This paper brings together the research and developments of instructed pragmatics over the past three decades by reporting the synthesis findings of instructional intervention studies in interlanguage pragmatics. Two questions have guided this investigation: (1) is instruction effective in learning pragmatics?; and (2) what methods are most effective in learning pragmatics? Exhaustive electronic bibliographical searches yielded a body of 58 instructional intervention studies for the review. Findings across these studies are compared and explored for common patterns and inconsistencies that emerge among them. The paper concludes with implications for future research based on the survey of the existing practice.
This study examined two issues: (a) whether there are gains in accurate and speedy comprehension of second language (L2) pragmatic meaning over time and (b) whether the gains are associated with cognitive processing ability and the amount of language contact in an L2 environment. Forty-four college students in a US institution completed three measures three times over a 4-month period: (a) the pragmatic listening test that measured the ability to comprehend implied speaker intentions, (b) the lexical access test that measured ability to make speedy semantic judgment, and (c) the language contact survey that examined the amount of time learners spent in L2 outside the class. The learners' pragmatic comprehension was analyzed for accuracy (the scores on the pragmatic listening test) and comprehension speed (the average time taken to answer items correctly). Results showed that the learners made significant improvement on comprehension speed but not on accuracy of comprehension. Lexical access speed was significantly correlated with comprehension speed but not with accuracy. The amount of speaking and reading outside class that the students reported on the language contact survey significantly correlated with the gains in comprehension speed but not with accuracy of comprehension.Cognition, Language Contact, and Pragmatic Comprehension is defined as the ability to convey one's intention appropriately and to interpret another's intention, explicitly or implicitly stated, in a communicative situation (Thomas, 1995). Within the construct of pragmatic competence, this study examined the development of the ability to comprehend speakers' intentions conveyed in nonliteral, indirect utterances. The study addressed two questions: (a) whether there are gains in accurate, speedy comprehension of implied meaning over a period of 4 months and (b) whether the gains are related to cognitive processing ability and the amount of language contact outside the class in a study-abroad context.
This study examined development of pragmatic comprehension ability across time. Twenty native speakers and 92 Japanese college students of English completed a computerized listening task measuring ability to comprehend two types of implied meaning in dialogues: indirect refusals (k = 24) and indirect opinions (k = 24). The participants' comprehension was analyzed for accuracy (scores on the listening task) and comprehension speed (average time taken to answer each item correctly). L2 learners' accuracy and comprehension speed improved significantly over a 7-week period. However, the magnitude of effect was lower for comprehension speed than for accuracy. This study also examined the relationships among general L2 proficiency (measured on the ITP TOEFL), speed of lexical judgment (measured on a word recognition task), and pragmatic comprehension ability. There was a significant relationship between proficiency and accuracy (r = 0.39), as well as between lexical access speed and comprehension speed (r = 0.40). However, L2 proficiency bore no relationship to comprehension speed, and lexical access speed had no relationship with accuracy. Moreover, accuracy and comprehension speed were not related to each other. These findings suggest that development of pragmatic knowledge and processing capacity of using the knowledge may not coincide perfectly in L2 development. BACKGROUND
This cross-sectional study examined the effect of general proficiency and study-abroad experience on pragmatic comprehension in second-language English. Participants were 25 native English speakers and 64 Japanese college students of English divided into three groups. Group 1 (n = 22) had lower proficiency and no study-abroad experience. Group 2 (n = 20) and Group 3 (n = 22) had higher proficiency than Group 1 but differed in their study-abroad experience. Group 2 had no study-abroad experience, but Group 3 had a minimum of 1 year of study-abroad experience in an English-speaking country. They completed a pragmatic listening test measuring their ability to comprehend conventional and nonconventional implicatures. Group performance was compared for the comprehension accuracy scores and response times. There was a significant effect of proficiency on response times but no effect of study-abroad experience. Comprehension accuracy scores revealed mixed findings. It was advantageous for students to have studyabroad experience in the comprehension of nonconventional implicatures and routine expressions but not in indirect refusals.
Theoretical, empirical, and practical interest in pragmatic competence and development for second language (L2) learners has resulted in a large body of literature on teaching L2 pragmatics. This body of literature has diverged into two major domains: (a) a group of experimental studies directly testing the efficacy of various instructional methods in pragmatics learning and (b) research that explores optimal instructional practice and resources for pragmatic development in formal classroom settings. This article reviews literature in these two domains and aims at providing a collective view of the available options for pragmatics teaching and the ways that pragmatic development can best be promoted in the classroom. In the area of instructional intervention, this article reviews studies under the common theoretical second language acquisition paradigms of explicit versus implicit instruction, input processing instruction, and skill acquisition and practice. In the area of classroom practice and resources, three domains of research and pedagogical practices are reviewed: material development and teacher education, learner strategies and autonomous learning, and incidental pragmatics learning in the classroom. Finally, this article discusses unique challenges and opportunities that have been embraced by pragmatics teaching in the current era of poststructuralism and multiculturalism.
This study investigated whether second language (L2) proficiency affects pragmatic comprehension, namely the ability to comprehend implied meaning in spoken dialogues, in terms of accuracy and speed of comprehension. Participants included 46 native English speakers at a U.S. university and 160 Japanese students of English in a college in Japan who were at different L2 proficiency levels. They took a 38-item computerized listening task measuring their ability to comprehend conversational implicatures of different types (i.e., 2 sets of items in different degrees of conventionality). The participants' comprehension was analyzed in terms of accuracy (i.e., test scores on a multiple choice measure) and comprehension speed (i.e., average time in seconds taken to answer each item correctly). The results revealed a significant L2 proficiency influence on accuracy, but not on comprehension speed. There was no significant relationship between accuracy and comprehension speed. A post hoc analysis of error data revealed a short-term memory influence on comprehension accuracy for L2 learners.
This study investigated the development of L2 Chinese formulaic competence in a study abroad context. Participants were 31 American students studying Chinese in a university in China (intermediate-level). They completed a computerized speaking test consisting of 24 formulae-use situations twice during their semester-long study abroad in China. The learners produced a formulaic expression according to each situation, and their production was evaluated on appropriateness (rated on a four-point scale by native speakers) and planning time. In addition, a survey was administered to gather information about the learners' perceived frequency of encounter with formulae-use situations. The learners showed significant gains on appropriateness and fluency. Reported frequency of encounter with target formulae-use situations did not correlate with the gains in formulae production, except for the learners with lower pretest score. Qualitative analysis revealed four patterns of change: (1) change toward target formulae, (2) change toward target-like slot-and-frame patterns, (3) change toward non-target formulae; and (4) stabilized non-target formulae use.
In Context, Individual Differences and Pragmatic Competence Naoko Taguchi provides a detailed account of research into second language acquisition pragmatics in a Japanese context. Pragmatics within second language acquisition (SLA) is a forgotten field, attracting very little practical attention in the classroom (very few SLA text-books cover more than the most common pragmatic meanings in a handful of situations: greetings, requesting, complementing at most). In SLA, students are dealing with interlanguage pragmatics, combining the pragmatics of two cultures, or even applying those of the mother culture to the second one. This results in SL students syntactically, lexically, and phonetically very competent but unable to understand speech acts such as a polite refusal. Studies like Taguchi's raise the profile of pragmatics in the SL classroom and the awareness of teachers as to its importance.Chapter 1 begins with a description of the study and its context, both within the field of pragmatics and of SLA. Taguchi's study follows 48 Japanese students of English in a bilingual university in Japan for one academic year. At the time
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.