Interlanguage Pragmatics

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. César Félix-Brasdefer
Keyword(s):  
Incidental Learning ◽  
Pragmatic Competence ◽  
Interlanguage Pragmatics ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Pedagogical Intervention ◽  
Pragmatic Development ◽  
Pragmatic Transfer ◽  
Pragmatic Failure ◽  
L2 Pragmatics

This chapter provides an overview and an assessment of central topics in interlanguage pragmatics (ILP). The chapter begins by defining the pragmatics for ILP, followed by a selective account of the main concepts covered in the field, such as pragmatic competence, the distinction between pragmalinguistics and sociopragmatics, second-language (L2) pragmatics, pragmatic transfer, pragmatic instruction, and types of pragmatic failure. Then, it describes and evaluates predominant theoretical and methodological approaches, as well as the methods generally used to collect data in ILP. The chapter also reviews research on pragmatic development, including longitudinal and cross-sectional studies, pedagogical intervention, study-abroad (SA) contexts, and pragmatic development as a result of incidental learning. The chapter ends with a discussion of future directions in ILP.

The Development of Pragmatic Competence

1996 ◽  
Vol 55 ◽  
pp. 103-120
Author(s):  
Gabriele Kasper
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Second Language Learning ◽  
Pragmatic Competence ◽  
Interlanguage Pragmatics ◽  
Social Psychological ◽  
Pragmatic Development ◽  
Psychological Theories ◽  
Research Findings

Unlike other areas of second language study, which are primarily concerned with acquisitional patterns of interlanguage knowledge over time, most studies in inter-language pragmatics have focused on second language use rather than second language learning. The aim of this talk is to profile interlanguage pragmatics as an area of inquiry in second language acquisition research, by reviewing existing studies with a focus on learning, examining research findings in interlanguage pragmatics that shed light on some basic questions in SLA, exploring cognitive and social-psychological theories that might offer explanations of different aspeas of pragmatic development, and proposing a research agenda for the study of interlanguage pragmatics with a developmental perspective that will tie it more closely to other areas of SLA.

Learning pragmatics through tasks

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Júlia Barón ◽  
M. Luz Celaya ◽  
Mayya Levkina
Keyword(s):  
Speech Acts ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Interlanguage Pragmatics ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Bilingual Students ◽  
Classroom Context ◽  
Pedagogical Intervention ◽  
Pragmatic Analysis ◽  
L2 Pragmatics ◽  
Before And After

Abstract This study aims at examining the benefits of teaching L2 pragmatics with the use of tasks. The participants were 50 Catalan/Spanish bilingual students (aged 12–14) from three intact classes who were learners of English as a Foreign Language and with an upper-intermediate level of proficiency. The three groups followed different approaches to teaching pragmatics: G1 was instructed in pragmatics following a task-supported approach; G2 was also instructed in pragmatics but no tasks were used; and G3 was a control group with no instruction on pragmatics and no use of tasks, either. To assess pragmatic learning, role-plays were used both before and after the pedagogical intervention. The pragmatic analysis focused on the speech acts of giving opinion, agreeing/disagreeing, interrupting, and acknowledging the interlocutor. Results showed that the two instructed groups, regardless of the type, were more pragmatically competent in the posttest in one of the pragmatic moves (i.e., interrupting). Additionally, G1 presented statistically significant differences in the posttest when acknowledging the interlocutor. Regarding the control group, no differences were found in any of the moves. These findings suggest that instruction in general, and task-supported instruction in particular, has a positive impact on the development of interlanguage pragmatics in a classroom context.

scholarly journals A METAPRAGMATIC ANALYSIS: A STUDY OF PRAGMATIC FAILURE FOUND IN INDONESIAN EFL STUDENTS

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 62-69
Author(s):  
Merawati Hutauruk ◽  
Dian Puspita
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Method ◽  
Research Question ◽  
The Other ◽  
Pragmatic Competence ◽  
English Text ◽  
Source Language ◽  
Pragmatic Transfer ◽  
Pragmatic Failure ◽  
Efl Students ◽  
Linguistic Proficiency

