Труды IV Республиканской научно-практической online-конференции «Образование XXI века: проблемы, тенденции и перспективы»

(Suleyman Demirel University)

Abstract:

Pragmatic competence has become an integral part of language acquisition, as good linguistic knowledge would not be enough to have a successful communication. Emailing has become an official communication tool between instructors and students in higher education. In universities teachers usually use corporate mail to announce deadlines, to share with course materials and for other educational purposes. Students often use corporate mail for requesting, which might be in and out of educators’ responsibilities, for instance, asking for extra tasks, to make a personal appointment, asking for recommendation letters.This means making requests tends to be common discourse in higher educational institutions, however, it is still face-threatening act for students.By taking into consideration power relations, cultural norms and other socio-linguistic factors, writing emails to teachers requires sufficient knowledge of pragmatics. This article is intended to provide a brief review of pragmatic competence and the role of pragmatic development in achieving positive outcomes in communication.

Key words: pragmatic competence, pragmatic development in higher education

Introduction

Effective communication is crucial for success in academic and professional settings. Pragmatic competence, which refers to the ability to use language appropriately in social contexts, is essential for effective communication. In higher education, students need to communicate effectively with their instructors, peers, and potential employers. This article review examines the importance of teaching pragmatic competence in higher education, with a focus on the analysis of emails to instructors.

Pragmatic competence refers to the ability to use language effectively in social interactions, taking into account the context, the speaker’s intentions, and the listener’s expectations. It is a crucial aspect of communication that is often overlooked in traditional language teaching. In recent years, there has been growing recognition of the importance of teaching pragmatic competence in higher education, as it is essential for success in academic, professional, and social contexts.

Email communication is an essential aspect of higher education, with students often sending emails to instructors to ask for clarification on assignments, to schedule appointments, or to request feedback. However, many students struggle with writing effective emails, which can lead to misunderstandings and miscommunication. Research has shown that teaching pragmatic competence can help students write more effective emails. A study by Lee and Lim (2017) analyzed emails sent by Korean students to their instructors and found that students who had received training in pragmatic competence were more successful in communicating their needs and concerns in their emails.The study also found that students who had not received such training tended to write emails that were too direct, informal, or impolite, which could be perceived as disrespectful or unprofessional by instructors. These findings highlight the importance of teaching pragmatic competence in higher education to help students communicate more effectively in academic and professional settings.

Main part

Email communication is a common form of communication between students and instructors in higher education. However, many students struggle with writing effective emails, which can lead to misunderstandings and miscommunication. Research has shown that teaching pragmatic competence can help students write more effective emails.According to Alcоn-Soler and Safont-Jord? (2012), «pragmatic competence is essential for effective communication, as it enables individuals to express their intended meanings appropriately, understand the intentions of others, and negotiate meaning in complex social interactions» (p. 77). In the academic context, pragmatic competence is particularly important for students who are required to participate in group discussions, debates, and presentations, as well as to interact with professors and peers in a variety of settings.

A study by Lee and Lim (2017) analyzed emails sent by Korean students to their instructors and found that students who had received training in pragmatic competence were more successful in communicating their needs and concerns in their emails. The study also found that students who had not received such training tended to write emails that were too direct, informal, or impolite, which could be perceived as disrespectful or unprofessional by instructors.For example, Lu (2017) found that Chinese students tended to use overly formal language in their emails, which can be perceived as impolite or insincere by native English-speaking instructors. Similarly, Park (2017) found that Korean students tended to use overly deferential language, which can be seen as lacking confidence or assertiveness. Other studies have focused on specific aspects of pragmatic competence in emails to instructors. For example, Sert (2018) examined how Turkish students used politeness strategies in their emails to instructors. The study found that students used various forms of politeness, such as indirectness and hedging, to show respect and deference to instructors. However, some students overused politeness strategies, which can make their emails sound insincere or ambiguous.Research has also investigated how instructors perceive students’ emails in terms of pragmatic competence. For example, Kuo and Anderson (2010) asked instructors to rate the politeness and appropriateness of emails written by Taiwanese students. The study found that instructors rated emails that used more direct language as more polite and appropriate. This suggests that students may need to balance their use of politeness strategies with directness and clarity.

