Document Type : Research Paper


University of Tabriz


Investigating transfer of one’s pragmatic knowledge of first language to his second or foreign language, has been one of the areas of interest for researchers. However, there are contradictory results even within the scarce studies which have addressed transferability. This study was an attempt to investigate perceived pragmatic transferability of L1 refusal strategies by Persian EFL learners. Specifically, the effect of degree of imposition of the context and eliciting act type on transferability rate was investigated. To this end, a DCT was developed with the help of 60 (male & female) Persian EFL learners. This DCT was then administered to 74 Persian EFL learners as the main participants of the study. The results showed the existence of the interactional effect of both degree of imposition and type of eliciting act on the learners’ transferability rate. This suggests that learners’ perception of the differences in conditions under which they refuse has an effect on their choices of the pragmatic aspects to be transferred to English.


Al-Eryani, A. (2007). Refusal strategies by Yemeni EFL learners. The Iranian EFL Journal, 1, 84-101.
Allami, H. & Naeimi, A. (2011). A cross-linguistic study of refusals: An analysis of pragmatic competence development in Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(2011), 385-406.
Beebe, L., Takahashi, T. &Uliss-Weltz, R. (1990).Pragmatic transfer in ESL refusals. In R.C. Scarcella, E. Anderson & S.D. Krashen (Eds.), Developing communicative competence in a second language (pp.55-73). New York: Newbury House.
Cohen, A. (1995). Investigating the production of speech act sets. In S. Gass & J. Neu (Eds.). Speech acts across cultures (pp.21-43). New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition (2nd. Ed.).Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Eslami, Z. & Noora, A. (2008). Perceived pragmatic transferability of L1 requet strategies by Persian learners of English. In M. Pütz & J. Aertselaer (Eds.). Developing contrastive pragmatics (pp.301-333). New York: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG.
Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (1993). Language transfer in language learning. USA: John Benjamins B.V.
Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition: An introductory course (3rd, edition). New York and London: Routledge.
Geis, M. & Harlow, L. (1995). Politeness strategies in French and English. In S. Gass & J. Neu (Eds.). Speech acts across cultures (pp.129-153). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Griffiths, P. (2006). An introduction to semantics and pragmatics. Edinburg University Press.
Jarvis, S. & Pavlenko, A. (2008). Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. New York and London: Routledge.
Kellerman, E. (1986). An eye for an eye: Crosslinguistic constraints on the development of the L2 lexicon. In E. Kellerman & M. Sharwood Smith (Eds.), Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition (pp.35-48). New York: Pergamon Press.
Keshavarz, M., Eslami, Z. & Ghahraman, V. (2006). Pragmatic transfer and Iranian EFL refusals: A cross-cultural perspective of Persian and English. Pragmatics and Language Learning, 11, 359-402. 
Koike, D. (1989). Pragmatic competence and adult L2 acquisition: Speech acts in interlanguage. Modern Language Journal, 73, 79-89.      
Ringbom, H. (2007). The importance of cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning comprehension, learning and production. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Spencer-Oatey, H. & Zegarac, V. (2002).Pragmatics. In N. Schmitt (Ed.). An introduction to applied linguistics (pp. 74-91). Arnold.
Takahashi, S. (1993).Transferability of L1 request strategies to L2 contexts. Pragmatics and Language Learning, 4, 50-84.
Takahashi, S. (1996).Pragmatic transferability. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(2), 189-223.
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.