Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdallah University Applied Language Studies and

Research in Higher Education Master

Faculty of Arts and Human Sciences
Program
Dhar Mehraz, Fez

An Investigation of the Sociolinguistic

Competence of Moroccan EFL Learners:
Baccalaureate Students in Fez as a Case
Study

Submitted by: Supervised by:

Benhima Mohamed Dr. Fatima Mouaid

Academic Year:
1
2014/2015
 Dedication

To my mother

To my brother

And to the memories of my father

i
 Acknowledgements

Numerous are the people who helped me to carry out this study. First and foremost, I am

fully indebted to Professor Fatima Mouaid who has never failed to respond to my e-mails

during all the phases of the current study. Furthermore, I would like to thank all the

participants for their time and effort in responding to the questions of the research

instruments. A great gratitude goes also to everyone who has played a facilitative role in the

data collection process. In this respect, I would like to mention:

 Abd Samad Saidi: a master student of Applied Language Studies and Research in

Higher Education in Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdallah University, Fez.

 Meloud Louden: a fourth semester student in the faculty of science, Dhar Lmehraz,

Fez.

 The director of the Arabic Language Institute in Fez/ the American Language Center.

Last but not least, warm thanks go to all master students and Professors of Applied Language

Studies and Research in Higher Education Master Program.

ii
 Abstract

The present study sets out to investigate the sociolinguistic competence of Moroccan EFL
learners with special reference to the production and interpretations of speech acts. More
specifically, it aims to examine cases of cross cultural pragmatic transfer and pragmatic
failure among Moroccan EFL learners, taking Baccalaureate students in Fez as a case study.
The major reason behind choosing Baccalaureate students as a case study is due to the
crucial role of this level in one's educational journey. After graduation, not all students major
in English studies in higher education. Moreover, some of the Baccalaureate students
continue their studies abroad, which makes it more likely for them to encounter
communication problems. In this respect, 30 second year Baccalaureate students and 30
native speakers of English take part in this study. For the data gathering, the Moroccan EFL
learners have been given 30 Discourse Completion Tests both in English and Moroccan
Arabic, whereas the native speakers have been asked to fill in the same English version given
to Moroccan EFL learners. The results have showed a varying degree of pragmatic failure
among Moroccan EFL learners as compared to the norms of native speakers due to several
reasons.

Key words: sociolinguistic competence, interlanguage pragmatics, cross cultural

communication, pragmatic transfer, pragmatic failure.

iii
 List of abbreviations
CA: Contrastive Analysis.

CAH: Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis.

CCSARP: Cross Cultural Speech Act Realization Project.

DCT: Discourse Completion Test.

EFL: English as a Foreign Language.

IL: Interlanguage.

ILP: Interlanguage Pragmatics.

L1: First Language.

L2: Second Language.

MLrs: Moroccan Learners of English.

NNS: Non Native Speakers of English

NSs: Native Speakers of English.

SLA: Second Language Acquisition.

iv
 List of Tables:

Table 1: Background information of Moroccan EFL learners.

Table 2: Background information of American and British participants.

Table 3: The degree of appropriateness in Moroccan EFL learners’ realization of speech acts in English.

Table 4: The frequency of pragmatic transfer in Moroccan EFL learners’ realization of speech acts in
English.

Table 5: The frequency of pragmatic failure in Moroccan EFL learners’ realization of speech acts in English.

v
 Contents
General Introduction..............................................................................................1
Chapter I: Review of the Literature .....................................................................3
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3
Language Knowledge and Language Use ........................................................................................... 3
Saussurre‟s Model (1916) ........................................................................................................................... 3
Chomsky‟s Model (1965) ............................................................................................................................. 3
Hymes‟ Model (1972) ................................................................................................................................... 4
Canale and Swain‟s Model (1980) ................................................................................................................ 4
Bachman‟s Model (1990) ............................................................................................................................. 5

Speech Act Theory .................................................................................................................................... 6

Austin and Searle‟s Model ........................................................................................................................... 6

Felicity Conditions (appropriateness) .......................................................................................................... 7

a) Preparatory Condition ............................................................................................................................. 7

b) Sincerity Condition ................................................................................................................................. 8
Speech Act in Moroccan EFL Textbooks .................................................................................................... 8

Classification of Speech Acts ...................................................................................................................... 9

Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................. 11

Chapter II: Methodology .....................................................................................12

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 12
Research Question and Hypothesis ...................................................................................................... 12
The Research Question .............................................................................................................................. 12
The Research Hypothesis ........................................................................................................................... 12

Research Approach ................................................................................................................................. 12

Data Collection Procedure .................................................................................................................... 13

Variables .................................................................................................................................................... 13

Participants ............................................................................................................................................... 13
Moroccan EFL Learners ........................................................................................................................... 14
Native Speakers of English ................................................................................................................................. 15

Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................. 15
vi
Chapter III: Data Analysis ..................................................................................16
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 16
The Appropriateness of Speech Acts ........................................................................................................... 16
Cases of Pragmatic Transfer ......................................................................................................................... 19

Cases of Pragmatic Failure ............................................................................................................................ 23

Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................................... 26

General Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 27

Bibliography ..........................................................................................................29
Appendices ............................................................................................................31

vii
 General Introduction
While knowledge of language rules is important in every EFL teaching context, these language rules
remain useless in case they do not conform to social norms. Highlighting the importance of the social aspect
of language, Hymes (1972) pointed out “there are rules of use without which rules of usage will be useless”.
Knowing the rules of language remains just one aspect of language knowledge; however, this knowledge is
described as useless since it cannot help one to express oneself in real communication. Being aware of the
importance of the social aspect of language, the Moroccan Baccalaureate curriculum aims to develop
students‟ sociolinguistic competence under the preview of the so-called Competency Based Approach. Thus,
the Moroccan English Language Guidelines for Secondary Schools (2007) state that “It is necessary to
further focus on the learners developing the ability to use social/communicative functions accurately
(correctly) and appropriately (in the right contexts)” (p.32). However, since the winds do not blow as the
vessels wish, many Baccalaureate students may not communicate appropriately in simple cross-cultural
situations. In this respect, the question of sociolinguistic competence arises as to the extent to which students
can communicate appropriately in cross-cultural situations.

It is hypothesized that cases of sociolinguistic transfer and pragmatic failure are more likely to be
found in students‟ linguistic performance in situations of cross-cultural communication due to the
interference of the mother tongue norms.

Therefore, the main aim of the present study is to investigate Moroccan EFL students‟ sociolinguistic
competence with special focus on the interpretation and production of speech acts. It also aims at unveiling
the extent to which their interpretation and production of speech acts reflect cases of pragmatic errors and/or
communication breakdowns. This paper aims to answer the following questions:

Is the realization of speech acts influenced by such variables as social distance, power relation, and
degree of imposition? How the pragmalinguistc level is influenced by the sociopragmatic norms, social
distance, degree of imposition and power relation?

Is there any evidence of L1 transfer in Moroccans‟ realization of speech acts in English?

Are there cases of communication failure in students‟ attempts to produce speech acts in English?

The present study consists of three major chapters, namely: review of the literature, methodology and
data analysis. The first chapter involves different models of language knowledge and language use.
Furthermore, it deals with the important role that speech acts play in determining one‟s sociolinguistic
1
competence, as well as the manifestation of speech acts in the Moroccan EFL textbooks. The second chapter
is concerned with the methodology of the study. More specifically, it outlines procedures, research questions
and hypotheses, the research approaches, the data collection procedures, the population sample and the
variables. Afterwards, the third chapter embarks upon the analysis of the collected data followed by a general
conclusion for the whole study.

2
 Review of the Literature
Introduction

The present chapter endeavors to establish a theoretical basis for the current study. Initially, different
accounts for sociolinguistic competence will be provided with the aim of tracing the development of this
concept from one model to another. Subsequently, the intricate relationship of sociolinguistic competence
with the speech act theory will be examined in the light of Austin and Searle‟s model. Accordingly, this
chapter will be divided into two sections. The first section will deal with the distinction between language
knowledge and language use within which five models of competence will be included. Since sociolinguistic
competence is intimately concomitant with the interpretation of speech acts or language functions, the second
section will deal with Austin and Searle‟s theory of speech acts by drawing examples of speech acts from
Moroccan EFL textbooks.

1. Language Knowledge and Language Use

There are different models that have accounted for the type of knowledge speakers have about
language. In this section, different accounts for language knowledge and language use will be discussed.

1.1. Saussurre’s Model (1916)

When one learns a language, s/he learns the components of that language, namely sounds, words, and
structures. The knowledge of these rules is traditionally termed „language‟ (langue), while the realization of
these rules in actual use is termed “speech” (parole). In more formal terms, these two concepts, according to
De Saussure (1916), respectively refer to the abstract knowledge of the linguistic system and the concrete
realization of this system in actual use. This model is flawed in that it restricts langue to "merely a systematic
inventory of items" (Phillips et al, n.d.).

