Requests

4.2.2.1.1 Scenario A

“You are in class. You really need to go to the toilet and you ask your teacher for permission to leave the classroom.”

● Sociopragmatic

A paired-samples t-test was conducted to compare the scores of the test before and after the intervention, specifically scenario A from the Request section.

There was not a statistical significant difference in the scores of the pre-test (M=

3.54, SD= 0.88) and the post-test (M= 3.50, SD= 0.72) in scenario A from the Request section; t= 0.29, p= 0.077.

In this situation, the participants demonstrated from the beginning they had an almost native-like competence, for example, only one participant had a

significant improvement which raised from 1 to 3 points. The pre-test answer given was: “I’m go to the toilet, please.” which reached the native-likeness rating, while in the post-test, the answer given was: “Teacher, Sorry but I need really go to the toilet now Can I go? please”.

● Pragmalinguistic:

Figure 1Requests strategies Scenario A: Pre-test vs. Post-test

Figure 1 shows an overview of the request strategies used by the

participants in scenario A before and after the interventions. In the pre-test, the conventionally indirect strategy (CIS) was the most used by twenty-three participants, on the other hand, direct strategies, non-conventionally indirect strategies (NCIS) and supportive moves were the strategies less used by only one participant each. Meanwhile, in the post-test, CIS strategy was used in all the participant's answers, while in supportive moves was the strategy less used by only one participant, NCIS strategy was not used.

Fourteen answers did not have a difference in the pre and post-test.

4.2.2.1.2 Scenario E

“You really want to go to a music festival, but you don’t have money for the tickets. Your only option is to ask your father.”

● Sociopragmatic

A paired-samples t-test was conducted to compare the scores of the test before and after the intervention, specifically scenario E from the Request section.

There was not a statistical significant difference in the scores of the pre-test (M= 2.50, SD= 1.14) and the post-pre-test (M= 2.46, SD= 1.22) in scenario E from the Request section; t= 0.14, p= 0.88. For instance, the participants demonstrate a low level of native-likeness in the pre-test answers which decrease 0.04 points in the post-test. One participant’s answer reached the maximum score of native-likeness with the answer: “Das, i wa’t to go to a music festival this summer but i don’t Have money to buy the ticket, Would you buy it for me? I will find a way to pay you back, please.”, while the post-test answer given was: “dad, pleasee!! I badly ant to go… If you give me the money i will work to return all.”, rating the answer below the native-likeness competence.

● Pragmalinguistic:

Figure 2 Requests strategies Scenario E: Pre-test vs. Post-test

Figure 2 presents an overview of the requests strategies used by the participants in scenario E before and after the interventions. In the pre-test,

sixteen participants used the CIS strategy being the most used in this scenario, while NCIS was the less used by three participants. As the same as the pre-test, in the post-test CIS strategy was the most used by seventeen participants, and NCIS was the less strategy used in four answers.

For this scenario, two answers were not considered due to the answers cannot be compared.

4.2.2.1.3 Scenario F

“You lost your school travel pass and you don't have enough money to go home.

You ask the bus driver if he can take you for less money.”

● Sociopragmatic

A paired-samples t-test was conducted to compare the scores of the test before and after the intervention, specifically scenario A from the Request section.

There was a statistical significant difference in the scores of the pre-test (M= 1.38, SD= 0.88) and the post-test (M= 1.58, SD= 0.83) in scenario F from the Request section; t= 1.00, p= 0.32. Although there is a statistical significance, in the pre-test the majority of the participants did not reach the native-likeness in the answers, only two answers stand out among the others, one positively and the other negatively. In one hand, one participant reached the maximum score in the pre-test, who gave the following answer: “I lost my school travel pass and don't have money, Can you let me in?”, while in the post-test, the same participant gave an answer which was rated two points below the native-likeness. The post-answer was: “Hi, can you take me for less money?”.

On the other hand, a participant did not reach the native-likeness the pre-test, who gave the following answer: “Hello Mr. i just lost my school travel pass and i don't Have more money, is there a chance for me to go for less money?”

while in the post-test the answer given improved, being rated with the maximum

score in the native-likeness, the answer was: “Hey, i lost my pass and i don’t Have much money, Could you please my a little ride? It’s not to far.”

● Pragmalinguistic:

Figure 3 Requests strategies Scenario F: Pre-test vs. Post-test

Figure 3 shows the request strategies in the pre and post-test used by the participants in scenario F. In the pre-test, supportive move strategy was the most used by thirteen participants while the less used was direct strategy by only one participant. In the post-test, CIS was the strategy most used by seventeen participants meanwhile direct strategy was not used by anyone. In addition, six answers did not have differences in the strategies used.

Furthermore, three cannot be comparable being dismissed from the analysis.