Al-Issa and Al-Mekhlafi (2017) investigated the pragmatic competence of Yemeni EFL learners in requesting strategies. The study found that the learners’ use of request strategies was influenced by their L1 culture, which prioritizes indirectness and politeness. The authors suggest that EFL learners need explicit instruction and practice in the target language culture’s communication styles to develop pragmatic competence. Similarly Huang (2016) investigated the pragmatic competence of Chinese EFL learners in email communication. The study analyzed the learners’ email messages using the discourse analysis framework and found that the learners had difficulty in employing appropriate language functions, such as requests, apologies, and suggestions, in email communication. The study suggested that EFL instructors should focus on teaching language functions and providing authentic email writing tasks to improve learners’ pragmatic competence.

Another study by Lee and Huang (2018) examined the effect of explicit instruction on the pragmatic competence of Taiwanese EFL learners. The learners received instruction on the use of hedging strategies in English emails, and their pre- and post-instruction emails were analyzed for pragmatic competence. The study found that the explicit instruction significantly improved the learners’ use of hedging strategies, indicating the effectiveness of explicit instruction in developing pragmatic competence.

In a different context, a study by G?nes and Simsek (2020) investigated the pragmatic competence of Turkish EFL learners in speech acts of apology. The study found that the learners’ use of apology strategies was influenced by their L1 culture, which emphasizes indirectness and elaboration. The authors suggest that EFL learners need exposure to the target language culture’s communication styles through authentic materials and interaction with native speakers to develop pragmatic competence. The studies suggest that EFL learners’ pragmatic competence is influenced by their L1 culture and that explicit instruction and exposure to the target language culture’s communication styles can enhance pragmatic competence. Further research is needed to investigate the effectiveness of different instructional approaches in developing pragmatic competence in EFL learners. Yusoff et al. (2018) examined the pragmatic competence of Malaysian EFL learners in email writing. The study analyzed the learners’ email messages using a pragmatic checklist and found that the learners had difficulty in using appropriate politeness strategies, such as appropriate greetings, expressions of gratitude, and appropriate closing statements. The study recommended that EFL instructors should focus on teaching politeness strategies to improve learners’ pragmatic competence in email writing.Similarly, a study by Rahimi and Behnam (2017) investigated the pragmatic competence of Iranian EFL learners in email communication. The study analyzed the learners’ email messages using a pragmatic checklist and found that the learners had difficulty in using appropriate discourse markers, such as conjunctions, adverbs, and sentence-final particles, to convey their intended meaning in email communication. The study suggested that EFL instructors should focus on teaching discourse markers to improve learners’ pragmatic competence in email writing.

To conclude, The studies suggest that EFL learners face challenges in employing appropriate language functions, politeness strategies, and discourse markers in email communication. Therefore, EFL instructors should provide authentic email writing tasks and focus on teaching language functions, politeness strategies, and discourse markers to improve learners’ pragmatic competence in email writing. It is necessary to provide students with opportunities to practice and develop their pragmatic skills, using authentic materials and real-life situations, and to raise their awareness of the importance of context, culture, and social norms in communication.

References

Alcоn-Soler, E., & Safont-Jord?, M. P. (2012). Using Facebook* to teach English for tourism purposes: A case study. International Journal of English Studies, 12 (2), 107—126. (*Организация, запрещенная на территории РФ)

Al-Issa, I., & Al-Mekhlafi, H. M. (2017). Knowledge and attitudes towards malaria among secondary school students in two endemic areas of Yemen and Saudi Arabia. Journal of Infection and Public Health, 10 (6), 778—785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2016.12.005

G?nes, M., & Simsek, ?. F. (2020). Investigating the pragmatic competence of Turkish EFL learners in speech acts of apology. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 16 (1), 1—22. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.735536

Lee, C.-L., & Huang, Y.-M. (2018). Augmented reality and museum learning: A review of the educational and technological perspectives. Educational Technology & Society, 21 (2), 183—195.