1.2. Chomsky’s Model (1965)

Based on Saussure‟s distinction between langue and parole, Noam Chomsky made another distinction
between „linguistic competence‟ and „linguistic performance‟. In his model, Chomsky differentiates the
idealized capacity from the production of actual performance. While the former encompasses implicit
knowledge of language components, namely phonetic phonology, morphology, syntax and semantics, the
latter involves an extra-linguistic knowledge, such as the awareness of the speaker, audience and the context,
which determines how speech is constructed and understood. According to Chomsky (1965):
3
 Linguistic theory is concerned primarily with the ideal speaker-listener, in a
completely homogeneous speech-community, who knows its language perfectly and is
unaffected by such grammatically irrelevant conditions as memory limitations,
distractions, shifts of attention and interest, and errors in applying this knowledge in
actual performance. (p. 3)

For Chomsky, linguistic theory should be centered on competence as the latter is not affected by
linguistically irrelevant factors, such as distractions, inattention, speech errors or memory limitations.
However, since there was a shift from structural to functional view of language, Chomsky modified his
model accordingly by including what he calls “pragmatic competence”. The latter can be distinguished from
grammatical competence in Chomsky‟s words as follows:

… we may proceed to distinguish “grammatical competence” from “pragmatic

competence”, restricting the first to the knowledge of form and meaning, and the
second to knowledge of conditions and manner of appropriate use. (1980, p. 242)

1.3. Hymes’ Model (1972)

Hymes argues that Chomsky‟s competence is too ideal that it cannot exist in reality. According to
Hymes, there is no ideal speaker or listener nor a homogeneous community. As a reaction to this blatant
inadequacy in Chomsky‟s model, Hymes rejected the dichotomy competence and performance by asserting
that competence and performance are two sides of the same coin. He, therefore, theorized what is called
communicative competence arguing that “there are rules of use without which the rules of grammar would be
useless” (Hymes 1972, p. 278). Communicative competence, in general terms, refers to the appropriateness
of language use to context. Hymes argues that producing acceptable sentences is not a question of mastering
the grammar of language; it is, in fact, question of appropriateness which is conditioned to “when to speak,
when not… what to talk about, with whom, when, where, in what manner” (ibid, p. 277). These are regarded
by Hymes as a repertoire of speech acts or language functions.

1.4. Canale and Swain’s Model (1980)

Canale and Swain (1980), and Canale (1983) expanded Hymes model to include four components,
namely grammatical, discourse, strategic and sociolinguistic competence. Grammatical competence is
"knowledge of lexical items and of rules of morphology, syntax, sentence-grammar semantics, and
phonology" (Canale and Swain 1980, p. 29). It is this type of competence that can be equated with Chomky‟s
linguistic competence. The second type of competence is discourse competence, which, in Swain‟s words
(1984, p. 188), refers to “the ability to combine grammatical forms and meanings to achieve a unified spoken
or written text in different genres. Unity of a text is achieved through cohesion in form and coherence in
meaning.” In other words, discourse competence refers to the ability to produce utterances beyond the
4
sentence level in the form of texts or conversations. Following the last line of thought, Canale and Swain
(ibid, p. 30) conceptualized what is called strategic competence, which according to them, refers to “... the
verbal and non-verbal communication strategies that may be called into action to compensate for breakdowns
in communication due to performance variables or to insufficient competence.” To put it differently, strategic
competence refers to the ability to initiate, maintain and close conversations through employing different
strategies, such as using fillers, back channeling, self-correcting, rewording or even gesturing. The last
component of communicative competence is sociolinguistic competence. According to Swain (1984):

…[sociolinguistic competence] addresses the extent to which utterances are

produced and understood appropriately in different sociolinguistic contexts,
depending on contextual factors such as topic, status of participants, and purposes of
the interaction. Appropriateness of utterances refers to both appropriateness of
meaning and appropriateness of form. (p.188)

The definition of sociolinguistic competence proposed above has highlighted four major aspects related to
appropriateness, namely appropriate production and appropriate reception, appropriate form and appropriate
meaning. With respect to the first two aspects, being socio-linguistically competent consists, for the most
part, of producing utterances appropriately and interpreting utterances in an appropriate way by taking into
account factors such as topic, situation and participants, etc. The second two aspects that characterize
sociolinguistic competence relate primarily to appropriate form and appropriate meaning . The
appropriateness of form is referred to as pragma-linguistics, which signals “the particular resources that a
given language provides for conveying particular illocutions” (Leech, 1983, p. 11); the appropriateness of
meaning refers to socio-pragmatics, which defines “the ways in which pragmatic performance is subject to
specific socio-cultural conventions and values (Kasper & Blum-Kulka, 1993, p. 112)”

1.5. Bachman’s Model (1990)

The last model which is a recent modification of Canale and Swain‟s model is that of Bachman
(1990). Within this model, there is a division of language knowledge into organizational competence and
pragmatic competence. Organizational competence encompasses grammatical and textual (or discourse)
competence, both of which refer to the way utterances, sentences and texts are organized. Pragmatic
competence which includes sociolinguistic and illocutionary competence is simply “the ability of knowing
what to say to whom” (English Language Guidelines for Secondary Schools: Common Core, First Year, and
Second Year Baccalaureate, 2007, p. 31). In other words, pragmatic competence consists of two sub-
components, viz. illocutionary and sociolinguistic competence. The former is the ability “to interpret
relationships between utterances or sentences and texts and the intentions of language users” (Bachman and
Palmer, 1996, p.69). This includes knowledge of producing and interpreting speech acts. Sociolinguistic
competence, on the other hand, refers to the ability “to create or interpret language that is appropriate to a
5
particular language use setting” (ibid, p.70). Pragmatic competence is also called socio-cultural competence
which refers to “the ability to understand and use utterances appropriately in different sociolinguistic
contexts depending on contextual factors/ clues.” (ELGSS, p. 9)

2. Speech Act Theory

Previous studies on the same topic have dealt with speech acts with special reference to requests,
apology, and compliment. Others attempted to provide a superfluous analysis of speech acts that exist in the
two Moroccan textbooks, namely Ticket to English and Insights into English. To mention but a few, Latif
(2001) attempted to provide a socio-pragmatic study of EFL Moroccan learners‟ requests, and Banbarka
(2002) dealt with pragmatic transfer in EFL Moroccan learners‟ apologies. All these studies attempted to test
students, either at the university or high school level, on speech acts under the assumption that students have
this meta-pragmatic (meta-sociolinguistic) knowledge about speech acts. Moreover, they all seem to agree
that the academic level does not play a major role in pragmatic ability. In this respect, the present study came
to investigate Moroccan EFL baccalaureate students‟ sociolinguistic competence in relation to what they
have been exposed to in the classroom in order to test the extent to which their interpretation and production
of speech acts reflect their sociolinguistic competence and whether what they have learnt in the classroom
enables them to express themselves in cross cultural situations. The choice of Baccalaureate students instead
of university students in this study is motivated by the fact that many students, after getting their
baccalaureate degree, will not major in English studies, while others may continue their education abroad;
hence, this level is of paramount importance in Moroccan students‟ educational journey.

The discussion carried out thus far has highlighted the important role that speech acts or language
functions play in determining sociolinguistic competence. As a matter of fact, there is huge body of literature
written on speech act theory. However, scarce are the sources that have linked this theory to the Moroccan
context. In this regard, the present section is devoted to discussing the different speech acts in the light of
Austin and Searle‟s model by drawing examples from two Moroccan Baccalaureate textbooks, namely
Insights into English and Gateway to English

2.1. Austin and Searle’s Model

Austin and Searle‟s model is often accused of being confusing in that it includes a lot of highly
technical and overlapping jargon. In order not to replicate this sense of confusion, the current discussion
focalizes on the aspects that are of direct relevance to the topic of the present research. For more information
on speech act theory, the reader is recommended to consult Austin (1962) and Searle (1989).

The most agreed upon definition of speech act is the premise that the act of speaking is an act of
doing. Utterances, in this theory, are subjected not only to truth condition, as being true or false but also to

6
felicity condition, appropriate or inappropriate. Hence, for an utterance to be felicitous, it should be
appropriate.

Speech acts consist of locution, illocution and perlocution. The first refers to the act of uttering a
sentence by conforming to language rules. The second refers to the intention of the speaker behind that form.
The third refers to the effect of the act on the hearer.

For an illocutionary act to carry an intention, it should have an illocutionary force. The latter can be
explicit or implicit. With respect to explicit illocutionary acts, there should be a formal element to encode the
illocutionary force. This formal element may be lexical or grammatical. Lexical forms include verbs, such as
thank, promise, recommend etc. whereas grammatical forms refer to structures, such as interrogative,
imperative and exclamation. In fact, there are several constraints on lexical verbs to be performative in that
they take first person pronoun and occur with hereby, either in the passive or active present tense. Implicit
speech acts are often referred to as indirect speech acts.

As was stated previously, performative speech acts are not only subjected to truth condition but also
to felicity condition. Following this condition, speech acts are said to be infelicitous or unhappy if they are
uttered inappropriately. According to Austin there are two types of infelicitous speech acts, namely misfires
and abuses. The former refer to acts that are void due to external factors, while the latter refer to acts that are
void due to internal factors. Misfires, in turn, consist of mis-invocations and mis-execution, whereas abuses
take the form of insincerities and non fulfillments.

