TEACHING SPANISH AND ENGLISH GRAMMAR AND PRAGMATICS IN DISCOURSE TO HIGHER EDUCATION STUDENTS

  • The authors:
    Marina Vorobiova Munguía
    Pablo Ramírez Rodríguez
  • Pages: 314-329
  • Section: LINGUISTICS AND THE HUMANITIES – INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACHES IN RESEARCH AND TEACHING
  • URL: http://science-ifl.rudn.ru/09835-2020-314-329/
  • DOI:
    10.22363/09835-2020-314-329

Download PDF

Abstract. This paper discusses one of the main problems faced by foreign students studying English as a first and Spanish as a second foreign language, that is to say, the use of different discourse markers in spoken language. A discursive marker is an immutable linguistic expression that does not perform a syntactic function, but is a limiting element whose main function is to promote understanding and consistency of speech. These markers endowed with a certain pragmatic role, differ according to the predominant role they play in this context, indicating the difficulties they face in their interpretation and translation into another linguistic code. In addition, it is noted that such particles appear in different contexts, performing functions that do not correspond to those that they performed by default. Therefore, it is desirable that Spanishspeaking students become familiar with these units, so that they can give speech consistency and cohesion in accordance with the morphosyntactic, semantic, and pragmatic properties that arise during communication. This work emphasizes the importance of speech acts arising in speech depending on the context. To achieve the goals, few the most commonly used discursive formulas in greetings are presented as an example, which are used as a replica in the confirmation to contrast their use and behavior in English and Spanish languages, as they can vary depending on the context, and therefore increases the degree of difficulty it presents for translation into Spanish. In addition, it is emphasized that routine formulas are a key example that provides a great cultural footprint, contributing to the development of communicative competence. We also discuss how modern linguistics assumes that languages cannot be described simply as a combination of phenomena, since they should be considered as internal systems used by speakers and how language speakers can use imagination to form new statements from a combination of existing elements, so language is a complex mechanism that allows you to combine elements to form statements. And finally, we argue that the “Grammar of Constructions” should turn to research in pragmatics, analysis of discourse and analysis of conversations in order to include categories that accurately describe contexts for using constructs.

Keywords: pragmatics, phraseology, discourse, American English, Spanish

Marina Vorobiova Munguía¹, Pablo Ramírez Rodríguez²

¹, ²Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia Moscow, Russia ¹e-mail: marinavb33@yahoo.com ²e-mail: pabloatanasev@gmail.com

Chomsky, N. 1957. Syntactic Structures Mouton. Syntactic Structures 9: 13-17. Chomsky, N. 1999. Un programa minimalista para la teoría linguistica. El programa minimalista 3: 40-58. Chomsky, N., & Lasnik, H. 1995. The theory of principles and parameters. In The minimalist program, MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 13-128. Corpas, Pastor, G. 1996. Manual de fraseología. Gredos, Madrid, 334 pp. Cuenca, M. J. 1995. Mecanismos lingüísticos y discursivos de la argumentación. Comunicación, lenguaje y educación 7 (2): 23-40. Fillmore, Ch. J. 1996. The case for case Syntax-Semantics Interface in Psych-verb Constructions 201: 1-88. Fillmore, Ch. J. 1977. Scenes-and-frames-semantics. In A. Zampolli (ed.) Linguistic Structures Processing, pp. 55-81. Fillmore, Ch. J. 2006. Frame semantics. Cognitive linguistics: Basic readings 34: 373-400. Goldberg, A. E. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. University of Chicago Press. Chicago, 271 pp. Goldberg, A. E. 2003. Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in cognitive sciences 7 (5): 219-224. Goldberg, A. E. 2006. Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press on Demand, Oxford, 280 pp. Hilferty, J. 2003. In defense of grammatical constructions. PhD Thesis, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, 380 pp. Kay, P., & Fillmore, Ch. J. 1999. Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: the What’s X doing Y? construction. Language 64 (30):1-33. Lakoff, R. 1977. What you can do with words: Politeness, pragmatics and performatives. In Proceedings of the Texas conference on performatives, presuppositions and implicatures 6 (3): 79-106. Lewis et al. 1997. Implementing the lexical approach: Putting theory into practice. Language Teaching Publications 3(1): 223232. Montolío Durán, E. 1996. Gramática e interacción. In A. Briz & al., Pragmática y grámatica. Libros Pórtico, A Coruña, 342 pp. Yagüe, M. I., & Maña, A. 2003. Un modelo de control de acceso basado en la semántica. RedIRIS: boletín de la Red Nacional de I+ D RedIRIS 66: 63-66.