Pragmatics Research and the Language Classroom
Organizer: Noël Houck
English and Foreign Languages Dept.
California State Polytechnic University Pomona
Presenters: Jean Wong, Zoreh Eslami, David Olsher, Maria Hasler Barker (see individual abstracts)
While numerous studies have examined the effects of different instructional approaches on learner pragmatic development (Jeon & Kaya, Kasper, 2006; Kasper & Rose, 2001), and resourceful second and foreign language (SL/FL) instructors have developed materials for their own classes, until recently there have been few efforts to disseminate the results of these efforts to second and foreign language teachers (but see Bardovi Harlig & Mahan Taylor, 2003).
Lately there has been an increase in publications whose purpose is to propagate teacher-friendly explanations of research involving speaker actions realized in a variety of discourse and social contexts and to provide pedagogical materials deriving from this research (e.g., Ishihara & Cohen, 2010; Houck & Tatsuki, 2011; Wong & Waring, 2010).
This panel contributes to that trend, linking data-based research with pedagogical implications. The papers relate findings on pragmatic actions played out in L1 discourse to the challenges encountered in actual SL/FL learner interactions with proficient speakers of English, as well as their implications for the classroom.
References
Bardovi-Harlig, K. and Mahan-Taylor, R. (2003). Teaching pragmatics. Washington DC:US Department of State, Office of English Language Programs. http://exchanges.state.gov/education/engteaching/pragmatics.htm
Houck, N., & Tatsuki, D. (2011). Pragmatics: Teaching natural conversation. Washington, D.C.: TESOL.
Ishihara, N., & Cohen, A. (2010). Teaching and learning pragmatics: Where language and culture meet. London: Pearson.
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.
Kasper G. & Rose, K. (Eds.) (2001). Pragmatics in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wong, J., & Waring, H. Z. (2010). Conversation analysis and second language pedagogy: A guide for ESL/EFL teachers. New York: Routledge.
The Pragmatics of E-mail Communication
Zohreh R. Eslami
Texas A&M University
As the internet has been growing over the last ten years one form of communication that has become the most prevalent in academic and institutional settings is email communication. Email communication has its advantages as well as challenges. The advantage is that it is asynchronous and receivers can reply to the messages at their own time and pace. However, as a medium which lacks linguistic cues, it is subject to recipient’s interpretation and can possibly lead to miscommunication (Biesenback-Lucas, 2007). An email exchange between a lecturer and a student at the University of Auckland resulted in dismissal of the lecturer (Haugh, 2010). Research has shown that there is variability in the perceptions of norms and expectations underlying evaluations of behavior as polite, impolite, over-polite and so on (Locher, 2006; Graham, 2007). In this presentation, our focus is on problematic nature of email communication and (im)politeness in email communication from a postmodern approach (Eelen, 2001; Mills, 2005).
Examples of ‘problematic’ email communications will be shared with the audience and audience evaluations will be sought and discussed. A teaching framework that involves implicit and then explicit focus on teaching pragmatic norms related to email communication will be used to illustrate the necessity and the effectiveness of instruction in enhancing pragmatic competence of the students in computer mediated communication.
Bisenbach-Lucas, S. (2007). Students writing emails to faculty: An examination of e-politeness among native and non-native speakers of English. Language Learning & Technology, 11(2), 59-81.
Eelen, G. (2001). A critique of politeness theories. Manchester: St. Jerome
Graham, S. (2007). Disagreeing to agree: Conflict, (im)politeness and identity in a computer-mediated community. Journal of Pragmatics 39 (4). 742_759.
Haugh, M. (2010). When is an email really offensive?: Argumentativity and variability in evaluations of impoliteness. Journal of Politeness Research 6, 7-31.
Locher, M. (2006). Polite behaviour within relational work: The discursive approach to politeness. Multilingua 25 (3). 249_267.
Mills, S> (2005). Gender and impoliteness. Journal of Politeness Research 1 (2). 263_2.