2.2. Felicity Conditions (appropriateness)

The discussion held above paved the way for a relevant concept, namely that of appropriateness.
Instead of appropriateness, Austin employed the term felicity. A given speech act is either felicitous or
infelicitous depending on social norms.

For speech acts to be preformed appropriately, certain contextual conditions should be respected.
These conditions are called happiness conditions or felicity conditions. In this respect, Searle (1969, p. 36)
claims that speaking a language is performing actions according to specific rules, and he suggests four types
of felicity conditions: propositional content, preparatory, sincerity and essential conditions. Two major
concepts that are of direct relevance to appropriateness of speech acts will be discussed below:

a) Preparatory condition

Preparatory conditions refer to external or contextual conditions, such as the status of participants,
social distance between them, time, and place that determine the fulfillment or non fulfillment of speech acts.
If these conditions are not met, the act will not be carried out (misfired). As a case in point, for performing
declarative acts, the person performing the act must have the authority to do it, and must do it in appropriate
7
circumstances and with appropriate actions. In the case of commands, the speaker must be in authority over
the hearer, must believe that the desired action has not yet already been carried out, and that it is possible for
the hearer to carry it out. In this respect, Lyons (1977: 733) provides an explanation of the preparatory
conditions in which he claims that achieving the preparatory conditions, means that the participants have the
appropriate rights or authorities to perform speech acts. For instance, to perform an act of „ordering‟,
speakers should be in superior status than their addressees. An example of misfired speech act is the
following:

1). Teacher to students in a classroom: I hereby declare you husband and wife.
(Fabricated data)

The utterance above is inappropriate, unhappy, infelicitous, and misfired given that the teacher does not have
the authority to declare marriage, and that marriage does not take place in the classroom.

b) Sincerity condition

If preparatory conditions refer to external factors, sincerity conditions, on the other hand, are
associated with internal factors, such as intentions, feelings and thoughts. It is this sense that the Moroccan
Guidelines for Secondary Schools (2007) intend by stating that “Social/ communicative functions involve
expressing one‟s thoughts, intentions or feelings, expressing agreement and disagreement, apologizing,
complaining, etc.” (p. 32). To be more concrete, in thanking, one must have the feeling of gratitude; when
making a promise, one should sincerely carry it out; in apologizing, one should have the feeling of regret,
and the thing being apologized for should be immoral. In the same vein, Hurford (2007, p. 286) points out
that a sincerity condition on apologizing involves that the speaker should believe that the thing which he
apologizes for is morally wrong. In our context, a lot of students keep apologizing about silly things, which
causes them to be perceived unserious in the eyes of native speakers since the things for which students
apologize are not immoral. In another direction, Yule (1996: 51) argues that a sincere „warn‟ means that the
speaker should genuinely believe that this warned act will not have a beneficial effect on the hearer. If the
sincerity conditions are not met, the act will be performed, but there will be a case of an abuse as Lyons
(1977, p. 734) points out: “If the person performing the act does so insincerely (i.e. without the appropriate
beliefs or feelings) his illocutionary act will not be nullified, but he will be guilty of what Austin calls an
abuse”.

2.3. Speech Act in Moroccan EFL Textbooks

The sociolinguistic aspect of language in syllabuses can be seen in the form of speech acts. “What to
teach can be described in sociolinguistic terms as a set of speech acts or language functions” Corder (1973, p.
140). Being aware of this sociolinguistic aspect of foreign language, English Language Guidelines for
Secondary Schools (2007) state that “It is necessary to further focus on the learners developing the ability to
8
use social/communicative functions accurately (correctly) and appropriately (in the right contexts)” (p.32). It
further specifies language functions by asserting that “Social/communicative functions involve expressing
one‟s thoughts, intentions or feelings, expressing agreement and disagreement, apologizing, complaining,
asking for information, etc.” (p. 32).

Moroccan EFL learners should be able to express themselves in social and cross-cultural situations,
such as in the case of condoling, congratulating, and thanking. Failure to express oneself in such situations
may result in sociolinguistic transfer or socio-pragmatic failure in the target culture. The former occurs in the
case of “using the rules of speaking associated with one‟s own language and speech community when
speaking a second language or interacting with members of another community” (Richards & Schmidt, 1992,
p. 494). The latter takes place when “one does not know what to say to whom, for example, which questions
are appropriate to ask a guest” (Richards & Schmidt, 1992, p. 495). While sociolinguistic transfer is peculiar
to foreign language learners in cross cultural situations, socio-pragmatic failure is related also to native
speakers. In some situations which are characterized by formulaic expressions, such as condoling,
congratulating or even greeting, Moroccans sometimes may not know the linguistic and the paralinguistic
conventions to follow. For instance, greeting in Morocco is sometimes accompanied by cheek kissing and
exchanging salutations. The number of kisses between two individuals is not agreed upon. Generally, it
ranges from two to four, and normally does not exceed six at maximum. In such situations, failure to agree
on the number of kisses or exchange the suitable salutations may cause a lot of us to fall in embarrassing
situations. With respect to EFL learners, it is difficult to teach target language norms in a foreign context. In
this regard, it is confessed:

“teaching a high level of functional competence is sometimes difficult to achieve

in situations where English is not used outside the classroom. However, raising
learners’ consciousness as to the various types of functions and to the relationship
that exists between form(s) and function(s) in English, as well as allowing them
time for practice and use, would contribute to the development of the learners’
overall language competence.” (ELGSS, p. 30).

2.4. Classification of Speech Acts

According to Searle; speech act are categorized under five major headings:

Assertives: These are acts that commit the speaker to the truth of the expressed propositions. In
general, assertives include state, suggest, boast, complain, claim, report, and warn that. According to ELGSS
(2007), social/communicative functions at Level Four involve complaining as in the following:

2)

9
  I am afraid I have a complaint about
 I’m sorry to bother you, but…
 I’m sorry to have to say this, but…
 Maybe you forgot to
 Don’t get me wrong, but we I think we should… (p.27)

Directives: are speech acts that elicit some action on the part of the hearer, such as order, command,
request, beg, beseech, advise, ask, warn, and recommend: examples of asking derived from the textbook
include:

3)

 I wonder if you could possibly … (Do something for me)?

 I would appreciate it if you could … (Send me more details)?
 Could you possibly… (Translate this)?
 I’d like you to … (To work longer today) please
 I want you to (clean this). (Hamanmni et al, 2007, p.64)

Examples of advice include:

4)

 you should + (go) infinitive

 you ought ( go)
 you’d better ( stay)
 I advise you
 If I were you, I would (see) (Najib et al, 2007, p.36)

Comissives: these are speech acts that commit the speaker to some future action. Examples include
promise, vow, undertake, contract, and threaten.

Expressive: these acts make known the speaker‟s psychological attitude towards the presupposed
state of affairs. As a case in point, such acts include thank, congratulate, condole, praise, blame, forgive and
pardon.

Declaratives: like all other speech acts, declaratives are said to bring about change in life. They
originally encode the change. Examples include resign, name, divorce, christen, etc.

This classification of speech acts as proposed by Searle (1969) lacks contextualization. In this respect,
Levinson (1983) argues that speech acts cannot be classified unless they are put in their context of use. For
Moroccan learners of English, they may not be aware of indirect speech acts. Thus, the utterance it is hot in
10
here which may be said by a teacher in a classroom whose windows are locked may be interpreted by them
as a statement of the fact.

Conclusion

The present chapter has presented a synoptic collection of relevant literature on sociolinguistic
competence and speech act theory. The review of sociolinguistic competence and speech act theory presented
in this chapter shows the important role speech acts play in developing sociolinguistic competence. In the
first section, we attempted to present five models that dealt with communicative competence in general and
sociolinguistic competence in particular so as to trace the development of the latter concept from one model
to the other. Examples of this model include de Saussurre (1916), Chomsky (1965), Hymes (1972), Canale
and Swain (1970, 1973) and Bachman (1990). In the second section, an attempt was made to provide an
analysis of speech acts due to their importance in determining sociolinguistic competence, as well as to link
this theory to the Moroccan context by drawing examples from Moroccan baccalaureate textbooks.

11
 II Methodology
Introduction

The current study can be contextualized within the so-called Cross Cultural Speech Act Realization
Project. It aims to test the sociolinguistic competence of Moroccan EFL learners with respect to the
realization of four speech acts, namely advice, complaint, apology and request. The data was obtained via a
Discourse Completion Test in Moroccan Arabic and English (attached in appendices 1 and 2). The latter
includes 8 situations introduced by some contextual information about participants‟ social distance, power
relation and degree of imposition. These situations include cases of advice, complaints, apologies, and
requests. 30 Moroccan EFL learners were given 30 DCTs, one in Moroccan Arabic and one in English,
whereas native speakers of English were given 30 DCTs in English. Both respondents were asked to fill in
the missing turn in each situation, thus providing the speech act under study. The aim of this chapter is, thus,
to present the methodology used in conducting the present study. First of all, the research questions and
hypothesis will be stated; then, the research approach that has been adopted in this study will be presented
and explained. Furthermore, the data collection procedures and the research variables will be discussed at
length followed by an outline of the population and the sampling procedures.

