THE ANALYSIS OF SEMANTIC AND PRAGMATIC CONTEXT IN TOEFL TEST SIMULATION ON LISTENING SECTION

Rakha Setyawan, Triastama Wiraatmaja


Abstract


Sociolinguistics aspects such as Semantic and Pragmatic affect language user in every situation. Those two contexts even exist in a proficiency test to become the test foundation. This research was conducted to identify the semantic and pragmatic contexts in TOEFL test simulation on the Listening section. The researcher applied a qualitative descriptive approach to this research, and Document Analysis and the researcher as the instrument. The object of this research was TOP NO 1 TOEFL SIMULATION published by FORUM TENTOR INDONESIA. The result reveals that there are several types of semantic and pragmatic context found in the test simulation. The semantic contexts found in 8 questions from the 30 questions analyzed. The types of semantic contexts which were found namely; Meaning, Semantic Feature, and Semantic Roles. Moreover, the semantic type that mostly occurred is Semantic Roles (4 Questions), then followed by Semantic Feature (2 Questions) and Meaning (2 Questions). However, the Pragmatic context quantities are found more than the semantic context. From the 30 analyzed questions, the Pragmatic contexts found are 40 questions, it happens because one test item can have more than one type of pragmatic. Also, the Reference type in Pragmatic occurred in most questions because the narrator on the listening passage uses referencing (nature of Reference) to make the question. The type of pragmatic context found namely; Context, Politeness, Reference, and Speech Act. The type of pragmatic context which is mostly occurred is Reference (25 questions).


Keywords


Semantic, Pragmatic, TOEFL test, Listening

Full Text:

PDF

References


Allami, H. (2014). Pragmatic Knowledge Assessment in Listening Sections of IELTS Tests. Iran: Yazd University

Ary, D. Jacobs, L. C., Sorensen, C., &Razavieh, A. (2010). Introduction to Research in Education Eighth Edition. Belmont: Wadsworth

BARDOVI-HARLIG, K. (2011). Do Language Learners Recognize Pragmatic Violations Pragmatic Versus Grammatical Awareness in Instructed L2 Learning?

Bowen, G. A. (2009) Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative Research Journal, Vol 9, No 2, 27-40. Cullowhee: Western Carolina University

British Council IELTS – Home Retrieved from http://indonesia.ielts.britishcouncil.org/iorpsea/html/registration/selectExamTypeServlet.do?gclid=Cj0KCQjwr4beBRDNARIsAGZaZ5cKdZZi-Doc2SOroYNoikYeH41XV8CxbxcSH7F7LBn-Uj7HfoTDBscaApNqEALw_wcB

Creswell J. W. (2012) Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research fourth edition. Boston: Pearson.

Fraenkel, Jack. R., and Norman E. Wallen. 2012. How to Design and EvaluateResearch in Education 8th Edition. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

Garcia, P. (2004). Pragmatic Comprehension of High and Low Level Language Learners. Arizona: Northern Arizona University

IELTS for Scholarship by British Council. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.britishcouncil.org/

IELTS test taker demography. (2017) Retrieved from https://www.ielts.org/teaching-and-research/test-statistics

Jianda, L. (2006). Assessing EFL learners’ interlanguagepragmatic knowledge:Implications for testers and teachers. China: Guangdong University of Foreign Studies

Jung, Y.J. (2002). Issues in Acquisitional Pragmatics. New York: Columbia University

Karbalaei, A. &Rahmanzade, M. K. (2015). An Investigation into Pragmatic Knowledge in the Reading Section of TOLIMO, TOEFL, and IELTS Examinations. Tehran: Farhangian University

Kasper, G., & Schmidt, R.G. (2008). Developmental Issues in Interlanguage Pragmatics.

Katz, J. J. (1972). Semantic theory (Studies in language). USA: Harper & Row

Katz, J. J & Fodor, J. A. (1963). The Structure of a Semantic Theory, Vol. 39, No. 2. (Apr. - Jun., 1963), pp. 170-210. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Latief, M. A. (2016) Research Methods on Language Learning an Introduction. Malang: UniversitasNegerei Malang (UM Press)

Leech, G. N. (1983). The principles of pragmatics. New York: Longman.

McNamara, T. (2000) Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Sheppard, B. (2013). Teaching and Researching Listening (2nded.). USA: University of Oregon

Soler, E.A &Martínez-Flor, A. (2008). Investigating Pragmatics in Foreign LanguageLearning, Teaching and Testing. UK: Cromwell Press Ltd

Tan, P. (1994). Key concepts in ELT. ELT Journal, 48(1), 100

TOEFL test taker demography and Types of TOEFL test. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.ets.org/toefl

Trudgill, P. (2000). Sociolinguistics: An introduction to language and society fourth edition. London: Penguin.

Van Dijk, T. (1977). Text and Context. London: Longman

Vitásková, K. &Šebková, L. (2017). The Variable Professional Perception in Assessment of PragmaticLanguage Level in Autism Spectrum Disorders and RelatedDevelopmental Difficulties. Czech Republic: Palacký University in Olomouc

Yule, G. (2010). The study of language 4th edition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press




DOI: https://doi.org/10.22219/CELTICUMM.Vol5.No2.45-57 | Abstract views : 201 | PDF views : 37

Copyright (c) 2019 Celtic: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature & Linguistics.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Editorial Office

English Language Education Department

Faculty of Teacher Training and Education

University of Muhammadiyah Malang

 Jl. Tlogomas No 246 Malang, JawaTimur, Indonesia

Phone (+62) 341464318 ex: 121

email: celtic@umm.ac.id

 

View My Stats 

 

Lisensi Creative Commons

Ciptaan disebarluaskan di bawah Lisensi Creative Commons Atribusi-BerbagiSerupa 4.0 Internasional.