This research aimed to investigate the possibilities of pragmatic failure done by Indonesian EFL students through their translation. This study employed theories by Thomas (1983) and Muir et al (2011) to answer the research question coming along with the problem concerned. As mentioned by Natrio (2018) that Indonesian EFL students lack pragmatic competence because they don’t recognize the intention of one language transferring is inappropriate. This research used a descriptive qualitative method in collecting the data. The data were coming from students‟ performance in translating short dialogue texts which contained idioms in them. The instrument given was two-way translation, English-Indonesian, and vice versa. As the result, this study found that the respondents experienced pragmatic failure in their performance which happened in several types, namely pragma-linguistic failure and socio-pragmatic failure, both of which were found in all types of texts given. It was also found that the failure that happened in English-Indonesian text was higher in number compared to the other type of text in which in all the data found, the failure in English –Indonesian text translation is 161 while in Indonesian-English text translation is 139. On the other hand, this study also revealed that the factors of the students‟ pragmatic failure that happened in their translation performance were coming from both the pragmatic transfer which influenced by either their native, source language or their understanding and lack of linguistic proficiency.

scholarly journals Second Language Pragmatics

Linguistics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soo Jung Youn
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Social Interaction ◽  
Communicative Competence ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Pragmatic Competence ◽  
Interlanguage Pragmatics ◽  
Research Issues ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
L2 Pragmatics ◽  
Second Language Pragmatics

The field of second language (L2) pragmatics surveys a range of research issues on how L2 learners learn to use a target language in context-appropriate manners. In the late 1970s, the field of interlanguage pragmatics emerged from cross-cultural pragmatic research. The field has now moved beyond comparisons of different pragmatic norms or simply describing language use. With nearly four decades of research, second language pragmatics has now become an independent field. Informed by different theories, the scope and definitions of L2 pragmatic competence have been expanded. An accumulative body of research illuminates underlying mechanisms and processes of L2 pragmatic development and what L2 pragmatic competence entails. In part, the increasing interest in interlanguage pragmatics reflects the notion that language competence entails the ability to use language in context, in addition to grammar. L2 pragmatics is also situated in a larger domain of language teaching, reflecting a call for more context-specific and more dynamic views of L2 communicative competence. In addition to formal aspects of language (e.g., grammar), L2 communicative competence entails the ability to engage in social interaction and perform speech acts in a contextually appropriate way. This article focuses on providing selective references, since the entire literature cannot be encapsulated in an article-length format. This article is organized around six topics: (1) Theoretical Approaches, (2) Analytical Objects of L2 Pragmatics, (3) Data Elicitation Methods, (4) Instructed L2 Pragmatics, (5) Assessing L2 Pragmatics, and (6) L2 Pragmatics in Diverse Social Interaction.

Technology and L2 Pragmatics Learning

2019 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
pp. 113-127
Author(s):  
Marta González-Lloret
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Applied Linguistics ◽  
Language Education ◽  
Pragmatic Competence ◽  
Large Field ◽  
Interlanguage Pragmatics ◽  
Computer Assisted ◽  
Essential Components ◽  
L2 Pragmatics

AbstractThe field of technology and language learning, also known as CALL (computer-assisted language learning), is now a robust area of study informed by research and practice in the fields of language education, computer science, psychology, sociology, cognitive science, cultural studies, and, most of all, applied linguistics and second language acquisition (SLA). As with any other large field of study, some subareas have become the focus of study, often influenced by advances and research in applied linguistics, while others remain to be explored further; among these is the area of technology-mediated second/foreign language (L2) pragmatics, also known as interlanguage pragmatics. The lack of research in this area is puzzling if one considers that pragmatic competence is one of the essential components of communicative competence and that most of the technologies today exist in the service of communication. This article reviews the efforts so far to explore the connections between interlanguage pragmatics and a variety of technologies and innovations, as well as existing resources to bring L2 pragmatic teaching into the language classroom. It then suggests unexplored areas where technology could be used to aid the development of pragmatic competence and where pragmatic theory can inform SLA research.

