Hybridity and Linguistic Pluralism: A Pragmatic Analysis of University Academic Discourse
The language used in academic texts and pedagogy is referred as academic discourse. Being student and teacher, the researchers observed that mixing of home language with academic language was a common practice in many institutions. Some linguists appreciate it, while others resist it by claiming it detrimental to objectivity and neutrality. Chiang (2006) finds role of teacher’s discourse a determining factor in pedagogy. Current study was conducted to observe the phenomenon of hybridization in academic discourse and to assess it in the light of pragmatics. Pragmatic analysis is known as a useful method to infer covert and implicit meanings of language (Savignon, 2007) and the researchers deemed it appropriate for current research. The pragmatic analysis could provide a newer outlook on academic discourse. Data was collected through observation sheet from the classes. Questionnaire was also used to get relevant data from teachers. The findings revealed that teachers often relied on cultural and ideological underpinnings in their pedagogy. The individual conversational styles were also responsible for different mode of hybridization and subsequently reinforced diverse facet of discourse different in pragmatic nature. The data was first analyzed for hybridization followed by its pragmatic analysis. The study was important in the backdrop of one of many beliefs, that meaning never remains fixed and it resides in socio-cultural structures and lack of pragmatic knowledge among interlocutors impedes semantic proficiency. The study revealed utility of pragmatic competence in turning this mixing of discourses in a class into a continuum. It also found that knowledge of academic pragmatics could reinforce semantic proficiency.
-
Hybridity/Hybridization, Academic Discourse, Linguistic Continuum, Pedagogy, University Teachers
-
(1) Nazakat
Lecturer, Department of English, Hazara University, Mansehra, KP, Pakistan.
(2) Muhammad Safeer Awan
Dean, Faculty of English Studies, National University of Modern Languages, Islamabad, Pakistan.
- Bakhtin, M. (1981)
- Audi, R. (2005-10-27). The Sources of Knowledge. In (Ed), The Oxford Handbook of Epistemology . : Oxford University Press. Retrieved 23 Sep. 2018, from http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb /9780195301700 .001.0001/oxfordhb-9780195301700-e-3
- Bardovi-Harlig, K.(1996). Pragmatics and language teaching: Bringing pragmatics and pedagogy together. In L. Bouton (Ed.), Pragmatics and Language Learning. Vol. (7) 21-39.
- Bawarshi, A. (2006). Taking up language difference in composition. College English. Vol. 68(6), 652-656.
- Bizzell, P. (1999). Hybrid academic discourses: What, why, how. Composition Studies, Vol. 27(2), 7-21.
- Brown, P.& S. Levinson (1987), Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage, 2nd edn, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Canagarajah, A.S. (2002). Critical Academic Writing And Multilingual Students. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
- Canagarajah, A.S. (2006a). The place of world Englishes in composition: Pluralization continued. College Composition and Communication, Vol. 57(4), 586-620.
- Canagarajah, A.S. (2006b). Toward a writing pedagogy of shuttling between languages: Learning from multilingual writers. College English, Vol. 68(6), 589-604.
- Chiang, L. C. (2006). Voices from the language classroom: a descriptive study of interactive-decision making of an expert teacher. English Teaching & Learning. Vol. 4(April), 23-45.
- Cook, G. (1994), Discourse and Literature, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Creswell, J.W. (2008). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. 3rd edn. Pearson International Edition.
- Cunningham, D. J. (2017). Methodological Innovation for the Study of Request Production in Telecollaboration. Language Learning and Technology, Vol. 1 (February,1),76-99.
- Fairclough, N., & Wodak, R. (1997). Critical discourse analysis. In T.A. van Dijk (Ed) Discourse as Social interaction : Vol. ( 1) 258-284. Sage: London.
- Gee, J. P. (1996). Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses. London: Taylor and Francis.
- Goffman, erving. (1974). Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New york, ny et al.: harper & row.
- Grice, H. P. (1975) 'Logic and conversation'. In P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds) Studies in Syntax and Semantics III: Speech Acts, New York: Academic Press
- Griffiths, P., & Cummins, C. (2017). Pragmatics. In An Introduction to English Semantics and Pragmatics (pp. 98-117). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctt1g09x36.13.
- Hawisher, G.E., Selfe, C.L., Guo, Y.H., & Liu, L. (2006). Globalization and agency: Designing and redesigning the literacies of cyberspace. College English, Vol. 68(6), 619-636.
