A Study On Chinese EFL Learners' Ways Of Expressing Disagreement

This thesis reports a study with the aim to investigate how Chinese EFL learners express disagreement pragmatically and linguistically. The secondary focus was on the differences in the disagreement expressions between learners of different oral proficiency levels. Data in this study were collected from Task Three of TEM-4 Oral Test from The Spoken English Corpus of Chinese Learners (SECCL) in which English learners holding opposite opinions interact with each other in pairs. Forty-eight Chinese EFL learners'disagreement responses, including sixteen high, intermediate and low level learners'respectively, were chosen as data. Learners'proficiency level was judged by the rank they got in TEM-4 Oral Test. Analysis of the data yielded the following findings:(1) Among the disagreement responses identified in the selected data, Chinese EFL learners employed mitigated disagreement, aggravated disagreement, and bald disagreement that are neither mitigated nor strengthened. Mitigated ones constituted the majority of all. Aggravated disagreements and bald disagreements did not happen frequently. Therefore, Chinese EFL learners did not prefer to strengthen disagreement or express disagreement directly to hurt others'faces purposefully, even under test situation.(2) As for linguistic realization of disagreement, Chinese EFL learners expressed disagreement both in statements and with questions. The majority of disagreements were expressed in statements. Both wh-questions and Y/N questions occurred in speakers' disagreement. Among all the disagreements shaped with questions, the occurrences of questions that show politeness overwhelmed that cannot. Generally speaking, Chinese EFL learners had a variety of ways of realize disagreement linguistically and they did not prefer to challenge others by asking face-hurting questions.(3) When it comes to inter-group difference, except a significant difference in the use of suggestion between high level learners and low level learners, no significant differences were found either in pragmatic aspect or linguistic aspect, which demonstrates that proficiency level may not be a decisive factor influencing speakers' ways to express disagreement. Another possible reason is that speaker's concern for face is not included in the grading system in TEM-4 Oral Tests. However, groups with higher proficiency did include slightly more softened elements in their disagreements and shaped more disagreements in questions.The findings yielded in this study have some implications. Theoretically, it is a complement to literatures in the speech act of disagreement and contributes to the Theory of Face from L2 perspective. Pedagogically, the quantitative description can provide teachers with a better understanding of students' conversations and provide insights to people who are involved in preparing textbooks and designing classroom materials or activities for EFL learners. Moreover, it can hopefully act as reference to the innovation of the present testing system that emphasizes grammar, fluency, pronunciation and complexity in oral tests.