Skip to Main Content
Frequently Asked Questions
Submit an ETD
Global Search Box
Need Help?
Keyword Search
Participating Institutions
Advanced Search
School Logo
Files
File List
Suh_Thesis_Final (1).pdf (976.92 KB)
ETD Abstract Container
Abstract Header
Cultural Miscommunication in L1 versus L2: How do listeners respond?
Author Info
Suh, Christine W
Permalink:
http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1531966196816458
Abstract Details
Year and Degree
2018, MA, Kent State University, College of Education, Health and Human Services / School of Health Sciences.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the response of listeners to miscommunication of non-native English speakers (L2) in comparison to native English speakers (L1). Discovery of differences in behavioral response provides new insight into language comprehension, and ultimately communication, with L2 speakers. Specifically studying this topic of L2 in regards to miscommunication implies the extent to which L1 listeners take perspective and engage in the ¿cooperative principle ¿(e.g., reciprocating efforts to successfully communicate). For example, do listeners take perspective of the L2 speaker’s cultural differences as ¿audience design¿ (accommodating for a conversation partner’s particular needs) suggests, or are they more ¿egocentric¿ (person centered or focused on their own needs) in nature? This can be better understood by comparing the amount of effort listeners put forth when an L2 speaker miscommunicates, compared to when an L1 speaker miscommunicates. Therefore, in this thesis, language comprehension and perspective taking effort are measured via eye-behaviors -- dwell time (voluntary cognitive effort); pupil size (reflexive attention) -- from native English speakers in a computer task-based interaction, to compare responses to communicative errors produced by an L1 English speaker versus an L2 English speaker (Chinese-accented speaker). Results indicate that individuals put forth more effort listening¿ to L2 speakers when they misunderstand (i.e., failure to interpret or understand) the speaker’s intended message; however they [listeners] do not take as much perspective to understand ¿why¿ the miscommunication occurred.
Committee
Jennifer Roche , Ph.D. (Committee Chair)
Sloane Burgess, Ph.D. (Committee Co-Chair)
Hayley Arnold, Ph.D. (Committee Member)
Julia Huyck, Ph.D. (Committee Member)
Pages
91 p.
Subject Headings
Cognitive Psychology
;
Speech Therapy
Keywords
miscommunication, eye-tracking, L2 speaker, cultural mismatch
Recommended Citations
Refworks
EndNote
RIS
Mendeley
Citations
Suh, C. W. (2018).
Cultural Miscommunication in L1 versus L2: How do listeners respond?
[Master's thesis, Kent State University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1531966196816458
APA Style (7th edition)
Suh, Christine.
Cultural Miscommunication in L1 versus L2: How do listeners respond? .
2018. Kent State University, Master's thesis.
OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center
, http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1531966196816458.
MLA Style (8th edition)
Suh, Christine. "Cultural Miscommunication in L1 versus L2: How do listeners respond? ." Master's thesis, Kent State University, 2018. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1531966196816458
Chicago Manual of Style (17th edition)
Abstract Footer
Document number:
kent1531966196816458
Download Count:
424
Copyright Info
© 2018, all rights reserved.
This open access ETD is published by Kent State University and OhioLINK.