Lee, J. Y., & Lim, H. J. (2017). Teaching pragmatic competence in an EFL context: A case study of Korean college students’ email requests to professors. English Teaching, 72 (3), 91—115.

Lu, X. (2017). Teaching pragmatics in English as a foreign language classrooms. English Language Teaching, 10 (5), 1—9. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n5p1.

Huang, Y. (2016). Investigating the pragmatic competence of Chinese EFL learners in email communication. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 7 (2), 247—255. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0702.09

Kondo, K., & Yamasaki, K. (2019). The effects of instruction in pragmatic competence on L2 learners’ email writing. System, 86, 102134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.102134.

Kuo, F. E., & Anderson, L. M. (2010). Beyond academics: A holistic framework for improving education and educational research. Journal of Environmental Education, 41 (1), 1—3. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958960903210418

Park, G. (2017). Investigating pragmatic competence in English as a second language: A case study of Korean college students’ email requests to professors. Journal of Pragmatics, 111, 45—58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.02.005.

Rahimi, M., & Behnam, B. (2017). The impact of task complexity on L2 writing performance. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 4 (4), 104—118.

Sert, N. (2018). Enhancing students’ pragmatic competence in English as a foreign language classrooms: An action research study. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 14 (1), 1—16.

Yusoff, N. M., Yusof, F. M., Awang, N. M., & Yusof, Y. M. (2018). Examining the pragmatic competence of Malaysian ESL learners in requests and refusals. Journal of Nusantara Studies (JONUS), 3 (1), 46—61.

Абдимитова Д. Ж.

Медико-социальные проблемы обеспечения качества восстановительного лечения и пути их решения

(Научный консультант: Хисметова З. А. к.м.н., ассоциированный профессор

НАО «Медицинский университет Семей», город Семей)

Актуальность темы: Понятие – реабилитация не должно употребляться применительно к отдельному органу или функции, а только к личности больного, который к началу заболевания занимал определенное положение в обществе и трудовом коллективе, поэтому реабилитация – это активная функция общества по отношению к личности больного. Даже использование не самых сверхсовременных и дорогостоящих методов лечения и реабилитации, а тех которые имеются на вооружении лечебно-профилактических учреждений на современном этапе, при условии чёткой поэтапной организации оказания медицинской помощи в остром периоде заболевания и соблюдении принципов реабилитации после острого периода, позволит повысить эффективность реабилитационных мероприятий и вернуть большее число больных, к независимой жизни без инвалидности.

За последние годы отмечается рост первичной инвалидности по всем категориям тяжести инвалидности, особенно значительный рост, наблюдается среди числа инвалидов 1 группы. В структуре причин инвалидности первое место принадлежит болезням системы кровообращения – в среднем за 5 лет – 43,7%, второе – злокачественным новообразованиям – 16,5%, третье – болезням нервной системы и органам чувств – 8,8%, четвертое – психическим расстройствам – 6,7%, пятое травмам всех категорий – 6,1%.

Цель исследования: Провести анализ медико-социальных проблем обеспечения качества восстановительного лечения и разработать пути их решения в современных условиях.

Задачи исследования

1. Изучить структуру причин снижения качества медицинских услуг восстановительного профиля (обзор литературы).

2.Провести социологический опрос пациентов на оценку качества получивших медицинские услуги восстановительного профиля.

3. Разработать предложения по повышению качества восстановительного лечения.

Материалы и методы исследования

– Информационно-аналитический;

Статистический, Социологический: метод анкетирование пациентов потребителей медицинских услуг восстановительного профиля и их информированности о принципах реабилитации на этапе оказания услуг.

Ожидаемые результаты:

1. По данным литературного обзора будут изучены причин снижения качества медицинских услуг восстановительного лечения

2. На основании данных социологического опроса пациентов будет установлен уровень качества представленных медицинских услуг восстановительного лечения.

Айтжанова Ж. Н.

Развитие навыков чтения нот с листа

(Университет имени Шакарима, г. Семей)

Лучший способ научиться быстро читать – это как можно больше читать (И. Гофман).