- Havid, A. & M. R. Nababan (2018) Characters' Politeness Strategies in Giving Command: Should Translators Keep Them? 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies - Vol 24(2): 181 - 193 http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2018-2402-14
- Hebb, J (2000). Hybrid Discourse and Academic Writing.Diss. Texas A&M University- Commerce. . Commerce, TX: UMI. 2000.072699.
- Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary Discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. New York, NY: Longman.
- Hyland, K. (2009). Academic Discourse: English in a Global Context. London: Continuum.
- Kells, M. H. (1999)
- Lalu N.Y, Thilagavathi S (2018) The Non-Observance of Grice's Maxims in Sasak: 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies - Vol 24(2): 166 - 180.
- Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
- Lea, M.R., & Street, B.V. (2006). The http//mrhoeystokwebsite.com/Knower/Useful Information/sources of Knowledge.htm
- MacDonald, S.P. (1987). Problem definition in academic writing. College English Vol. 49(3), 315-331.
- MacDonald, S.P. (2010). Professional Academic Writing In The Humanities And Social Sciences. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
- Mayr, A, (n.d) Language and Power : An Introduction to Institutional Discourse; ed; New York; Continuum.
- Noffke, S.E. (2009). Revisiting the professional, personal, and political dimensions of action research. In S.E. Noffke & B. Somekh (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Educational Action Research (pp. 6- 23). London: Sage.
- Olson, G. A., and Lynn W. (1999), eds. Race, Rhetoric, and The Postcolonial. Albany: State of U of NYP.
- Richardson, E. (2002).
- Royster, J. J. (1996)
- Savignon, J. S. (2007). Beyond communicative language teaching: what's ahead? Journal of Pragmatics. Vol. (39), 207-220.
- Sengupta, S. (1999). Rhetorical consciousness raising in the L2 reading classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, Vol. 8(3), 291-319.
- Tang, R., & John, S. (1999). The 'I' in identity: exploring writer identity in student academic writing through the first person pronoun. English for Specific Purposes, Vol.18(supplement 1), S23-S39.
- Van Dijk, T. A (1998), Ideology, London : Sage.
- Vásquez, c., & Sharpless, d. (2009). The Role of Pragmatics in the Master's TESOL Curriculum: Findings From a Nationwide Survey. TESOL Quarterly, 43(1), 5-28. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/27784984
- Verscheren, J. (1999). Understanding Pragmatics, London : Arnold.
- Werth, P. (1999). Text Worlds: Representing Conceptual Space in Discourse, Harlow: Pearson Education.
- Wodak, R. 2001a. 'What CDA is about - a summary of its history, important concepts and development', in R. Wodak and M. Meyer (eds) Methods of Critical Discourse Analysi (pp. 1-13). London and Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Yule, G (1996). Pragmatics: New York, Oxford University Press
Cite this article
-
APA : Nazakat., & Awan, M. S. (2018). Hybridity and Linguistic Pluralism: A Pragmatic Analysis of University Academic Discourse. Global Social Sciences Review, III(III), 447-465. https://doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2018(III-III).25
-
CHICAGO : Nazakat, , and Muhammad Safeer Awan. 2018. "Hybridity and Linguistic Pluralism: A Pragmatic Analysis of University Academic Discourse." Global Social Sciences Review, III (III): 447-465 doi: 10.31703/gssr.2018(III-III).25
-
HARVARD : NAZAKAT. & AWAN, M. S. 2018. Hybridity and Linguistic Pluralism: A Pragmatic Analysis of University Academic Discourse. Global Social Sciences Review, III, 447-465.
-
MHRA : Nazakat, , and Muhammad Safeer Awan. 2018. "Hybridity and Linguistic Pluralism: A Pragmatic Analysis of University Academic Discourse." Global Social Sciences Review, III: 447-465
-
MLA : Nazakat, , and Muhammad Safeer Awan. "Hybridity and Linguistic Pluralism: A Pragmatic Analysis of University Academic Discourse." Global Social Sciences Review, III.III (2018): 447-465 Print.
-
OXFORD : Nazakat, and Awan, Muhammad Safeer (2018), "Hybridity and Linguistic Pluralism: A Pragmatic Analysis of University Academic Discourse", Global Social Sciences Review, III (III), 447-465
-
TURABIAN : Nazakat, , and Muhammad Safeer Awan. "Hybridity and Linguistic Pluralism: A Pragmatic Analysis of University Academic Discourse." Global Social Sciences Review III, no. III (2018): 447-465. https://doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2018(III-III).25