Researching & teaching

second language pragmatics:

Current trends & issues

Dr. Nguyn Th Thy Minh

English Language & Literature Department, National Institute of
Education, Singapore
Faculty of English Language Education, HULIS, Vietnam
Hanoi, September 2013

Coming to terms with

pragmatics
Charles

Morris (1983: 6): [Pragmatics is] the study of

the relation of signs to interpreters.

Anglo-American school:
[Pragmatics is] the systematic study of meaning by
virtue of, or dependent on, language use (Huang,
2007: 4).

European

Continental school:
Pragmatics constitutes a general functional (i.e.
cognitive, social and cultural) perspective on
linguistic phenomena in relation to their usage in the
form of behavior (Verschueren, 1997: 7-11).

Pragmatics is the study of language

from the point of view of users,
especially of the choices they make,
the constraints they encounter in
using language in social interaction
and the effects their use of language
has on other participants in the act of
communication
(Crystal, 1985: 240)

L2 Pragmatics

sociolinguistics
What social,
cultural &
linguistic
factors
contribute to
the learners
ability to
derive and
make

psycholinguistics
What learning
mechanisms
contribute to
the learners
ability to
derive and
make
meanings?

A survey of 152 pragmatics

studies from 1979 to mid 2008
Bardovi-Harlig,

K. (2010). Exploring
the pragmatics of interlanguage
pragmatics: Definition by design. In
A. Trosborg (Ed.), Pragmatics across
languages and cultures (pp. 219260). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

Language under inquiry

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

English
Other languages

A new kid on the block

Production vs. nonproduction

studies
Series 1
120
100
80
60
40
20
0

Production

Nonproduction

Both

Pragmatic features under

inquiry

Speech acts
Non-speech acts

Speech acts under

inquiry
Request/
directive
Apology
Refusal
Complaint
Others

Distribution
35%
17%
11%
5%
1-4%

Interactive vs. noninteractive

data

Data triangulation
45/1
52
Single task
Multiple task

107/1
52

Method & testing studies

Aim:

to compare elicitation tasks

9 method studies
2 assessment studies
1 addresses both

Suggestions for future studies

Scope:

widen the circle of languages/

language learning settings/ learner
population
expand the range of pragmatic
features under study
pragmatic comprehension/ awareness
particularly when approached with
natural data and innovative design

 Methodology:

more authentic & consequential data (or when

its not available, the closest possible
simulation is desired)
no written production unless investigating the
pragmatics of written genres (e.g. letters,
grant proposals, CMC, chat, texting, etc which
are under-researched and should be
investigated further)
more interactional data to allow research into
interaction & effects
data triangulation

Instructional pragmatics

Earlier studies:
Is pragmatics teachable?
Is instruction in targeted feature more effective than
no instruction at all?
Are different teaching approaches differentially
effective? (deductive vs. inductive; explicit vs. implicit)

Pedagogically motivated
Testing Schmidts Noticing Hypothesis (role of
attention & consciousness)
(Rose 2005)

A shift from pedagogically motivated studies to

studies that are drawn on SLA theories,
strengthening the interconnection between
pragmatics & SLA (Ellis 2008; Taguchi 2011)

Input processing theory: the role of structured input in

pragmatic development (Takimoto 2009, 2010)
Skills acquisition theory: the role of repetition and practice in
developing pragmatic accuracy & fluency (Li in press)
Noticing, interaction and output hypotheses: the role of
corrective feedback (negative vs. positive evidence, inputproviding vs. output-prompting) in pragmatic development
(see Lyster, Saito & Sato 2013)
Socio-cultural theory: applying the notion of Zone of Proximal
Development to understand pragmatic development &
improve instruction in L2 pragmatics (see Ohta 2005)

 Pragmatics

teaching in the era of

poststructuralism & multiculturalism (Taguchi
2011):

By whose criteria is appropriateness determined in a

given language? To what extent are these criteria
valid?
Do native speakers of different backgrounds operate
under identical standards in judging and projecting
appropriateness of behaviors?
If the assumption of idealized native speakers is in
question, can teachers still transmit ideological beliefs
about community norms to students, and are students
expected to conform to these norms?

CA as an alternative approach to studying discursive

pragmatics:

The poststructuralist movement is also an impetus in the

shifting view of pragmatic competence as a monolithic
trait within individual learners to an emergent state jointly
constructed among participants in discourse. Traditionally,
pragmatic competence has been operationalized as the
ability to use appropriate speech act formulae,
comprehend indirect meaning, or choose proper speech
styles, and these features have been considered target
features in instruction. However, such practice begs the
question of whether pragmatics can be reduced to a set
of isolated linguistic systems used to index social
functions and other styles and behaviors associated with
politeness. This reductionist view has been challenged by
the recent poststructuralist perspective, which argues
that pragmatic acts are dynamic in nature, constructed
and negotiated through interaction among participants

Pragmatics & teacher education

What do language teacher education programs do

to prepare their MA-TESL students for teaching L2
pragmatics? (Vasquez & Shaprless 2009)
To what extent does training in instructional
pragmatics contribute to the development of
teachers pragmatically related content and
pedagogical knowledge?
http://
www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume15/ej58/