Data for this study was obtained from one strata of the larger population of Syria and the US. The Syrian compliment responses were uttered by middle class people from an urban area (i.e. Damascus) and most of the American compliment responses were given by Caucasian university graduate students. One cannot assume that these findings generalize to other groups within Syria or the US or to other Arabic-speaking or English-speaking countries. Further research is needed to know how generalizable these findings are. In order for students to become communicatively competent in a second language, they need both grammatical and pragmatic competence (Thomas 1983). However, achieving pragmatic competence may, at times, be complicated due to pragmatic transfer – using the rules governing speech events from one’s L1 speech com-munity when interacting with members of an L2 speech community. Pragmatic transfer can lead to pragmatic failure, to not understanding the illocutionary force of an utterance, to not understanding what is meant by what is said (Thomas 1983). Such situations can result in cross-cultural misunderstandings and communi-cation breakdowns. Cross-cultural studies such as this one contribute to our know-ledge of appropriate compliment/compliment response competence in Syrian Arabic and American English and also to our understanding of pragmatic transfer as a possible cause for pragmatic failure. The results of this study suggest similarities and differences in Syrian Arabic and American English compliment responses. Similarities include the overall manner of responding – both Syrians and Americans are much more likely to either accept or mitigate the force of the compliment than to reject it outright. In addition, members of both groups use some similar response types (e.g. Agreeing Utterances, Compliment Returns, Deflecting or Qualifying Comments, and Reas-surance or Repetition Requests). Finally, males and females in both groups employ most of the response types. An exception is Agreeing Utterances; Syrian females did not use this response. Students of English and Arabic can use these similari-ties between Arabic and English compliment responses to their advantage by learn-ing the responses that are similar in both languages. As Kasper and Blum-Kulka (1993) point out, behaviors that are consistent across L1 and L2 usually result in communicative success. However, Hurley (1992) warns that the similarity of an L2 form to a form in the learner’s L1 can also be a pragmalinguistic problem. The danger is that the L2 learner may overgeneralize the form to inappropriate settings. Although the two groups share similarities in compliment responses, they also differ in important ways. In responding to compliments, US recipients are much more likely than Syrians to use Appreciation Tokens (e.g. thanks). The infrequency of this response in the Arabic data suggests that the utterance Shukran (‘thank you’) by itself is not usually a sufficient response to an Arabic compliment and needs to be supplemented by additional words. By itself, it may sound flat and awkward because it appears to signal the end of the conversation. As illustrated

2005 ◽  
pp. 187-187
Keyword(s):  
American English ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Pragmatic Competence ◽  
Speech Community ◽  
Pragmatic Transfer ◽  
Pragmatic Failure ◽  
Compliment Responses ◽  
The Us ◽  
Communicative Success ◽  
Arabic And English

Machiko Achiba, Learning to request in a second language: A study of child interlanguage pragmatics. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, 2003. Pp. xii, 223. HB £42.95/US $69.95/Can $99.95.

2004 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 780-783
Author(s):  
Akiko Kato-Yoshioka
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Pragmatic Competence ◽  
Interlanguage Pragmatics ◽  
Pragmatic Development ◽  
Second Languages ◽  
Proficiency Levels ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Old Japanese ◽  
Single Moment

The question of “how second languages are learned” (Gass & Selinker 1994:1) is central to second language acquisition (SLA) research; however, although a number of longitudinal studies have been carried out examining second language (L2) grammatical development, very little attention has been devoted to L2 learners' development of pragmatic competence over time. As Achiba points out, the majority of previous studies on L2 (or interlanguage) pragmatics have observed the single-moment pragmatic realization of a group of L2 learners with similar proficiency levels and compared it with that of native speakers or L2 learners with different proficiency levels or first language (L1) backgrounds. The current paucity of knowledge regarding the developmental aspect of L2 pragmatic competence has led to calls for detailed longitudinal interlanguage pragmatic studies (cf. Kasper & Schmidt 1996, Kasper & Rose 1999). Achiba's study, which carefully observes the pragmatic development in English requestive realization of a seven-year-old Japanese girl over a period of 17 months, certainly meets these essential needs.

scholarly journals Interlanguage Pragmatics: Deviant Patterns of Negative Responses to English Negative Yes/No Questions by L1 Thai Speakers

