Keywords
learning pragmatics
pragmatics learning strategies
strategy instruction
How to Cite
Number of views: 1128
Number of downloads: 700
Abstract
Explicit instruction in strategies for interlanguage pragmatic learning is fundamental to the development of a comprehensive set of pragmatic abilities in the target language. In this article, we begin by providing an overview of previous work in the area of language learner strategies directed at the teaching and learning of pragmatics. We then offer an extension of Cohen’s (2005, 2014) framework of strategies for learning, using, and evaluating the use of interlanguage pragmatics in four domains: knowledge, analysis, subjectivity, and awareness (Sykes, Malone, Forrest, & Sadgic, forthcoming). Examples from current projects are provided to exemplify the critical importance of a strategies-based approach to the teaching and learning of interlanguage pragmatics. The article concludes with ideas for future research and implementation.
References
Al Masaeed, K., & Waugh, L. R. (2017). Interlanguage pragmatic development: The case of L2 Arabic apologies. Paper presented at the 40th Annual Conference of the American Association for Applied Linguistics, Portland, OR, 18-21 March 2017.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2001). Evaluating the empirical evidence: Grounds for instruction in pragmatics? In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 13-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524797.005
Belz, J. A., & Thorne, S. L. (2005). Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education. Florence, SC: Cengage Learning.
CARLA Website on speech acts. http://carla.umn.edu/speechacts/descriptions.html
Cohen, A. D. (2002). Mental and written translation strategies in ESL. MinneTESOL/ WITESOL Journal, 19, 1-14.
Cohen, A. D. (2005). Strategies for learning and performing L2 speech acts. Intercultural Pragmatics, 2(3), 275-301.
Cohen, A. D. (2013) Verbal report. In C. A. Chapelle (general ed.) The Encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal1261
Cohen, A. D. (2014). Strategies for learning and performing speech acts. In N. Ishihara & A. D. Cohen (Eds.), Teaching and learning pragmatics: Where language and culture meet (pp. 227-243). Abingdon: Routledge.
Cohen, A. D. (2018). Learning pragmatics from native and nonnative language teachers. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Cohen, A. D., & Ishihara, N. (2005). A web-based approach to strategic learning of speech acts. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition (CARLA), University of Minnesota. Retrieved from http://www.carla.umn.edu/speechacts/Japanese%20Speech%20Act%20Report%20Rev.%20June05.pdf (accessed 25 July 2016).
Cohen, A. D., & Pinilla-Herrera, A. (2010). Communicating grammatically: Constructing a learner strategies website for Spanish. In T. Kao & Y. Lin (Eds.), A new look at language teaching and testing: English as a subject and vehicle (pp. 63-83). Taipei, Taiwan: The Language Training & Testing Center.
Cohen, A. & Sykes, J. (2012). Strategy-based learning of pragmatics for intercultural education. In F. Dervin & A. Liddicoat (Eds.), Linguistics for intercultural education in language learning and teaching. (pp. 87-111). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Retrieved from http://carla.umn.edu/speechacts/sp_pragmatics/home.html
Cohen, A. D., & Wang, I. K.-H. (2018). Fluctuation in the functions of language learner strategies. System, 74, 169-182.
Daly, N., Holmes, J., Newton, J., & Stubbe, M. (2004). Expletives as solidarity signals in FTAs on the factory floor. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(5), 945-964.
Eslami-Rasekh, Z., Eslami-Rasekh, A., & Fatahi, A. (2004). The effect of explicit metapragmatic instruction on the speech act awareness of advanced EFL students. Teaching English as a second or foreign language – the Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 8(2), 1-12. Retrieved from http://tesl-ej.org/ej30/a2.html (accessed 16 January 2017).
Eslami, Z. R., Mirzaei, A., & Shadi, D. (2015). The role of asynchronous computer medi¬ated communication in the instruction and development of EFL learners’ pragmatic competence. System, 48, 99-111.
Félix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2007). Pragmatic development in the Spanish as a FL classroom: A cross-sectional study of learner requests. Intercultural Pragmatics, 4(2), 253-286.
Fukuya, Y. J., & Martínez-Flor, A. (2008). The interactive effects of pragmatic-eliciting tasks and pragmatic instruction. Foreign Language Annals, 41(3), 478-500.
Furniss, E. (2016). Teaching the pragmatics of Russian conversation using a corpus-referred website. Language Learning & Technology, 20(2), 38-60.
Ghobadi, A., & Fahim, M. (2009). The effect of explicit teaching of English “thanking formulas” on Iranian EFL intermediate level students at English language institutes. System, 37, 526-537.
Gonzales, A. (2013). Development of politeness strategies in participatory online environments: A case study. In N. Taguchi & J. M. Sykes (Eds.), Technology in interlanguage pragmatics research and teaching (pp. 101-120). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hasler-Barker, M. (2016). Effects of metapragmatic instruction on the production of com¬plements and complement responses: Learner-learner role-plays in the foreign lan¬guage classroom. In K. Bardovi-Harlig & J. C. Félix-Brasdefer (Eds.), Pragmatics and language learning (Vol. 14, pp. 125-152). Honolulu, HI: National Foreign Language Resource Center, University of Hawai’i at Manoa.
