Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2019 - 2024
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal EJI (English Journal of Indragiri) : Studies in Education, Literature, and Linguistics EJI (English Journal of Indragiri) : Studies in Education, Literature, and Linguistics
Trifita Handayani
IAIN Metro Lampung
Education Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
THE EFFECTS OF IMPLICIT VERSUS EXPLICIT INSTRUCTIONS TO TEACH REFUSAL STRATEGIES ON STUDENTS’ SOCIOPRAGMATIC AND PRAGMALINGUISTIC COMPETENCE Trifita Handayani
EJI (English Journal of Indragiri) : Studies in Education, Literature, and Linguistics Vol. 4 No. 1 (2020): EJI (English Journal of Indragiri) : Studies in Education, Literature, and Ling
Publisher : Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.32520/eji.v4i1.864

Abstract

Abstract The purposes of the study were to explain the effects of implicit instruction on student’s sociopragmatic competences, implicit instructions on students’ pragmalinguistic competences, explicit instructions on students’ sociopragmatic competences, explicit instructions on students’ pragmalinguistic competences, the differences between implicit and explicit instructions on students’ sociopragmatic competences, the differences between implicit and explicit instructions on student’s pragmalinguistic competences, and the interaction between instructions with the students’ sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic competences. The study used a quantitative research by using experimental factorial design 2x2. The data were taken from 80 second semester students at English Language Education Study Program at STAIN. The result of the study revealed that the mean score of post-test in implicit instruction on students’ sociopragmatic was 80.000 while explicit 92.550. Meanwhile, the mean score of post-test in implicit instruction on students’ pragmalinguistic was 83.000 while explicit 95.5000. It could be concluded that explicit has better effect to teach refusal strategies than implicit instruction on students’ sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic competence based on the difference between the means score on implicit and explicit.
THE EFFECTS OF IMPLICIT VERSUS EXPLICIT INSTRUCTIONS TO TEACH REFUSAL STRATEGIES ON STUDENTS’ SOCIOPRAGMATIC AND PRAGMALINGUISTIC COMPETENCE Trifita Handayani
EJI (English Journal of Indragiri) : Studies in Education, Literature, and Linguistics Vol. 4 No. 1 (2020): EJI (English Journal of Indragiri): Studies in Education, Literature, and Lingu
Publisher : Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.32520/eji.v4i1.864

Abstract

Abstract The purposes of the study were to explain the effects of implicit instruction on student’s sociopragmatic competences, implicit instructions on students’ pragmalinguistic competences, explicit instructions on students’ sociopragmatic competences, explicit instructions on students’ pragmalinguistic competences, the differences between implicit and explicit instructions on students’ sociopragmatic competences, the differences between implicit and explicit instructions on student’s pragmalinguistic competences, and the interaction between instructions with the students’ sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic competences. The study used a quantitative research by using experimental factorial design 2x2. The data were taken from 80 second semester students at English Language Education Study Program at STAIN. The result of the study revealed that the mean score of post-test in implicit instruction on students’ sociopragmatic was 80.000 while explicit 92.550. Meanwhile, the mean score of post-test in implicit instruction on students’ pragmalinguistic was 83.000 while explicit 95.5000. It could be concluded that explicit has better effect to teach refusal strategies than implicit instruction on students’ sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic competence based on the difference between the means score on implicit and explicit.
Co-Authors