1. Research Questions and Hypothesis:

1.1 The Research Questions:

The current study addresses the following questions:

Is the realization of speech acts influenced by such variables as social distance, power relation,
and degree of imposition? How is the pragmalinguistic level influenced by the sociopragmatic
norms, social distance, degree of imposition and power relation?
Is there any evidence of sociolinguistic transfer or L1 transfer in Moroccans‟ realization of
speech acts in English?
Are there cases of communication failure in students‟ attempts to produce speech acts in
English?

1.2 The Research Hypothesis:

It is hypothesized that cases of sociolinguistic transfer and pragmatic failure are more likely to be
found in students‟ linguistic performance in situations of cross-cultural communication due to the
interference of the mother tongue norms.

2. Research Approach:

12
 Given the nature of the topic, the present research adopts a qualitative approach. This approach allows
for the generation of more in-depth information. However, it restricts the number of the research tools that
can be used as data collection procedures. Using different research tools will not fit the scope of the current
paper. Hence, to compensate for these drawbacks, this single method was used differently with different
respondents.

3. Data Collection Procedure:

A discourse completion test of students‟ sociolinguistic competence is used as the main method of
data collection in the current study. DCT can be defined as a questionnaire containing very briefly described
situations designed to elicit a particular speech act. It contains short descriptions of a particular situation
intended to reveal the pattern of the speech act being studied. Participants are asked to read each situation
and respond to a prompt in writing. This type of test is very effective in inter-language pragmatic research.
According to Kasper and Dahl (1991), DCT, along with role play, serves as one of the major data collection
instruments in pragmatic research. In our context, DCT will help investigate the sociolinguistic competence
of Moroccan EFL learners.

The situations that are included in the current DCT are derived mainly from workplace life. The
reason behind focusing on these situations lies in the fact that one of the aims of the Moroccan high school
curriculum is to help students integrate in the labor market by adopting a Competency Based Approach to
education. The latter draws mainly on industrial psychology, which is a branch within applied psychology
that helps individuals develop skills to solve problems encountered in work-life situations. After their
graduation, Baccalaureate students are expected to apply for several jobs, among which are gendarmerie
royale, police officers, soldiers and even primary school teachers. Exposing second year Baccalaureate
students to these kinds of situations will enable us, in addition to testing their sociolinguistic competence, to
see the extent to which sociolinguistic competence helps in avoiding or solving communication problems
that may be encountered in workplace situations.

4. Variables:

The dependent and the independent variables are the ones that are operative within the present study.
The dependent variable includes students‟ realization of speech acts, while the independent variables
encompass several factors, such as social distance, degree of imposition and power relation between
participants. The assumption behind this division lies in the fact that social distance, degree of imposition
and power relation are more likely to influence students‟ realization of speech acts.

5. Participants:

13
 The participants were 30 second year Baccalaureate students and 30 native speakers of English in
Fes. Native speakers were used as a control group, whereas Moroccan EFL learners were taken as an
experimental group. Purposive sampling was the technique used in choosing the participants of the current
study. This type of sampling is said to be the most common one when the research question that is being
addressed is specific to the characteristics of the particular group of interest, which is subsequently examined
in detail. In short, the profiles of each group will be presented in the tables below.

5.1 Moroccan EFL learners:

30 DCTs in Moroccan Arabic and English were distributed to 30 second year Baccalaureate students
following their studies in three high schools in Fez. The three schools involved are Ibn Tachafin High
School, Ibn Maatir High School and Ibn Rochd High School. A number of ten DCTs were distributed to ten
students in each school. In general, the background information of respondents is displayed in the graph
below:

Gender Age Educational Level Major

Male Female 15- 20 20-25 2ndYear Baccalaureate Literature Physic Life and
Sciences Earth
Sciences
15 15 28 2 30 6 10 14

Table 1: Background information of Moroccan EFL learners

As can be seen above, all students are second year Baccalaureate students. However, they have different
majors. This diversification of Baccalaureate streams can be accounted for by the national charter for
education and training as follows:

74. Le cycle du baccalauréat, d'une durée de deux années, est ouvert aux élèves
issus du tronc commun et comprend deux filières principales : une filière
d'enseignement technologique et professionnelle et une filière d'enseignement
général étant entendu que chaque filière est composée de plusieurs branches et
que chaque branche comporte des disciplines obligatoires et des disciplines à
option. (National Charter for Education and Training, 1999, pp. 30-31.)

[The Baccalaureate level, which lasts for two years, is open to students of
common core curriculum, and is comprised of two fundamental streams:
technology stream and general stream. Each stream consists of several branches,
and each branch consists of mandatory modules and optional modules.]

14
5.2 Native speakers of English in the sample

In another vein, 30 native speakers following their studies in Arabic Language Institute in Fez (ALIF)
were asked to fill in the same English version of the DCT that was handed to Moroccan EFL learners. Before
being given the discourse completion tests, the respondents were asked whether they are native speakers of
English or not. In general, the profiles of native speakers of English can be displayed below:

Gender Age Educational Level Majors Nationality

Male Female 15- 20- 25- Under Graduate Postgrduate Polit Strategic Othe Americ British Other
20 25 above gradu ical communica rs an s
ate Scie tion
nce
21 9 0 28 2 13 15 2 9 15 6 23 5 2

Table 2: Background information of American and British participants

As can be seen above, the American and British respondents differ significantly in terms of educational level,
majors and nationality. Americans have different levels of education ranging from BA degree to Master
degree. Similarly, their majors vary from political science to strategic communication. It is worth
emphasizing that these degrees and majors are not found in the Arabic Language Institute in Fez which is
specialized in teaching Americans Arabic (either Standard Arabic or Moroccan Arabic) and teaching
Moroccans English. The native respondents got these degrees from their home countries. With respect to
nationality, it should be noted that the factor of nationality is not adequate in knowing whether they are
native speakers or not. Some of them have Moroccan American parents; thus, they have Moroccan American
nationalities. Others have Danish nationalities; still they are native speakers of English. In a word, the
criterion of nationality is elusive in detecting English native speakers; thus, it was not taken into account.

Conclusion

To conclude, the main objective of this chapter was to present the methodology followed in the
current study. In the beginning, the research questions and hypothesis were stated; then, the research
approach that had been adopted in this study was presented and explained. Furthermore, the data collection
procedures and the research variables were briefly stated followed by a lengthy discussion of the population.

15
 Chapter III Data Analysis:
Introduction:

The data under analysis was collected by means of a Moroccan Arabic and English written discourse
completion test. The latter consists of 4 sections. Each section includes 2 situations. The total number of
situations is 8 situations (attached in appendices 1 and 2). While the responses provided by English native
speakers are taken as baseline or standard data for comparison, the responses provided by Moroccan EFL
learners will be analyzed and crosschecked with the native data in order to determine the extent to which
Moroccan EFL learners can communicate in cross-cultural communication situations. In general, the linguistic
behavior of Moroccan EFL students will be assessed in terms of the degree of appropriateness, the number of
pragmatic transfer cases, and the number of pragmatic failure cases.

Section 1: the appropriateness of speech acts:

To assess students‟ pragmatic appropriateness in English, the formula of Brown and Levinson was
taken as a rubric for scoring. This formula was used by Brown and Levinson (1987) for assessing the
weightiness (W) of a face threatening act, which involves three essential components, namely power (P), social
distance (D) and rank of impositions (R). Thus, W = D + P+ R. Accordingly, student‟s appropriate or
inappropriate behavior is tested in terms of four situations, namely advice, complaints, apologies, and requests.

Situations Items Number of Appropriate Number of Inappropriate Answers Rate of Inappropriateness

Answers (in percentage)

Advice 1 16 14 46%
2 22 08 26%
Complaints 3 17 13 43%
4 19 11 36%
Apologies 5 21 09 30%
6 17 13 43%
Requests 7 12 18 60%
8 09 21 70%
Table 3: the frequency of appropriateness in Moroccan EFL learners’ realization of speech acts in English.

As can be seen in the figures represented in the table above, the majority of student‟s responses are appropriate
in realizing the speech acts of advice, complaints, apologies and requests. In general, the percentage of
inappropriate cases ranges from 26% to 70% depending on the situation and the type of speech act. This
indicates that student‟s linguistic behavior is sensitive to such factors as power relationship, social distance,

16
and degree of imposition. In other words, students are pragmatically aware that they should speak
appropriately depending on the situations despite their limited linguistic resources. For example, when asked to
give an advice to a friend who is very sick, and refuses to see a doctor, respondents give the following
responses:

Respondent 1 (NNS): “You must go to hospital.”

Respondent 2 (NNS): “You should go to the doctor.”

Respondent 5 (NNS): “You‟d better go to see a doctor.”

Respondent 8 (NNS): “You should go to the doctor, because you don‟t feel better.”

Respondent 9 (NNS): “Go to doctor [sic].”

Respondent 10 (NNS): “I advise you to see a doctor but if you keep refusing I have nothing to
do about it.”

Respondent 19 (NNS): “You have to see a doctor.”

These responses, when compared with the responses given by native speakers, are appropriate in the case of
advising a friend. This fact can be seen clearly in native speakers‟ responses:

Respondent 4 (NS): “No ifs, no buts; you must see a doctor.”