Holden, C., & Sykes, J. (2011). Leveraging mobile games for place-based language learning. International Journal of Game-Based Learning, 1(2), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijgbl.2011040101
Holden, C., & Sykes, J. M. (2013). Complex L2 pragmatic feedback via place-based mobile games. In N. Taguchi & J. M. Sykes (Eds.), Technology in interlanguage pragmatics research and teaching (pp. 155-184). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ishihara, N. (2009). Transforming community norms: Potentials of L2 speakers’ pragmatic resistance. In M. Hood (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2008 Temple University Japan Colloquium on Language Learning (pp. 1-10). Tokyo: Temple University Japan.
Ishihara, N., & Tarone, E. (2009). Emulating and resisting pragmatic norms: Learner subjectivity and pragmatic choice in L2 Japanese. In N. Taguchi (Ed.), Pragmatic competence (pp. 101-28). NY, NY: Mouton de Gruyter.
Jenks, C. (2012). Getting acquainted in Skypecasts: Aspects of social organization in online chat rooms. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 19(1), 26-46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2009.00211.x
Jeon, E. H., & Kaya, T. (2006). Effects of L2 instruction on interlanguage pragmatic development: A meta-analysis. In J. M. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 165-211). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Martínez-Flor, A. (2016). Teaching apology formulas at the discourse level: Are instructional effects maintained over time? Estudios de Lingüistica Inglesa Aplicada, 16, 13-48.
Mugford, G. (2016). Challenges facing Mexican EFL learners: Disagreement and local pragmatic practices. In K. Bardovi-Harlig & J. C. Félix-Brasdefer (Eds.), Pragmatics and language learning (Vol. 14, pp. 153-178). Honolulu, HI: National Foreign Language Resource Center, University of Hawai’i at Manoa.
Nguyen, T. T. M., Pham, T. H., & Pham, M. T. (2012). The relative effects of explicit and implicit form-focused instruction on the development of L2 pragmatic competence. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(4), 416-434.
Olshtain, E., & Cohen, A. D. (1983). Apology: A speech act set. In N. Wolfson & E. Judd (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition (pp. 18-35). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Oxford, R. L. (2017). Teaching and researching language learning strategies: Self-regulation in context (2nd ed.). Abingdon, England: Routledge.
Riddiford, N., & Holmes, J. (2015). Assisting the development of sociopragmatic skills: Negotiating refusals at work. System, 48, 129-140.
Roever, C. (2013). Assessment of pragmatics. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. (pp. 1-8). Wiley‐Blackwell: Oxford, England.
Roever, C., Fraser, C., & Elder, C. (2014). Testing ESL sociopragmatics: Development and validation of a web-based test battery. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Rose, K. R. (2005). On the effects of instruction in second language pragmatics. System, 33(3), 385-399.
Sykes, J. (2005). Synchronous CMC and pragmatic development: Effects of oral and written chat. CALICO Journal, 22(3), 399-431.
Sykes, J. (2012). Synthetic immersive environments and second language pragmatic development. In C. Chapelle and S. Sauro (Eds.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal1136
Sykes, J. (2014). TBLT and synthetic immersive environments: What can in-game task restarts tell us about design and implementation? In M. González-Lloret & L. Ortega (Eds.), Technology-mediated TBLT: Researching technology and tasks (pp. 149-182). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.6.06syk
Sykes, J. (2016). Technologies for teaching and learning intercultural competence and interlanguage pragmatics. In S. Sauro & C. A. Chapelle (Eds.), Handbook of technology and second language teaching and learning (pp. 118 -133). New York: Wiley.
Sykes, J. M., & Cohen, A. D. (2008). Observed learner behavior, reported use, and evalu¬ation of a website for learning Spanish pragmatics. In M. Bowles, R. Foote, & S. Perpiñán (Eds.), Second language acquisition and research: Focus on form and function. Selected proceedings of the 2007 Second Language Research Forum (pp. 144-157). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Sykes, J., Malone, M., Forrest, L., & Sadgic, A. (forthcoming). Framework for an assessment of intercultural, pragmatic, and interactional competence. Eugene, OR: Center for Applied Second Language Studies, University of Oregon.
Taguchi, N. (2015). Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies were, are, and should be going. Language Teaching, 48(1), 1-50.
Taguchi, N., Li, Q., & Tang, X. (2017). Learning Chinese formulaic expressions in a scenario‐based interactive environment. Foreign Language Annals, 50(4), 641-660.
Taguchi, N., & Sykes, J. M. (2013). Technology in interlanguage pragmatics re-search and teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.36
Tarone, E. (2009). A variationist perspective on the interaction approach. In A. Mackey & C. Polio (Eds.), Multiple perspectives on interaction (pp. 47-63). New York, NY: Routledge.
Tateyama, Y. (2001). Explicit and implicit teaching of pragmatic routines. In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 200-222). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vyatkina, N., & Belz, J. A. (2006). A learner corpus-drive intervention for the develop¬ment of L2 pragmatic competence. In K. Bardovi-Harlig, J. C. Félix-Brasdefer, & A. S. Omar (Eds.), Pragmatics & language learning (pp. 315-357). Honolulu, HI: National Foreign Language Resource Center, University of Hawai’i at Manoa.
License
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.