Problems with the Lexicon: Offers That Fade Away
Jean Wong
The College of New Jersey
Using a conversation analysis (CA) perspective, I examine a series of offer sequences found in a telephone conversation between a second language user and a fluent/proficient speaker of English (what traditionally has been referred to as native/non-native speaker conversation or L1-L2 talk). What is noticed is that problems with the lexicon lead to offer sequences that are somewhat misfitted or loosely tied in sequential terms (Wong, 2010). The novice speaker does not appear to fully comprehend what the items being offered to him are, however, the fluent/proficient speaker only goes so far in helping him to resolve the vocabulary difficulties. In other words, teachable moments (Havighurst, 1957) are not necessarily seized upon enthusiastically in ordinary talk as they would be in classroom settings; nor is repair or correction done adequately in order to address the lexical difficulties associated with the offer sequences. In the data examined, we see how participants orient to their identities as novice or fluent speaker in the context of real-world pragmatics, e.g., offers, and how on a turn by turn basis they shift away from the offer sequences and proceed toward closure of the topic or closure of the conversation when intersubjectivity is not achievable. The examples resonate with the notion of fittedness (e.g., Fox & Thompson, 2010; Raymond, 2003; Stivers, 2010) but in my cases, it is loose fittedness that appears to be at stake, which suggests a relaxation in terms of accountability and expectations regarding what sort of utterance is due next or made conditionally relevant (Schegloff, 2007; Schegloff & Sacks, 1973). The examples discussed serve to raise second language teachers’ awareness of how offer sequences are sometimes produced and oriented to in L1-L2 talk. It is instructive for language teachers to see that offer sequences in the real world are not necessarily coherent, neat and tidy packages with, say, an offer being done in an initiating turn and its acceptance or declination in a response turn. Indeed, second language learners may have problems with the lexicon, problems with understanding what is being offered in the first place.
References
Fox, B., & Thompson, S. (2010). Responses to Wh-questions in English conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43(2), 133-156.
Havighurst, R. (1957). Human development and education. New York: Longmans Green & Co.
Raymond, G. (2003). Grammar and social organization: Yes/no interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review, 68, 939-967.
Schegloff, E.A. (2007). Sequence organization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, E.A., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 7, 289-327.
Stivers, T. (2010). An overview of the question-response system in American English. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 2772-2781.
Wong, J. (2010). The coming of age of conversation analysis and applied linguistics. Opening Plenary Address, 18th Pragmatics and Language Learning, Kobe, Japan.
Teaching Compliments in the Spanish Foreign Language Classroom
Maria Hasler-Barker
Indiana University Bloomington
The focus of the present study is the effect of teaching Spanish language learners how to give compliments. Pragmatic instruction has been demonstrated to be effective in enhancing pragmatic speaking and listening. Researchers have found that instruction is more effective than exposure alone in most areas of pragmatic competence. Explicit metapragmatic information has the largest effect on the development of pragmatic competence. Though the best method for conveying metapragmatic instruction has not been identified, researchers suggest that instruction should involve at least three main elements: awareness activities; authentic language samples as examples or models; and input preceding interpretation (Bardovi-Harlig & Mahan-Taylor, 2003).
The present study assesses the effectiveness of instruction on the oral production of compliments in Spanish by L2 learners. Results indicate that implicit and explicit metapragmatic instruction are more effective than input-only in enhancing the compliment repertoire of learners. Pedagogical implications and ideas for conveying pragmatic instruction are also discussed.
References
Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Mahan-Taylor, R. (2003). Introduction. Teaching Pragmatics. (pp. 1-13). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of State.
Pragmatics and Teaching Oral Skills:
Teaching Materials Projects from an MA TESOL Seminar
San Francisco State University
David Olsher
While classroom instruction and awareness raising in pragmatic aspects of social interaction can be very useful for learners, it can be challenging to find useful research-informed teaching materials and to find time and space to integrate pragmatics into an existing syllabus. This presentation gathers examples of pragmatics teaching projects that draw on research on language use (linguistic pragmatics, interlanguage pragmatics, and conversation analysis) and target specific students and courses, with suggestions for integration into existing syllabi.
This presentation reports on student projects from an MA seminar on Pragmatics and Teaching Oral Skills, projects which reflect the seminar’s focus on awareness raising approaches to introducing pragmatics and interaction skills, and drawing on research on language use to inform the pragmatic and interactional skills taught.
These projects are informed by needs analysis done in target classrooms and in communication with classroom teachers, and the pragmatics focus was based on either
published sociolinguistics or pragmatics research or on newly generated role-play data involving interaction among fellow members of a target classroom or school community. Projects were designed to be supplemental to existing curricula and materials of target classrooms, to be integrated with an existing course schedule or syllabus, as much as possible, though implementation remains a challenge in programs with very fully specified course activities and materials.
The presenter will provide overviews and selected classroom materials from a number of projects designed for academic (college) or pre-academic (intensive institute) ESL students, including projects on Office Hours Interactions, Topic Management, Comparing Answers with Classmates, Asking Questions of the Teacher, Asking for Clarification, Making Requests, and Agreeing & Disagreeing. Overviews and examples will also be provided from projects targeting EFL learners in Japanese high schools (asking for repetition) and adult immigrant ESL students in non-credit classes (learning the “script” for doctor visits). The presenter will share feedback gathered by piloting of some project materials and report on efforts by teachers to incorporate them into their own classes. Finally, time will be provided for discussion of challenges and opportunities for implementing such materials within the constraints of existing curricula.