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 193
Author(s):  
Jidapa Chantharasombat ◽  
Nattama Pongpairoj
Keyword(s):  
Negative Transfer ◽  
English Proficiency ◽  
Pragmatic Competence ◽  
Interlanguage Pragmatics ◽  
Pragmatic Transfer ◽  
Completion Task ◽  
Linguistic Action ◽  
Linguistic Proficiency ◽  
Pragmatic Knowledge

This study investigated the potential cause of L1 Thai speakers’ persistent deviations from target-like negative responses to negative yes/no questions in L2 English context based on the theory of interlanguage pragmatics, particularly pragmatic transfer. L1 Thai undergraduates were categorized into two groups according to their level of L2 English linguistic proficiency. A discourse completion task (DCT), which required the participants to complete their turns in a conversation under different situations, were used to elicit their negative responses. The results revealed that negative pragmatic transfer, influenced by differences in linguistic action patterns of negative responses to negative yes/no questions between Thai and English, occurred in the performance of L1 Thai speakers in both lower and higher L2 English proficiency groups. However, the overall results suggested that the lower proficiency group tended to rely more on their L1 Thai pragmatic competence and showed higher tendency of negative pragmatic transfer than the higher proficiency group. The research indicated that negative transfer from the speakers’ different L1 Thai pragmatic influence from L2 English could make an impact on their non-target-like performance. Moreover, their level of L2 English linguistic proficiency and degree of reliance on their L1 Thai pragmatic knowledge could affect their production to diverge from L2 English pragmatic norms.

scholarly journals Replication research in contextual and individual influences in pragmatic competence: Taguchi, Xiao & Li (2016) and Bardovi-Harlig & Bastos (2011)

2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 128-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naoko Taguchi ◽  
Shuai Li
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Study Abroad ◽  
Research Direction ◽  
Pragmatic Competence ◽  
Pragmatic Development ◽  
Individual Learner ◽  
Quantitative Studies ◽  
L2 Pragmatics ◽  
Replication Research ◽  
New Research

Recent development in L2 pragmatics research in a study abroad context has witnessed an emerging line of studies investigating the joint influences of contextual and individual learner factors on second language (L2) pragmatic development. This paper argues for the replication of two representative quantitative studies in this new research direction. Situated within the field's increasing emphasis on explaining the development of L2 pragmatic competence, the first part of this paper makes a case for the necessity of replicating quantitative studies investigating the study abroad context, highlighting why and how the field can benefit from replication research. The second part of this paper presents detailed accounts of the two focus studies and suggests several options for approximate and conceptual replications.

scholarly journals Pragmatic Errors and Transfer of Foreign Learners of Indonesian: The Case of Refusals

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 501
Author(s):  
I Made Rai Jaya Widanta ◽  
Putu Dyah Hudiananingsih ◽  
Anak Agung Raka Sitawati ◽  
I Wayan Dana Ardika
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Knowledge ◽  
Pragmatic Competence ◽  
Interlanguage Pragmatics ◽  
L2 Proficiency ◽  
Culture Form ◽  
Language And Culture ◽  
Pragmatic Transfer ◽  
Completion Test ◽  
Refusal Strategies ◽  
Training Institute

Pragmatic transfer, an emerging part of interlanguage pragmatics (ILP), has been receiving serious attention from applied linguists currently. This study was aimed at investigating pragmatic errors and pragmatic transfer learners made and effect of second language (L2) proficiency to their pragmatic transfer. Eighteen students of Darmasiswa who have been learning Indonesian language and culture form Bali State Polytechnic (PNB) and from Teacher Training Institute of Saraswati Tabanan, Bali, Indonesia were involved as research participants. Discourse completion test (DCT) consisting of nine situations designed with sociocultural aspect of power, distance, and rank of imposition (PDR) was used to elicit data of refusal strategies. The data were analysed to see pragmatic errors, pragmatic transfer, and effect of L2 proficiency on participants’ pragmatic transfer. Result of analysis revealed that learners’ pragmatic competence was still low. They were pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic errors made dealing with Indonesian noun phrase (NP) structure, the use of verb, noun, prepositions which are very different from English patterns. Moreover, pragmatic transfer was frequently made due to learners’ shortage of L2 pragmatic proficiency and learners’ L1 cultural knowledge. In addition, learners’ pragmatic transfer was found to be strongly influenced by learners’ L2 proficiency.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document