Pragmatics

Ⅰ. Introduction


Ⅱ. Literature Summary

1.Bill, J., Gabriele, K., & Steven, R. (1998). Effect of Rejoinders in Production Questionnaires: Applied Linguistics, 19(2), 157-182.

2. Demirci, M. (2000). The role of pragmatics in reflexive interpretation by Turkish learners of English: Second Language Research, 16(4), 325-353.

3. Kenneth R.R. (2000) AN EXPLORATORY CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY OF INTERLANGUAGE PRAGMATIC DEVELOPMENT: Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(1), 27-67.

4 Matsumura, S. (2001). Learning the Rules for Offering Advice: A Quantitative Approach to Second Language Socialization: Language learning. 51(4). 635- 679.

5. Daejin, K., & Joan, K. H. (2002). The Role of an Interactive Book Reading Program in the Development of Second Language Pragmatic Competence: Modern Language Journal, 86(3), 332-348.

6. Gayle L. N., Joan C., Mahmoud A.B., & Waguida E.B. (2002). Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Strategy Use in Egyptian Arabic and American English Refusals: Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 163-189.

7. Matsumura S.( 2003). Modelling the Relationships among Interlanguage Pragmatic Development, L2 Proficiency, and Exposure to L2: Applied Linguistics. 24(4). 465-491.

8. Liszka, S. A.(2004). Exploring the effects of first language influence on second language pragmatic processes from a syntactic deficit perspective: Second Language Research, 20(3), 212-231.

9. Márquez R. R., Rainey, I., & Fulcher, G. (2005). A Comparative Study of Certainty and Conventional Indirectness: Evidence from British English and Peninsular Spanish: Applied Linguistics, 26(1), 1-31.
10. TAGUCHI, N. (2005). Comprehending Implied Meaning in English as a Foreign Language: The Modern Language Journal. 89(4), 543-562.
11. Takahashi, S. (2005). Pragmalinguistic Awareness: Is it Related to Motivation and Proficiency? : Applied Linguistics, 26(1), 90-120.

12. Schauer, G. A. (2006). Pragmatics Awareness in ESL and EFL contexts: Contrast and development: Language Learning, 56(2), 269-318.



Ⅲ. Conclusion








Ⅰ. Introduction
Pragmatics is the study of meaning in context and of language use. To fully understand the meaning of a sentence, we must understand the context in which it used. Pragmatics is concerned with how people use language within a context and why they use language in particular way. For non native speakers who are studying English as a second language, to understand the meaning in context is a demanding job. However, it’s so important that it can have an influence on the way we communicate with the native speakers. Many learners dream of speaking like native speaker. To do this, along with fluency, the knowledge of pragmatics is needed.
I wanted to know more about pragmatics. Therefore, I chose it as the topic of the “literature review.” I chose all empirical paper. I am not going to mention about it anymore.


Ⅱ. Literature Summary


1. Bill, J., Gabriele, K., & Steven, R. (1998). Effect of Rejoinders in Production Questionnaires: Applied Linguistics, 19(2), 157-182.

The most widely used method of data collection in interlanguage pragnatics is some form of production questionnaire (PQ). PQs have generally been found to be effective in constraining pragmatic options to the speech act under study, thus rendering the unit of analysis identical with the response provided. PQ studies are eminently feasible. This study investigates the effect of three types of rejoinder- positive, negative, or absent- on non native and native informants’ choices of strategies to perform complaints, requests, and apologies.


There were 36 NS of American English and 33 NS of Chinese. Each respondent was given to be completed in English. The items on the questionnaire included situations aimed at eliciting three different speech acts; complaints, requests, and apologies. There were six complaint situations, ten request situations and six apology situations.


Both NS and NNS made their choice of complaint strategies contingent on rejoinder type in only two out of seven strategies. However, the affected
Strategies were different in the NS and NNS groups. In request realization, two of the optional modificatory dimensions were affected by rejoinder type in the NS and NNS groups. Both groups mitigated requisitive force by means of internal modifiers most frequently when the interlocutor indicated non-compliance. Apologies were most strongly affected by rejoinder type. There is remarkable similarity in the effect of rejoinder type on the NS and NNS apologt performance.
In sum, results show that strategy choice is differently affected by rejoinder type. This suggests that findings from studies using different PQ formats may not be comparable.


2. Demirci, M. (2000). The role of pragmatics in reflexive interpretation by Turkish learners of English: Second Language Research, 16(4), 325-353.

This study explores the acquisition of the bindings of English reflexives by adult Turkish speakers, and focuses on how the knowledge of reflexive binding interacts with pragmatic knowledge in the acquisition process. This study compares pragmatically biased and pragmatically neutral sentences to determine whether pragmatic bias toward a non-local antecedent overrides the parameter setting of English and causes learners to choose as possible antecedent. There is a sentence, “Jane believes that Mary trust herself.” In English, the reflexive herself chooses Mary, but not Jane for its antecedent. However, in Turkish, The reflexive herself(in Turkish, Kendi) can refer to either Mary or Jane.


