PRAGMATIC APPROACH UPON THE INSTITUTIONAL EDUCATIONAL VERBALINTERACTION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17770/sie2017vol1.2426Keywords:
verbal interaction, pragmatic act, verbal acts, teaching-learning process, studentAbstract
The present paper intends to analyze the institutional educational verbal interaction from the pragmatics point of view, as pragmatics is that linguistic discipline focused on the dialogized communication performed by real speakers: the teacher (instructor, trainer) and his students. I was interested in emphasizing the type of verbal; interaction established during this special form of communication, the way the principles of communication are kept or broken during the dialogue between teacher and student, different types of discourse performed by the teacher while discussing with his students. I was also interested in underlining the role of the deictic elements (especially the subjective ones) in the communication performed within the didactic process of teaching-learning.The present paper intends to outline the importance of pragmatics in achieving an efficient teaching-learning process for the both sides implied: both for the teachers who will succeed in teaching easier their subject matters, and for the students who will understand faster the theoretic concepts and thus will be able to turn them into efficient and useful knowledge for their future career. Owing to my university teaching experience, I have faced lots of situations when pragmatics helped me out. In this paper I will focus my attention upon my didactic activities performed when teaching the Romanian language for foreign students (as I also teach Pragmatics, Advertising and Politic Discourse to the Romanian students of my Faculty). The present paper contains four parts as it follows: introduction, literature review, case study and conclusions (accompanied by limitations of the paper and recommendations).
Downloads
References
Barab, Sasha (2016), Games, Learners and Innovation, Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College at Arizona State University Press.
Bridges, J., Hallinger (2010), L., The Didactic Dialogue, IRWIN, Homewood, Illinois.
Ioan Cerghit (2015), Metode de invatamant, Editura Didactica si Pedagogica, Bucuresti.
Feltovich, Paul (2004), Dimensions of Adjustable autonomy and mixed-initiative interaction, in M.Klusch, G.Weiss, M.Rovatsos (eds.), , Computational Autonomy, Berlin, Germany, Spring-Verlag.
Jones, B.F., Rasmussen, C.M., Moffitt, M.C., (eds), (2011), Real-life Problem solving: A Collaborative Approach to Interdisciplinary Learning, American Psychological Association, Washington D.C..
Koschmann, J. Timothy (2013), Qualitative Research in Psychology, Routledge, Springfield.
Seifert, A., Simmons (2012), Problem-based learning in Nowadays Education, Routledge, London.
Seifert, E.H., & D. Simmons, D., (2016), Learning centered schools using a problem-based approach, in Canadian Journal of Educational Communication, vol.27, No. 1.
Searle, John. R. (1977), A Classification of Illocutionary Acts, in Andy Roger, Bib Wall and John P. Murphy (eds.) Proceedings of the Texas Conference on Performatives, Presupositions and Implicatures, Washington D.C. Center for Applied Linguistics.
Sutherland, Max, Sylvester, Alice, From Advertising to Consumer, Routledge, London, 2009.
Taylor, L.,Talbot, L. (2008), Mutual Misunderstanding, Routledge, London.
Tanner, C.K., Keedy, J.L., Galis, S. A. (2013), Problem-based learning: Relating the Real World to Students Preparation, Clearing House, pages 154-157.
Whittaker, S.G., Scheiman, M. (2014), Problem-based teaching in a Didactic Curriculum, in Canadian Journal of Educational Communication, vol.24, No.4.