Respondent 6 (NS): “Go to the doctor!”

Respondent 8 (NS): “Go see a doctor now. You are being stupid.”

Respondent 11 (NS): “You should definitely see a doctor. He or she can probably give you
medicine to help you.”

Thus, it can be said that some Moroccan NNS of English approach native-like pragmatic competence in
performing the speech acts of advice. This is accounted for by the fact that the majority of students‟ responses
are by all means appropriate.

Similarly, the number of appropriate responses in the realization of the speech acts of complaints also
received high frequencies ranging from 17 to 19 cases in the two items. When Moroccan NNS of English and
native speakers of English were asked how they would complain to their director about the behavior of one of
their coworkers who is disturbing them with smoking, they provided the following answers:

Respondent 4 (NNS): “I can‟t work with a man who is smoking close to me.”

Respondent 8 (NS): “I can no longer work with this person because of his rude smoking
behavior. Please do something about it or I will be leaving this job”

In the light of the responses presented above, it can be deduced that both Moroccan NNS of English and NS
tend to use indirect strategies to express a complaint in order to mitigate its face threatening effect. However,
the NNS of English complaint is less detailed than the one by a NS of English.
17
 As responses to complaints usually trigger an apology, asking students to respond to a complaint will
make them realize the speech act of apologizing. The frequency of appropriateness of the pragmatic
performance of this speech act is generally said to be high in that it varies from 17 to 21 cases. When asked to
respond to a complaint made by a client about delaying his service, Respondent 10 (NNS) provided the
following answer:

“I‟m very sorry sir, this is the first time it happens to us. We will solve this problem as soon as
possible.”

Respondent 2 (NS): “I am sorry for the delay. We are trying to get it to you as fast as possible.
Thank you for your patience.”

This answer provided by respondent 10 approximates the one presented by a native speaker in terms of the
strategies used in making an apology. Both responses respect the strategies for performing an apology as
specified by cross-cultural pragmatic research. These strategies can be summarized in expression of apology (I
am sorry), a formula that expresses lack of intent (this is the first time it happens to us), and offer of repair (We
will solve this problem as soon as possible). Accordingly, this observation made here attests to the fact that
some NNS reach a native-like pragmatic competence in their L2 interlanguage pragmatic development.

Last but not least, the frequency of appropriateness in the realization of the speech act of request ranges
from 12 to 10 cases in both items. NNS and NS provided more or less similar responses in attempting to
request someone who has parked his car in a non parking zone:

Respondent 9 (NNS): “Excuse me sir, this place is not parking area [sic], you should move
your car from here right now please.”

Respondent 13(NNS): “You can‟t park your car here, it interdit [sic]. Please respect the law.”

Respondent 4 (NS): “I am afraid you won‟t park here as this is a non parking zone. Could you
please move your vehicle?”

Respondent 1 (NS): “you can‟t park here”

Although the responses provided by both NNS and NS are similar in terms of the structure of a request, they
differ mainly in the types of strategies used. In contrast to NNS answers, what is quite remarkable in NS
responses is that NS make use of conventionally indirect strategies (indirect speech acts). This type of
strategies can be exemplified in the expression “could you please move your vehicle” as stated by respondent 4
above. Moreover, although Moroccan NNS respect the structure of a request in that they use an address term
(excuse me sir), a head act (you should move your car from here right now), and an adjunct to a head act (this
place is not parking area), the order in which these strategies take place is reversed. That is, NNS sometimes
start with an adjunct to a head act, then a head act as in the response of respondent 9. However, all these
variations in the responses of NNS are less likely to make their linguistic behavior sound inappropriate.

18
 The highest frequency of inappropriate linguistic behavior among NNS can be found in the responses
provided to the second item of performing a request. 21 of the answers are inappropriate in a response to
situation in which respondents have to request their university teacher to repeat a question they have not heard
well. This high degree of inappropriateness can be explained by two major factors, namely pragmatic transfer
and pragmatic failure. These last two issues will be dealt with separately in the following subsections.

Section 2: cases of pragmatic transfer:

Pragmatic transfer, which can be defined as the carryover of linguistic or cultural knowledge from one
language to another, seems to characterize Moroccan EFL learners‟ linguistic behavior. It mainly refers to the
influence exerted by learners‟ pragmatic knowledge of languages and cultures other than L2 on their
comprehension, production, and acquisition of L2 pragmatic information. Pragmatic transfer can be divided
into: transfer of linguistic knowledge (pragmalinguistic transfer) and transfer of native cultural conventions
(sociopragmatic transfer). When this transfer facilitates the learning of language, it is said to be positive
pragmatic transfer: when this transfer hinders language learning, it is said to be negative pragmatic transfer. In
the present section, Moroccan EFL learners‟ cases of pragmatic transfer in advice, complaint apology and
request will be analyzed and crosschecked with both the Moroccan Arabic data and the English data.

Situations Items Cases of Positive Pragmatic Cases of Negative Pragmatic The Frequency of
Transfer Transfer Pragmatic Transfer
Advice 1 04 05 09
2 02 05 07
Complaints 3 00 04 04
4 01 03 04
Apologies 5 00 02 02
6 00 03 03
Requests 7 00 02 02
8 02 13 15
Table 4: the frequency of pragmatic transfer in Moroccan EFL learners’ realization of speech acts in English.

A close look at the graph above reveals that the rate of pragmatic transfer varies slightly from one situation to
another. In expressing advice, the rate of pragmatic transfer ranges from 9 to 7 cases. When students were
asked to give an advice to their sick friend who refuses to see a doctor, they provided the following responses:

Respondent 16 (NNS): “May Allah guide you”

Respondent 26 (NNS): “Drink ə zeʕtar [Thyme] or lħalba [funegreek]” [modified data]

19
The examples cited above reveal that there are cases of sociopragmatic transfer from Moroccan Arabic in
learners‟ behavior in the target language. The reasons behind these sociopragmatic violations, so to speak, lie
in that some semantic formulas are used only in Moroccan Arabic. Thus, transferring this social knowledge
from Moroccan Arabic to English gives rise to negative sociopragmatic transfer. For example, the expressions
“May Allah guide you” and “Insha Allah” (if Allah wills) are culture specific. Such expressions characterize
the pragmatic behavior of students who have an Islamic background. Moreover, advising someone who is sick
to drink thyeme or funegreek is typically Moroccan given that Moroccans are very convinced of the
effectiveness of the so-called alternative medicine in healing common sickness such as flue, fever and the like.
The reason behind this pragmatic transfer is rooted in the influence of Moroccan culture norms, which are
reflected in language. A further evidence of this L1 influence on the linguistic behavior of EFL students in the
L2 is the existence of transfer at the level of language structure as in the following examples:

Respondent 7 (NNS): “you should go to see a doctor it is important to [sic] your health.” (for)
[emphasis added]

Respondent 7: /xasek tamʃi llt̪ ˁbi:b rah darori l sˁaħtək/ [emphasis added]

Respondent 14 (NNS): “visite doctore [sic]” (visit a doctor) [emphasis added]

Surprisingly, the linguistic performance of Moroccan EFL learners is not only influenced by Moroccan Arabic
but also by French, which is considered a second language in Morocco, thus, taught from primary education.
The transferred linguistic features include the preposition “to” in “important to your health” “darori l sˁaħtək”,
and the silent “e” as in “visite doctore”. While the first linguistic feature is transferred from Moroccan Arabic,
the latter two linguistic features are transferred from French. This cross-linguistic influence has repercussions
on the pragmalinguistic competence of Moroccan EFL learners.

As there are cases of pragmatic transfer in EFL learners‟ realization of advice, there is ample evidence
of L1 pragmatic transfer in the realization of complaints. When asked to complain to their director about being
disturbed by the smoking behaviour of one of their coworkers, respondent 1 (NNS) provided the following
response:

Respondent 1 (NNS): “Mister, I want to tell [sic] my coworker is always disturbing me with
smoking if you tell his [sic] stop smoking in the company.”

The complaint given by respondent 1 contains a serious case of pragmatic transfer. This case of pragmatic
transfer is exemplified in saying “I want to tell”. This expression is obviously a result of transfer from
students‟ mother tongue. In Moroccan Arabic, when one starts his or her speech, he sometimes may use the
expression “bRi:t ngol lik”. Although this expression is appropriate in Moroccan Arabic, using it in addressing
someone who has a high status in English is downright rude. In subsequent cases, some students say “I want
you to”. This expression is rather rude. It may make the addressee offended. However, if a student makes a
20
grammatical mistake, the addressee may not be offended. Thus, pragmatic failure caused by the interference of
the mother tongue is more likely to cause social conflict in addition to miscommunication.

In addition to expressing complaints, expressing apologies can also be susceptible to pragmatic transfer.
While the majority of Moroccan EFL learners expressed an apology in appropriate way, some evidence of
pragmatic transfer can still be detected. One example of negative pragmalinguistic transfer can be found in the
following response to coming late for work:

Respondent 12 (NNS): “Road is full I am sorry.”