The subject pool consisted of an experimental group of 170 native speakers of Turkish, a control group of 25 native speakers of English and another control group of 25 native speakers of Turkish. There were five proficiency levels.
Subjects were asked to indicate their interpretation of the reflexive by circling either yes or no for each statement. It would be possible for the study to discover whether the learners accepted or rejected each possible antecedent. To facilitate understanding among both high-level and low-level learners alike, the experimental materials employed simple vocabulary and conventional Turkish names whose genders are easily recognizable. Furthermore, before the test, every subject was given a list of vocabulary items used in the test sentences along with their Turkish gloss. There are three possible outcomes( either, both or neither). This study used six sentence types.


Both group and individual results indicate that pragmatically biased sentences compel the subjects to consider pragmatic information to the extent that it can affect their choice of local antecedent.


3. Kenneth R.R. (2000) AN EXPLORATORY CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY OF INTERLANGUAGE PRAGMATIC DEVELOPMENT: Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(1), 27-67.

This paper is an attempt to fill the gap between SLA and interlanguage pragmatics (ILP) by reporting the results of an exploratory cross-sectional study on the development of requests, apologies, and compliment responses in English.



The primary school students in Hong Kong participating in this study were taken from three levels; primary2, 4, 6; their average age is 7,9,11. The first group which didn’t participate in the actual data collection consisted of 15students, 5 from esch level. The second group consisted of three classes, one each for p-2, p-4, p-6. The instrument used for the data collection was a cartoon oral production task(COPT). To develop COPT, a preliminary questionnaire was administered in Cantonese to a group of 15 primary school children. It provided one example of a request, apology, and compliment. On the COPT, each cartoon included a brief caption to describe the scenario. The scenarios all involve the exploits of a young boy. Data collection for all groups was carried out in Cantonese to ensure adequate comprehension of the task and scenarios. Each student was assigned an individual tape recorder. After recording, Transcripts of each tape were produced.


Although a number of developmental patterns are revealed, there is little evidence of situational variation for any of the speech acts, which may indicate the precedence of pragmalinguistics over sociopragmatics in the early stages of pragmatic development in second language.


4 Matsumura, S. (2001). Learning the Rules for Offering Advice: A Quantitative Approach to Second Language Socialization: Language learning. 51(4). 635- 679.

This study examined university-level Japanese students’ changing sociocultural perceptions and the impact of the changes on their pragmatic use of English when giving advice. The purpose is to provide Japanese students with an integrated language and content program in an English immersion environment.


Research was conducted as t private university in Kyoto, Japan and a provincial university in Vancouver. Three participant groups were employed. One consisted of 101 Japanese students who studied in Canada for 8 months in an academic exchange program. A second comparative group consisted of 132 Japanese students who continued to study in Japan. The third group consisted of 111 native speakers of English who were in Vancouver students’ roommates or floor mates living in on-campus residences as the Canadian university. In-class questionnaire were administrated foue times during the academic year in Japan and Canada. 97 Vancouver students and 102 Kyoto students were compared in the study. As instruments, Questionnaire on personal information and multiple choice questionnaires to assess perceptions of social status were used. Each scenario represented one of three social status variables; higher status, status equal, and lower status.


Results revealed that the group( 97 Japanese exchange students) started lower in pragmatic performance the other group(102 peers in Japan) but then surpassed them, suggesting that living and studying in a target speech community was effective in developing pragmatic competence.


5. Daejin, K., & Joan, K. H. (2002). The Role of an Interactive Book Reading Program in the Development of Second Language Pragmatic Competence: Modern Language Journal, 86(3), 332-348.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the connection between Korean children’s participation in an interactive book reading program and their development of pragmatic competence in English.


The participants consisted of 4 Korean male children in the third grade. Seven books are selected for use. The study lasted 4 months, average 2 times a week for a total of 35 sessions. Each session was conducted in English and lasted 30 minutes. Each books was read once a month. Only one book was read during each session, and the researcher tried to read the books in the same order each month. All sessions were both audio and video recorded. Role play was chosen as the setting.



Children’s participation led to significant changes in the mean number of words, utterances, and talk management features as measured by the chances in children’s use of these during role play sessions. The findings suggest that participation in such reading programs provides opportunities for the development of at least some aspects of L2 pragmatic competence.


6. Gayle L. N., Joan C., Mahmoud A.B., & Waguida E.B. (2002). Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Strategy Use in Egyptian Arabic and American English Refusals: Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 163-189.

This study investigated American English and Egyptian Arabic refusals.


55 subjects participate din this study; 30 English-speaking Americans in the USA and 25 Arabic-speaking Egyptian in Egypt. A modified version of the Discourse Completion Test (DCT) was used to collect data. Spoken elicitation and the corresponding refusals were used because they more closely resemble real life communication than written role plays. Most importantly, oral responses are more appropriate for Arabic speakers. In order to elicit refusal, respondents were specifically instructed by the interviewer to refuse each situation. The instrument consisted of 10 situations that ask for a refusal; 2 requests, 3 invitations, 3 offers, and 2 suggestions. After interviews were completed, the audiotapes were transcribed. The 30 US interviews resulted in 298 American English refusals. The 25 Egyptian interviews resulted in 250 Egyptian Arabic refusals.


