Trifita Handayani, 0203513003 (2015) THE EFFECTS OF IMPLICIT VERSUS EXPLICIT INSTRUCTIONS TO TEACH REFUSAL STRATEGIES ON STUDENTS’ SOCIOPRAGMATIC AND PRAGMALINGUISTIC COMPETENCES The Case at the Second Semester Students of the English Language Education at State Islamic College (STAIN) of Jurai Siwo Metro, Lampung. Masters thesis, Universitas Negeri Semarang.

Preview

PDF Download (194kB) | Preview

Abstract

The purposes of this study were to explain the effects of implicit instructions to teach refusal strategies on student’s sociopragmatic competences, to explain the effects of implicit instructions to teach refusal strategies on student’s pragmalinguistic competences, to explain the effects of explicit instructions to teach refusal strategies on student’s sociopragmatic competences, to explain the effects of explicit instructions to teach refusal strategies on student’s pragmalinguistic competences, to explain the differences between implicit and explicit instructions to teach refusal strategies on student’s sociopragmatic competences, to explain the differences between implicit and explicit instructions to teach refusal strategies on student’s pragmalinguistic competences, and to explain the interaction among instructions, refusal strategies, with the students’ sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic competences. This study is a quantitative research by using experimental factorial design 2x2. The samples of the study were the 80 students consisting of 40 students. There were two classes. The first experiment and second experiment class. The first experiment class used the treatment implicit and the second experiment class used the treatment explicit. Try out was conducted to measure validity and reliability. After the treatment, they were given DCT consisting of 12 items in 60 minutes. Two-ways ANOVA was conducted to test the hypothesis, two ways analysis of variance with F-test at the 5% (0.05) level of significance. The findings of this study show that (1) the implicit that has effect in teaching refusal strategies on students sociopragmatic competences (2) the implicit that has effect in teaching refusal strategies on students pragmalinguistic competences (3) the explicit that has effect in teaching refusal strategies on students sociopragmatic competences (4) the explicit that has effect in teaching refusal strategies on students pragmalinguistic competences (5) the explicit that has better effect than implicit in teaching refusal strategies on students sociopragmatic competences (6) the explicit that has better effect than implicit in teaching refusal strategies on students pragmalinguistic competences (7) there is no interaction among instructions, refusal, and students’ pragmatic competence. To sum up, there are significant differences of the effect of implicit and explicit instruction for enhancing students’ pragmatic competence. However, there is no interaction among instructions, refusal, and students’ pragmatic competence. The results of the study revealed that the mean score of post-test in implicit instruction on students’ sociopragmatic was 80.00 while explicit 92.550. Meanwhile, the mean score of post-test in implicit instruction on students’ pragmalinguistic was 83.000 while explicit 95.5000. it could be concluded that explicit has better effect to teach refusal strategies than implicit instruction on students’ sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic competence based on the difference the explicit instruction was better than impicit instruction to teach refusal strategies on students’ sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic competence. It can be concluded that, there was the effect between explicit and implicit instruction on students’ sociopragmatic ad pragmalinguistic competence. The present study to prove the effects of teaching pragmatic competence. It is expected that addressing pragmatic issues in language teaching would raise learners’ of pragmatic competence and contribute to EFL pragmatic learning.

Actions (login required)

View Item