The example above illustrates a case of negative pragmaliguistic transfer caused by the interference of
Moroccan Arabic. This instance is judged as such because there is no case of such apology structure in the
responses provided by native speakers of English. Thus, it can be explained by the fact that, in order to express
an apology in Moroccan Arabic, one can say “/ra ttri:q ʔamra sməħ li/”. In native speakers‟ responses, the
expression I am sorry usually comes first then followed by justification and a promise of repair as in the
following:

Respondent 11 (NS): “I am sorry for my impromptness, I had problems with my commute. I

will be on time from here on out.”

Another remark that arises in NNL realization of the act of apologizing is that Moroccan ELL learners often
confuse the structure used for expressing complaints with the one used in expressing apology due to the
similarity that exists in these two speech acts in English. In an attempt to express an apology to a director for
not finishing a bill on time, respondent 13 provided the following response:

Respondent 13 (NNS): “I am sorry to bother you but I don‟t finish [sic] the document because I
have a problem personnel [sic].” (haven‟t finished) (a personal problem)

The formula “I am sorry to bother you but” is not appropriate in expressing an apology per se. it is, in fact,
used as a preparatory strategy for making a complaint. This fact can be explained by the total absence of such a
formula in native speakers‟ apologies. It exists only in expressing complaints as in the following:

Respondent 23 (NS): “I don‟t mean to complain, but you should really talk … about his
smoking. He is not appropriate.”

Respondent 13 (NS): “I don‟t want to make a fuss but my collegue [sic] keeps smoking and it is
disturbing my work”

One final example which seems to deviate from L2 apology norms can be found in the following:

Respondent 18 (NNS): “Sir this document is very difficult I want you to give me another time
for finish [sic].”

In this response, an apology has been changed to a request. However, the expression of this request is
inappropriate due to L1 negative pragmatic transfer. The fact of saying “I want you to give me another time”
21
is, in fact, inappropriate L2 linguistic behavior that arises out of the negative pragmalinguistic transfer from
Moroccan Arabic. In this language, we can say to someone “bRitik tddi:r lia chi ħaja”. However, saying to
someone “I want you” involves a high degree of face threat.

Further cases of pragmatic transfer can be found in expressing the speech act of request. As a response
to requesting someone who parked his car illegally, students provided the following responses:

Respondent 25 (NNS): “You can‟t park your car here, it interdit [sic]. Please respect the law.”

Respondent 18 (NNS): “Sir, this place is not parking for cars So please, move it to here [sic].”

Pragmatic transfer in expressing request in the classroom context results in one of the most reported issue by
both native speaker teachers and non native speaker teachers in the classroom community. In a situation where
students have to ask their university teacher to repeat a question, they provided the following answers:

Respondent 1 (NNS): “I am sorry teacher can you repeat the question?”

Respondent 26 (NNS): “I‟m sorry to say this, but I did not hear the question. Well can you repeat
it please?”

Respondent 28 (NNS): “Would you please repeat the question if you want?”

Respondent 29 (NNS): “Please, teacher repeat.”

Respondent 14 (NS): “Sorry, professor. I couldn‟t hear you. Could you please repeat what you
said?”

Respondent 13 (NS): “I‟am sorry, I didn‟t hear you.”

Respondent 6 (NS): “Sorry, say it again?

Respondent 11 (NS): “Can you please repeat the question! I couldn‟t hear it.”

Respondent 17 (NS): “Sorry, I didn‟t hear the question, would you say it again please?”

A contrastive analysis of the pragmatic data elicited from Moroccan EFL learners and the data generated from
native speakers reveal that the frequency of addressing a teacher “teacher” is 0% in native speakers‟ requests.
Although the address term „teacher‟ is used as an attention getter for asking a request, it is a case of an outright
pragmatic transfer. That is why there is a high frequency of negative pragmatic transfer in Moroccan EFL
learners‟ response.

In sum, the pragmatic interlanguage data elicited from Moroccan students are full of pragmatic transfer
cases. These differences are traceable to transfer from L1. Examples of pragmatic transfer in students‟
realization of advice, apology, complain and request include the use of the expression “I want you” even when
talking to a higher status hearer. The fact that these strategies did not occur in the American data, while being
22
used by Moroccan EFL learners, is suggestive of cases of negative transfer. The small percentage of positive
pragmatic transfer in Moroccans EFL learners‟ pragmatic interlanguage data is mainly due to the huge
dissimilarity between Moroccan Arabic and English in the linguistic rules and pragmatic norms.

Section 3: cases of pragmatic failure:

Pragmatic failure is the major cause behind cross-cultural communication breakdown. It refers mainly
to “not understanding what is meant by what is said” (Thomas, 1983). Generally, pragmatic failure is said to be
caused mainly by pragmalinguistic errors and sociopragmatic errors in addition to pragmatic transfer. This can
result in pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic failure. In general, Cases that constitute pragmatic failure in the
responses of Moroccan EFL learners are computed and statistically calculated as can be seen in the graph
below:

Situations Items Cases of Cross Cases of Cross Cultural Rate of Pragmatic failure
Cultural Pragmatic Pragmatic Success
Failure
Advice 1 12 18 40%
2 13 17 41%
Complaints 3 12 18 40%
4 14 16 45%
Apologies 5 09 21 30%
6 14 16 45%
Requests 7 11 19 40%
8 21 09 70%
Table 5: the frequency of pragmatic failure in Moroccan EFL learners’ realization of speech acts in English.

The table above shows a varying degree of cross-cultural pragmatic failure in Moroccan EFL learners‟
communicative behavior in the realization of four types of speech acts, namely advice, complaints apologies,
and requests. In general, the frequency of pragmatic failure in students‟ responses to the four situations ranges
from 30% to 70%, which indicates that the likelihood of pragmatic failure is governed by the nature of the
situation as well as the type of speech act.

To start with, the frequency of pragmatic failure in the realization of an advice ranges from 12 to 13
cases. As a response to giving an advice to a friend who has failed the Baccalaureate exam, the following
answer was provided:

Respondent 12 (NNS): “May friend today Bac insha Allah”

23
The reason behind such communication failure can be traceable mainly to the lack of linguistic proficiency.
The scarce linguistic and pragmatic resources in expressing the speech act of advice are one of the major
reasons behind “not understanding what is meant by what is said” (Thomas, 1983). What is quite interesting is
that intra-cultural pragmatic failure can occur in even the mother tongue due to intra-cultural and intra-lingual
differences. An illustration of this fact can be found in the following response about giving an advice to a
friend who has failed the Baccalaureate exam:

Respondent 16 (NNS of Moroccan Arabic): “/ənta lli xrajti ʕla ra:sk byedek ditiha flalla o malli
o t qarqi:b stta:lli o lxro:j mʕa lbna:t iwa lʕam jay tsenna/”

Not every MA native speaker can produce or understand such an expression. Thus, failure to deduce the
meaning of such a ritualized formula is more likely to result in sociopragmatic failure even among native
speakers of MA. This indicates that in the different regional and social dialects of Moroccan Arabic, politeness
is expressed differently. This renders the pragmatic aspect of language a potentially explosive area in which
one should tread carefully, to use Thomas‟ words.

In addition to advice, cases of pragmatic failure in expressing apology range from 12 to 14. One major
reason behind pragmatic failure in this speech act is due to pragmatic transfer from L1. When asked to make a
complaint to a director about the smoking behavior of a coworker, one of the respondents provided the
following answer:

Respondent 14: (NSS): “My friend in working [sic] is smoking very much Talk to him”

Respondent 14 (NS of Moroccan Arabic): “Sməħli a saʕadat lmodi;r, rah saħbi taykmi bza:f
flxadma, ħawel thdar mʕah”

As can be seen above, the conventional way of complaining in Moroccan Arabic is transferred to English
resulting in pragmatic failure in that language. While the Moroccan Arabic version contains some politeness
markers such as \smaħli\ [excuse me], \saʕadat lmodi:r\,[Mr. the director], the English version lacks politeness
markers. Making a complaint to director is a very face-threatening act in Moroccan Arabic. Thus, a lot of
politeness strategies are used to the extent that there is a change from Moroccan Arabic to what is called
Middle Spoken Arabic or Educated Arabic. An example of this can be found in the following responses:

Respondent 2: “/a si lmodir kima ka taʕref lgaro modir bəᵴaħa dyal li kaydaxen o li taykon Ri
gales ħdaħ ra zami:l dyali fl ʕamel dima mberzetni belgaro o bRitek twoqfo ʕend ħdo/”

[Sir, as you know, smoking is harmful for those who smoke and those who don‟t smoke. My
colleague is always disturbing me with smoking, and I would like you to stop him in his limits]

The same fact is also true of English which has different varieties varying from American to British English
and from Standard to non Standard English.

24
 In contrast to advice and complaint, the speech act of apology contains less cases of pragmatic failure
ranging from 9 to 14 cases. Indeed, there is a great deal of pragmatic success, so to speak, in students‟
linguistic behavior as in the following:

Respondent 4 (NNS):”I am very sorry the buss has not come on time”

Respondent 23 (NS): “I am really sorry, there were terrible problems getting to work today.”

As can be seen above, learners‟ realization of the speech act of apology matches that of native speakers. Thus,
it constitutes a case of pragmatic success, as it were.

