT are uncovered. Keywords: Implicature; Language unit; Listening; TOEFL iBT. 1. Introduction Since the English language has been long adopted as the medium of instruction throughout the world, ESL/EFL learners have to take different types of English language test in order to gain the admission requirements to study at universities or colleges in terms of English language proficiency. The standardized Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) versioned Internet-based test (iBT), emphasizing integrated communicative skills and communicative competence, is of those designed to assess English language skills of non-native speakers and to be taken on the Internet, (ETS, 2015). It is not meant to test academic knowledge or computer ability, and as such, questions are always based on materials found in the test. It is, however, agreed that the TOEFL iBT test is challenging, especially the listening task. Listening, according to ETS (2007), is one of the most important skills necessary for success on TOEFL iBT and in academics in general. The listening section measures test- takers’ ability to understand spoken English from North America and other English- speaking parts of the world. Test-takers have to listen to a wide range of lectures and conversations in academic environments, in which the speech sounds very natural. Moreover, there are nine types of questions in the listening section, namely, Gist-Content, Gist-Purpose, Detail, Understanding the Function of What is Said, Understanding the Speaker’s Attitude, Understanding Organization, Connecting Content and Making Inferences (ETS, 2007). One of the most challenging types of question in the listening section of TOEFL test is inference since test- takers may have to infer an opinion, attitude, 48 Le T. N. Lien & Tran Q. Thao. Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh City Open University, 7(4), 47-59 organization, connection among statements, but the purposes are not always explicitly stated. Rather, they are implied. Not many ESL/EFL learners, in reality, may not find it easy to realize the implicature triggers in the English language because there are two ways for speakers to transmit information: the first way is using explicit language use (literal meaning); the other way is by making interpretive inferences through which the information is left implicit. A written or spoken piece of information can be interpreted based on what can be inferred from the utterance, but it is not a condition for its truth. Let us consider the utterance: Even John came to the party (To, 2007). It is noticed that the word even enables the listener to infer that the speaker means not to expect John’s coming. The right judgment, however, sometimes cannot be made if the listener only interprets the literal meaning of what is said as seen in the following example: (1) Annie: Was the dessert any good? Mike: Annie, cherry pie is cherry pie. Mike’s response seems quite irrelevant in the surface structure level as far as the question-answer content is concerned. This way that speaker conveys what he/she means is linguistically defined as implicature. Albeit the area of implication has been intensively and extensively researched by scholars (e.g., Horn, 2004; Kate, 2000; Levinson, 1983; Nguyen, 2000; Nguyen, 2007), in order to examine the phenomena of implication in particular and communication in general, there is, to the best knowledge of the researchers, no research on linguistic units that triggers implications in the conversation extracts in the listening section of TOEFL iBT. This paper, hence, purports to identify the linguistic units to signal implications and their implicatures used in the listening tasks of TOEFL iBT in order to assist ESL/EFL test- takers with the procedural functions of words/expressions used in the listening section of TOEFL iBT. The research questions are formed as follows: 1. What are the common linguistic units to signal implications used in the listening section of TOEFL iBT? 2. What are their implicatures used in the listening section of TOEFL iBT? 2. Methodology Linguistic Corpus This descriptive study involved the development of a corpus of transcripts including 87 lectures, 97 long conversations, and 31 short conversations/adjacency pairs (about 36,127 words) (see Table 1). They were sourced from TOEFL iBT materials, viz. Building Skills for the TOEFL iBT (Beginning), Developing Skills for the TOEFL iBT (Intermediate), Mastering Skills for the TOEFL iBT (Advanced), How to Master Skills for the TOEFL iBT (Intermediate Listening), Barron’s TOEFL iBT (12 th edition), iBT TOEFL Listening Breakthrough, which were chosen based on their availability in the researchers’ context. Table 1 The corpus of transcripts Type Number of word/each Total of words Lecture 87 About 216 About 18,792 Long conversation 97 About 172 About 16,684 Short conversation 31 About 21 About 651 Total 215 409 About 36,127 Research procedure In order to achieve the set goals, the study was carried out by the combination of descriptive, quantitative and qualitative approaches, based on the analysis of frequencies of the linguistic units that signal implicature (quantitative analysis) and content analysis of the use of implicatures of those linguistic units (qualitative analysis). The study was done based on an initial list of Le T. N. Lien & Tran Q. Thao. Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh City Open University, 7(4), 47-59 49 triggers (See Table 2) proposed by Gazdar (1979), Grice (1978), Levinson (1993), and Yule (1996). Table 2 Categories of linguistic units proposed by Gazdar (1979), Grice (1978), Levinson (1993), and Yule (1996) No. Linguistic unit Example 1 Determiner all, most, many, some, few, etc. 2 Adverb always, often, sometimes, etc. 3 Linking word but, and, or, etc. 4 Adjective hot, warm, cool, cold, etc. 5 Verb love, realize, recognize, forget, etc. 6 Set phrase without doubt, no way, etc. 7 Interjection hey, oh, well, etc. With respect to the reliability of the data analysis, double-check was employed. For the quantitative data, the researchers asked two experts as double-checkers to randomly check the occurrences of conventional implicature triggers. In respect of the qualitative data, two experts, likewise, were invited to work as double-checkers to randomly check three pieces of utterances. The two double-checkers and researchers had to reach to an agreement level of reliability (over 85%). 3. Results and Discussion 3.1. Categories of Linguistic Units Used in the Listening Section of TOEFL iBT As seen from Table 3, linking words, among seven linguistic units that trigger implicatures account for the highest percentage per 1,000 words (42%) of individual items, signaling up to 1533 occurrences of implicature out of a total of 3626, followed by determiners with 542 occurrences (15%) and verbs with 506 occurrences (13.9 %). The next number of implicature triggered by adverbs and interjections was 481 occurrences (13.2%) and 412 occurrences (11.4%), respectively. The least used linguistic units of implicature are adjectives with 103 occurrences (2.8%) and set phrase with 50 occurrences (1.4%). Table 3 Occurrences of conventional implicature triggers No. Linguistic units Raw number % Per 1,000 words 1 Determiners 542 15.0 2 Adverbs 481 13.2 3 Linking words 1533 42.3 4 Adjectives 103 2.8 5 Verbs 506 13.9 6 Set phrases 50 1.4 7 Interjections 412 11.4 Total 3,626 100.0 When it comes to the comparison of the distribution of linguistic units in lectures and conversations, it can be noticed from Table 4 that the total distribution per 1,000 words of linguistic units in lectures (51.8%) and conversations (48.2%) is relatively similar. Specifically, the frequency of linking words (25.4%) and determiners (9.4%) in lectures is much higher than that in conversations (linking words: 16.9%; determiners: 5.6%). Additionally, adjectives account for 1.6% in lectures, whereas those in conversations are 1.2%. Meanwhile, other linguistic units (adverbs: 6.8%; verbs: 8.0%; set phrases: 1.0%; interjections: 8.7%) appear more often in conversations than in lectures (adverbs: 6.4%; verbs: 5.9%; set phrases: .4%; interjections: 2.7%). 50 Le T. N. Lien & Tran Q. Thao. Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh City Open University, 7(4), 47-59 Table 4 Distribution of conventional implicatures in lectures and conversations No. Linguistic units Lectures (% per 1,000 words) Conversations (% per 1,000 words) Total (% per 1,000 words) 1 Determiners 9.4 5.6 15.0 2 Adverbs 6.4 6.8 13.2 3 Linking words 25.4 16.9 42.3 4 Adjectives 1.6 1.2 2.8 5 Verbs 5.9 8.0 13.9 6 Set phrases .4 1.0 1.4 7 Interjections 2.7 8.7 11.4 Total 51.8 48.2 100.0 3.2. Implicatures of the Linguistic Units Used in the Listening Section of TOEFL iBT a. Determiners When producing an utterance, a speaker chooses the word which is most informative and truthful in the circumstances, as in (2): (2) There are several theories. Some of these are superstitions - that is, things that many people believe but that aren’t really true. (Worchester, Lark, & Eric, p.254) By choosing some in (2), the speaker creates an implicature (+> not all). In saying ‘Some of these are superstitions’, the speaker also creates other implicatures, for example, (+> not many / not most) theories are superstitions. By using sometimes in (3), the speaker communicates, via implicature, the negative forms higher on the scale of frequency (+> not always, +> not often). (3) He was sometimes violent, but that was OK in the military. (Edmun & Mackinnon, p.223) (4) Students should carry their ID card at all times. (Edmun & Mackinnon, p.233) +> not must on a scale of ‘obligation’ The utterance, as seen in the above example (4), implicates that ‘students must not carry their ID card at all times’ or ‘they sometimes should carry their ID card with them’. b. Adverbs Adverbs also have conventional implicatures such as: only, mainly, especially, actually, even, yet, soon, just, already, also, at first, at least, etc. Some adverbs can be used to emphasize that only one particular thing is involved in what we are saying. For instance: (5) Some people once thought that only four things made up the Earth: earth, water, air and fire. (Edmun and Mackinnon, p.210) With adverbs once and only in the above statement (5), the hearer can derive from that utterance some implicatures like these: ‘In the past, some people thought that the four things: earth, water, air and fire but nothing else made up the Earth’ and the effect of this is ‘At present, they don’t think so.’ Adverbs are not normally used at the beginning of a sentence. Only, however, is used to begin a sentence when it focuses on Le T. N. Lien & Tran Q. Thao. Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh City Open University, 7(4), 47-59 51 the things that follow it as in (6): (6) In the next reading, you can start highlighting. Only underline one or two key words or phrases per page. (Worchester, Lark, and Eric, pp.248 – 249) The conventional implicature of only, in this case, is that ‘when you highlight the key words/phrases each page, you do underline them except for any other ways.’ (7) He was a very good general, but unfortunately he was not a very good politician. In politics, he was not always honest. (Edmun and Mackinnon, p.223) Adverb unfortunately in (7) can provoke a negative implicature that shows the politician’s disadvantage. The implicature from unfortunately can be a criticism. In fact the explanation of this is used by a scalar implicature. This utterance may implicate that ‘the very good general is criticized for not being a not very good politician because he was sometimes honest in politics.’ (8) M: Yes. I just need to see proof that you are enrolled in a summer course. W: I haven't enrolled yet. (MacGillivary, Yancey and Malarcher, p.706) As seen in (8), when the woman uses yet, she denotes the present situation is different as expected, or perhaps the opposite to the man’s expectation. Recently, she hasn’t enrolled in a summer course, so she cannot show the proof to the man. Adverbs are also used to emphasize uniqueness from the point of view of the speaker in a given situation as in (9): (9) He was the only one who knew Batman and Robin’s real names. (Worchester et al., p.236) Obviously, the speaker uses only to assert that he was the person who knew Batman and Robin’s real names. If he didn’t reveal, no one would know their real names. Additionally, adverbs are used as conjunctions but, yet, however, etc. to express absoluteness as in (10) & (11): (10) Leave plenty of space, but try to make it just one page. (Worchester et al., p.286) (11) By the way, may I ask what exactly you wrote about me? (Link, Kushwaha and Kato, p.321) The above utterances show absolute requirements, in (10) the speaker wants the hearer to leave exactly one-page space, but no more. In (11) the speaker, nonetheless, wants to know correctly about what the addressee wrote about him/ her. c. Linking words The three central coordinators (and, but, or) can function as sentence logical operators and other sentential connectives (Mitchell, 1998). Some linguists suggest many ways of interpretation showing a variety of meanings in accordance with each particular situation. Nevertheless, it is vital that the coordinators can make the regular semantic implication. Semantically, and is usually regarded as a logical operator which can join two explicit contents of assertions or one implicit to another explicit meaning. In another aspect, the implications of the coordinator and are those which denote consequence- result, condition, concession, contrast, purpose, similarity, and explanation as follows: (12) Well, she covers all the same basic material, but you'll find the lectures won't be exactly the same. And you'll have some writing assignments. (Worchester et al., p.320) (13) You'll find out how different governments were formed. And you’ll learn how technology has changed us. (Worchester et al., p.320) Clearly, the meaning of and in (12) and (13) is simply plus or in addition. In the above 52 Le T. N. Lien & Tran Q. Thao. Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh City Open University, 7(4), 47-59 examples, the fact that ‘you'll find the lectures won't be exactly the same’ (= q) is plus, via coordinator and, the information that ‘you'll have some writing assignments’ (= p). Thus, it can be clarified as: q & p (+> q plus p). The coordinator but can mark the unexpected result. But also shows the direct opposition as in (14): (14) Earth, water and air are all forms of matter, but fire is really different. +> That fire isn’t matter. (Worchester et al, p.210) p & q (+> p is in contrast to q) Another meaning of contrast is showing a correction. It can change the balance of an argument in favor of another viewpoint. Consider the following sentence: (15) To the nerve cells in your brain, caffeine looks just like adenosine, but caffeine acts differently. (Worchester et al, p.267) The above illustration (15) indicates that but (+> however). The utterer wants to explain some more about caffeine’s influence to the nerve cells in the brain. The interpretation of any utterance of the type p but q will be based on the conjunction p & q plus an implicature of contrast between the information in p and the information in q. (16) W: I’ve got a secret that helps me in math class. Wanna know what it is? M: OK. But it probably won’t help me. (Worchester et al., p.255) In this conversation (16), the speaker uses but to show that he is observing the maxim of relation and implies the importance of what is going to be uttered. The man wants to get a secret of studying math from the woman, but he is afraid that it will not help him in math class at all. Thus, we can establish the effective implicature of but as follows: x but y → x in contrast to y and y is the thing that is interested in. → y is shown to terminate the inferred presuppositions from x. d. Verbs Verbs were found to make up one of the biggest group of conventional implicature triggers collected in the data. They involve the use of a wide range of factive verbs: realize, recognize, forget, regret, know, remember, learn, find out, etc., non-factive verbs: believe, claim, say, assert, think, is possible, is likely, etc., and verbs of feelings: like, love, hate, dislike, fear, mind, etc.. Semantically, factives and non- factives differ in whether or not the truth of their complement clauses is presupposed. In (59), the truth of the sentential complement user factive know is presupposed, while under non- factive think in (17), the same complement need not be evaluated as true. (17) W: I'm looking at Woods College. They have lots of good courses in the catalog here. M: Woods College? I know that is a very good school, but it is so far away! (Link et al., p.271) +> (I know that is a very good school) has a factive implication that Woods College is a very good school, and a belief implication that I believe that Woods College is a very good school. (18) My secret is I think about numbers in math as if they were money. (Worchester et al., p.255) +> I think about numbers in math as if they were money has an uncertain implication that numbers in math as if they were money. I hope so. An actual explanation of the fact that one utters t
File đính kèm:
- the_use_of_linguistic_units_and_their_implicatures_in_the_li.pdf