Last but not least, requesting in English can also be subject to pragmatic errors and pragmatic failure.
Generally speaking, the frequency of pragmatic failure in requests range from 11 to 21 cases depending on the
nature of situations. For example, in the situation where Moroccan learners have to imagine themselves as
police officers requesting someone who has illegally parked his car to move it, students provided the following
responses:

Respondent 20 (NNS): “could you please move your car this is not a parking [sic]”

Respondent 4 (NS): “I am afraid you won‟t park here as this is a non parking zone. Could you
please move your vehicle?”

Both the inter-language data and the native data match in terms of the strategies used in performing the speech
act of request. The strategy employed in performing a request is conventionally indirect. This strategy is also
known as indirect speech act, and is used to show politeness. What further reinforces this politeness is the
semantic formula “please”, which is used to soften the degree of imposition. However, it seems that the degree
of imposition in this situation should be high. Thus, it can be deduced that both answers seem to be
inappropriate in such a situation. Furthermore, when students have to request their university teacher to repeat
a question they haven‟t heard well, they provided the following answers:

Respondent 1 (NNS) “Sorry teacher but I am not hear [sic] you so please reply [sic] the
question.”

A close look at the example above reveals that there are cases of pragmatic errors which reflect L1 pragmatic
transfer and L2 pragmatic as well as linguistic overgeneralization. This type of pragmalinguistic errors can be
traceable to L2 lexical overgeneralization. In the example above, it is due to the similarities that exist between
“repeat” and “reply” in English that this error is more likely to occur. The teacher could interpret students
request to repeat the question as a request to reply the question: thus, this instance of pragmatic failure amounts
to creating miscommunication.

25
 In some situations, students remain silent. That is, they do not know what to say at all due to total lack
of linguistic resources needed to express oneself in some situations. This act is the extreme type of cross-
cultural pragmatic failure, which leads to a total communication breakdown

Conclusion

To conclude, the main aim of the present chapter was to assess Moroccan EFL learners‟ pragmatic
behavior and crosschecked it with that of native speakers in order to detect and statistically compute the cases
of appropriateness, pragmatic transfer and pragmatic failure in the realization of four speech acts, namely
advice, complaint, apology, and request. In general, the results revealed that the degree of sociolinguistic
appropriateness varies from one situation to another due to the pragmatic and the linguistic influence of the
MA norms and the French language structure. The cases of negative pragmatic transfer and the limited
linguistic and pragmatic resources were discovered to be the main reasons behind students‟ commitment of
pragmatic failure and pragmatic errors in the realization of speech acts in English.

26
General Conclusion
The main objective of the current study was to investigate the sociolinguistic competence of
Moroccan EFL learners with respect to the realization of four speech acts, namely advice, complaint, apology
and requests. In this respect, different accounts of language knowledge and language use were theoretically
reviewed. Moreover, since language knowledge and language use are concomitant with speech act theory,
the latter was theoretically surveyed drawing mainly on Austin and Searle‟s model along with studies done
on speech acts. The discussion carried out in the literature review amounted to questioning the extent to
which the linguistic behavior of Moroccan EFL learners is sensitive to such variables as power, social
distance and rate of imposition. Moreover, the realization of speech acts was also questioned for cases of
pragmatic transfer and pragmatic failure. In general, it was hypothesized that cases of pragmatic transfer and
pragmatic failure are more likely to be found in students‟ realization of speech acts in English due to the
interference of the mother tongue norms and the lack of adequate linguistic as well as pragmatic resources. In
this regard, a DCT in Moroccan Arabic and English was incorporated in the present study. While 30 DCTs
both in MA and English were handed to 30 second year Baccalaureate students in three high schools in Fez,
30 English native speakers in an Arabic Language Institute in Fez were asked to fill in the same English
version of the DCT that was handed to Moroccan EFL learners.

The findings derived from the current study showed a varying degree of pragmatic appropriateness,
pragmatic transfer and pragmatic failure in students‟ realization of speech acts due to several reasons. With
respect to appropriateness, Moroccan EFL students generally seemed to be pragmatically aware of the role of
power relationship, status and degree of imposition on the realization of speech acts. Thus, the majority of
students‟ pragmatic performance was found to conform to that of native speakers. Moreover, several cases of
pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic transfer were attested in students‟ attempts to realize different speech
acts. This pragmatic transfer was attributed mainly to the linguistic and the pragmatic influence exerted by
Moroccan Arabic and French on students‟ realizations of speech acts in English. Additionally, the huge
linguistic and pragmatic dissimilarities that exist between English and Moroccan Arabic were found to be
one of the major reasons behind negative pragmatic transfer that characterizes Moroccan EFL learners‟
linguistic and pragmatic behavior. Furthermore, given that pragmatic transfer results in pragmatic failure,
Moroccan EFL learners‟ sociolinguistic performance was also susceptible to pragmatic errors, which
ultimately led to pragmatic failure or communication breakdown. Another reason behind pragmatic failure
relates to the so-called L2 pragmatic and linguistic overgeneralization. Moroccan EFL Learners were found
to overgeneralize some pragmatic strategies that are used in expressing complaints to other situations that
express requests, thus resulting in pragmatic confusion, as it were. In general, investigating pragmatic
appropriateness, pragmatic transfer and pragmatic failure had to a larger extent reflected Moroccan EFL

27
Learners‟ sociolinguistic competence, especially with respect to expressing advice, complaints, apologies and
requests.

In this regard, it is recommended that contrastive analysis be used by EFL teachers in order to detect
the areas where pragmatic transfer and pragmatic failure are more likely to occur. Furthermore, further
research to investigate Moroccan EFL learners‟ pragmatic performance in the realization of other speech acts
is strongly called for in order to help learners and students understand the peculiarities that characterize the
development of interlanguage pragmatics.

28
 Bibliography
Austin, J.L. (1962). How to do Things with Words. New York: Oxford University Press.

Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford. Oxford,

University press.

Benbarka, L. (2002). Pragmatic Transfer in EFL Moroccan Learners‟ Apologies. Unpublished

DESA dissertation, Faculty of Education. Mohamed V, Souissi, Rabat

Canale, M.; Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical Bases of Communicative Approaches to Second Language
Teaching and Learning. Applied Linguistics (1): 1–47. Retrieved January 29, 2015.

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Massachusetts: The Massachusetts Institute of
Technology Press.

Chomsky, N. (1980). Rules and Representations. New York: Colombia University.

Corder, S.P. (1973). Introducing Applied Linguistics. Harmondsworth : Penguin.

Færch, C., & Kasper, G. (1983). Strategies in Interlanguage Communication. London: Longman.

Hassim, M.S, et al. (2007). Gateway to English. Rabat: Nadia Edition

Hurford, J. R. Heasley, B & Smith, B.M. (2007). Semantics. United States of America: Cambridge
University Press.

Hymes, D. (1972) „Models of the Interaction of language and Social Life‟, in J. Gumperz and D.
Hymes (eds) Directions in Sociolinguistics, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, pp. 35–71.

Hymes, D. (1974) Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach, Philadelphia, PA:

University of Pennsylvania Press.

Kasper, G., & Blum-Kulka, S. (1993). “Interlanguage Pragmatics: An Introduction”. In G.

Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage Pragmatics, (3 –18). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Latif, H. (2001). A Sociopragmatic Study of EFL Moroccan Learners‟ Requests. Unpublished

DESA dissertation, Faculty of Education. Mohamed V, Souissi, Rabat.

Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Moroccan English Guidelines for Secondary Schools: Common Core, First Year and Second Year
Baccalaureate, (2007)

29
 Najib, M. and E.M El Hadad, (2007). Insights into English. Rabat: El Massar Edition.

Phillips, John. and Tan, Chrissie (The Literary Encyclopedia ), Competence Retrieved on January 17,
2015.

Richards J.C. & Schmidt R. (1992). Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied
Linguistics. London: Longman Group UK Limited.

Saussure, F. de. (1983/1916). Course in General Linguistics. Edited by Charles Bally and Albert
Sechehaye with the collaboration of Albert Riedlinger. Translated by Roy Harris. London: Gerald
Duckworth & Co. Ltd. (Original work published in 1916).

Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 91-112.

Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press.

30
Appendices:
Appendix 1: Discourse Completion Task in English

Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdallah University Applied Language Studies and

Faculty of Arts and Human Sciences Research in Higher Education
Master Program
Dhar Mehraz, Fez

Discourse Completion Task

The main aim of this Discourse Completion Task is to investigate “the Sociolinguistic
Competence of Moroccan EFL Learners”. You are kindly asked to complete the whole task.
The information you will provide will remain strictly confidential .
Thank you very much for your cooperation

Instructions: Please, respond to the following situations and write down what you would say
in each of the situations. Make sure to read the whole situation carefully before you respond.
This is not a test, so there are no wrong or right answers; just answer as spontaneously as you
can.

Background information:

1. Gender: 1.  male 2.  female

2. Age:

1. Between 15 and 20

2. Between 20 and 25

3. 25 above

3. Educational level: ………………………………

4. Major: …………………………………………..

Situations related to giving advice:

31
5. Your friend is seriously sick, and he refuses to see a doctor. What would you say?

…………………………………………………………………………......................................
......................................................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................................................

6. One of your close friends has failed the Baccalaureate exam because he did not study hard,
what would you say?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………….…………

Situations related to making and responding to complaints:

7. Imagine that you are working in a company, and one of your co-workers is always
disturbing you with smoking. You have talked to him several times to stop smoking, but that
was in vain. Now that you want to make a complaint about him to the director, what would
you say?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………

8. You are a shop assistant, and one of your customers is complaining about not sending the
service he or she asked for on time, how would you respond?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Situations related to making apologies:

9. You are working in an international company. Today, you had some problem, and you
could not get to work on time. You want to apologize about this to your director, what would
you say?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………

10. You are asked to finish a document, but you have not finished it on time, what would you
say?

32
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………

Situations related to making requests:

11. You are a police officer in Marrakech city, and one of the tourists has parked his car in
non-parking area, what would you say?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………

12. You are in an amphitheatre. Your teacher asked you a question, but you did not hear the
question well. What would you say?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………

In case you have further remarks, feel free to add them.

…………………………………………………..………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………

Thank you so much for your cooperation

33
 ‫‪Appendix 2: Discourse Completion Task in Moroccan Arabic‬‬

‫جامعة سٌدي محمد بن عبد هللا‬

‫اىيساّ‪ٞ‬ات اىَطثقة ٗاىثحث ف‪ٜ‬‬
‫كلٌة اآلداب والعلوم اإلنسانٌة ظهر‬ ‫اىحعي‪ ٌٞ‬اىعاى‪ٜ‬‬
‫المهراز فاس‬

‫استمارة‬

‫تهدف هذه اإلستمارة إلى دراسة القدرة السوسٌولسانٌة لدى تالمٌذ اللغة اإلنجلٌزٌة بالسنة الثانٌة باكالورٌا‪ .‬و بالتالً نطلب منكم اإلجابة‬
‫على جمٌع أسئلة هذه اإلستمارة‪ ،‬علما أن هوٌاتكم و المعلومات التً سٌتم اإلفادة بها فً هذه اإلستمارة ستبقى فً غاٌة السرٌة ‪.‬‬

‫التعليمات‪ :‬الرجاء الرد على الحاالت التالٌة بإستعمال الدّارجة‪ .‬تأكد من قراءة الحاالت بتمعن قبل الرد ‪ .‬المرجو أن تكون إجاباتك تلقائٌة ‪.‬‬

‫الشطز األول‪:‬‬

‫‪ .1‬اىدْس‪:‬‬

‫‪ .1 ‬رمش‬

‫‪ .2 ‬أّث‪ٚ‬‬

‫‪ٍ .2‬إ٘ سْل(‪)ٛ‬؟‬

‫‪ٍ .1 ‬ا ت‪ 20 ٗ 15 ِٞ‬سْة‬

‫‪ٍ .2 ‬ا ت‪ 25 ٗ 20 ِٞ‬سْة‬

‫‪ٍ .3 ‬ا ت‪ 30ٗ 25 ِٞ‬سْة‬

‫‪ .4 ‬أمثش ٍِ ‪ 30‬سْة‬

‫‪ٍ . .3‬ا ٕ٘ ٍسح٘اك اىذساس‪ٜ‬؟‬

‫‪............................................................‬‬

‫‪.4‬ف‪ ٜ‬أ‪ ٛ‬ضعثة جحاتع(‪ )ِٝ‬دساسحل؟‬

‫‪...........................................................‬‬

‫الشطز الثاني‪ :‬وضعيات مزتبطة بإعطاء نصائح‬

‫‪ .5‬صاحثل ٍش‪ٝ‬ض تضاف أُ ٍثغاش ‪ٝ‬ط٘ف اىطث‪ٞ‬ة‪ ,‬أش غاجق٘ه ى‪ ٔٞ‬؟‬

‫‪..........................................................................................................................................................................................‬‬
‫‪..........................................................................................................................................................................................‬‬

‫‪ٗ .6‬احذ ٍِ صحاتل ٍاّدحص فاىثاك الحقاش ٍاقشاش ٍض‪ٝ‬اُ ‪ ,‬أش غاجق٘ه ى‪ٔٞ‬؟‬

‫‪34‬‬
‫‪..........................................................................................................................................................................................‬‬
‫‪..........................................................................................................................................................................................‬‬

‫الشطز الثالث‪ :‬وضعيات مزتبطة باإلحتجاج و اإلجابة علي اإلحتجاج أو الشكوى‬

‫‪ .7‬جخ‪ٞ‬و تأّل خذاً ف‪ ٜ‬ضشمة‪ٗ ,‬احذ ٍِ ى‪ ٜ‬خذاٍ‪ٍ ِٞ‬عاك د‪َٝ‬ا ٍثشصطل تاىناسٗ‪ .‬جححاٗه د‪َٝ‬ا جٖذس ٍعآ تاش ٍا ‪ٝ‬ثقاش ‪ٝ‬ذخِ ٗىنِ تذُٗ خذٗ‪ .ٙ‬داتا‬
‫تغ‪ٞ‬ث جطن‪ ٜ‬ت‪ ٔٞ‬ىَذ‪ٝ‬ش‪ ,‬أش غاجق٘ه ؟‬

‫‪..........................................................................................................................................................................................‬‬
‫‪..........................................................................................................................................................................................‬‬

‫‪ .8‬جخ‪ٞ‬و تأّل خذاً فسْحش دات‪ٞ‬و‪ٗ ,‬احذ ٍِ صتْاء أجاصو ت‪ٞ‬ل ٗتذ‪ ٙ‬ج‪ٞ‬ححح الحقاش ٍاسسيح٘ش ى‪ٗ ٔٞ‬احذ اىَْح٘ج ماّطشآ أّٗي‪ .ِٞ‬م‪ٞ‬فاش غاجداٗب فٖاد‬
‫اىحاىة؟‬

‫‪..........................................................................................................................................................................................‬‬
‫‪..........................................................................................................................................................................................‬‬

‫الشطز الزابع‪ :‬وضعيات مزتبطة باإلعتذار‬

‫‪ .9‬جخ‪ٞ‬و خذاً ف‪ ٜ‬ضشمة عاىَ‪ٞ‬ة‪ ,‬ى‪ٍ٘ٞ‬ا ماّ٘ عْذك ٍطامو فاىطش‪ٝ‬ق أٍاقذسج‪ٞ‬ص ج٘صو ىخذٍة فاى٘قث‪ ,‬تغ‪ٞ‬ث جعحزس اىَذ‪ٝ‬ش د‪ٝ‬اىل أش غاجق٘ه ى‪ٔٞ‬؟‬

‫‪..........................................................................................................................................................................................‬‬
‫‪..........................................................................................................................................................................................‬‬

‫‪ .10‬طية ٍْل اىَذ‪ٝ‬ش جنَو ٗاحذ اىَيف‪ٗ ,‬ىنِ ٍامَيح‪ٖٞ‬ص فاى٘قث‪ .‬داتا اىَذ‪ٝ‬ش طيثُ٘ ٍْل أش غاجق٘ه ى‪ٔٞ‬؟‬
‫‪..........................................................................................................................................................................................‬‬
‫‪.........................................................................................................................................................................................‬‬

‫الشطز الخامس‪ :‬وضعيات مزتبطة بالطلب‬

‫‪ .11‬جخ‪ٞ‬و تأّل ت٘ى‪ٞ‬س‪ ٜ‬ف‪ٍ ٜ‬شامص‪ٗٗ .‬احذ ٍِ اىس‪ٞ‬اذ ٗقف طٍ٘٘ت‪ٞ‬يح٘ ف٘احذ ىثالصة ٍاج‪ٞ‬قف٘ش ف‪ٖٞ‬ا اىطٍ٘٘ت‪ٞ‬الت‪ ,‬أش غحق٘ه ى‪ ٔٞ‬ف‪ٖٞ‬اد اىحاىة؟‬

‫‪..........................................................................................................................................................................................‬‬
‫‪..........................................................................................................................................................................................‬‬

‫‪ .12‬جخ‪ٞ‬و تأّل ف‪ ٜ‬قاعة اىَحاضشات‪ ,‬أسحارك س٘ىل ٗاحذ اىسؤاه‪ٗ ,‬ىنِ ٍسَعح‪ٖٞ‬ص ٍض‪ٝ‬اُ‪ ,‬أضْ٘ غاجق٘ه ى‪ٔٞ‬؟‬

‫‪..........................................................................................................................................................................................‬‬
‫‪……... ..........................................................................................................................................................................‬‬

‫إرا ماّث ىذ‪ٝ‬ل(‪ )ٛ‬أ‪ٍ ٛ‬الحظات أٗ إضافات‪ ،‬جفضو(‪ )ٛ‬تئضافحٖا‪:‬‬

‫…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………‬
‫……………………………………………‪…………………………………………………………………………….‬‬
‫‪………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….‬‬

‫ضنشا خض‪ٝ‬ال عي‪ ٚ‬جعاّٗنٌ ‪.‬‬

‫‪35‬‬