Results indicate that both groups use similar strategies with similar frequency in making refusals. The findings, however, suggest that although methods such as the DCT may be appropriate for collecting pragmalinguistic data, they fail to reveal the sociopragmatic complexities of face-threatening acts such as refusals.


7. Matsumura S.( 2003). Modelling the Relationships among Interlanguage Pragmatic Development, L2 Proficiency, and Exposure to L2: Applied Linguistics. 24(4). 465-491.

Substantively, this study aimed to account for the different levels of pragmatic development among Japanese learners of English, as functions of their varying levels of English proficiency and amount of exposure to English. Methodologically, 4 competing structural equation models(SEM) were constructed.


Participants consisted of 187 university-level Japanese students who came to Canada to study for 8 months on an academic exchange program, and 111 native speakers of English who were the dormitory mates of the Japanese students. Data were collected 3 times at 3 months intervals from the Japanese students. All data were gathered in the classroom using a multiple choice questionnaire (MCQ) and a self-report questionnaire on uses of English. The multiple choice questionnaire contained 12 scenarios. All scenarios were written in both English and Japanese, but all response choices were provided only in English. Japanese pragmatic competence was assessed using three measures: scores in scenarios for higher status, equal status, and lower status. Scores in 3 sections of an institutional version of TOEFL were used as measures of general English proficiency. A self-report questionnaire for the information on the amount of exposure to English was constructed.


Although the results revealed the persistent effect of pragmatic competence on itself over the duration of the study, they also suggested that amount of exposure had greater potential to account for pragmatic development than level of proficiency.


8. Liszka, S. A.(2004). Exploring the effects of first language influence on second language pragmatic processes from a syntactic deficit perspective: Second Language Research, 20(3), 212-231.

This paper considers how a grammatical deficit could contribute to non-native-like pragmatic processing at the level of explicature formation, on the assumption that the decoding of grammatical knowledge at logical form initiates the pragmatic development required for explicature formation. The focus of the discussion is the syntactically and semantically complex (British) English present perfect.


12 proficiency-matched speakers were compared from 3 native language backgrounds: German, Japanese, and Chinese. 5 native speakers of English acted as a control group. The task comprised 120 environments, 54 of which obligatorily required present perfect verb forms. Half of the tokens were real English regular and irregular verbs and the other half were invented. 6 definitions were presented on each page of a 20-page booklet and informants were instructed to use each verb once in one of six contexts provided. Half were written and half were recorded.


Results from comparative data of second language English speakers from 3 typologically different language backgrounds are used to explain how the L1 might influence the L2 acquisition of the present perfect and to assess pragmatic differences post-logical-form, resulting from such an influence.


9. Márquez R. R., Rainey, I., & Fulcher, G. (2005). A Comparative Study of Certainty and Conventional Indirectness: Evidence from British English and Peninsular Spanish: Applied Linguistics, 26(1), 1-31.

This paper describes the results of an exploratory study into the perception of conventionally indirect requests, also known as structurally indirect requests, in British English and Peninsular Spanish. This study set out to investigate whether conventionally indirect requests mean the same to speakers of English and Spanish.


The open role play was constructed in English and Spanish and performed by native speakers of British English and Peninsular Spanish studying at the University of Surrey. There were 23 Spaniards from Barcelona and 32 Britons from Surrey. The main data set was collected via an open role play, post-performance interviews, and a questionnaire. The first questionnaire reproduced the 6 situations of the role play. The second questionnaire was of the open-ended type and was based on the answers given during the post-performance interviews.


The results have shown that speakers’ levels of expectation of compliance in the likelihood of request compliance are a factor motivating the realization of conventionally indirect requests. The findings also indicate that in both language, there is a relationship between levels of expectation and the actual language employed in the case of formulaic and mitigated requests. The study has also shown that sameness of situational context in Spanish and English, understood as familiar everyday social situations with the same combination of social variables. The results show that the Spanish were generally more certain that the addressee would comply with the request than the Britons.


10. TAGUCHI, N. (2005). Comprehending Implied Meaning in English as a Foreign Language: The Modern Language Journal. 89(4), 543-562.
What is important about meaning interpretation, from a pragmatic point of view, is understanding what the speaker intends to accomplish in making an utterance.This study investigated whether L2 proficiency affects pragmatic comprehension, namely the ability to comprehend implied meaning in spoken dialogues, in terms of accuracy and speed of comprehension.


The study included 210 participants, consisting of two distinct groups: 46 native speakers of English in a university in the United States, and 164 Japanese learners of English in a branch U.S. college in Japan. The participants ability to comprehend implied meaning was assessed by a pragmatic listening task, consisting of 40 multiple choice questions. The filler items that tested literal comprehension were included. This study tested the comprehension ability with a listening task, not reading task like other studies.


The statistic show that native speaker comprehension was accurate and generally fast, and little variation was observed in score and tome data. L2 proficiency was found to be a real predicator for the three of the dependent variables tested. The results revealed a significant L2 proficiency influence on accuracy, but not on comprehension speed. There was no significant relationship between accuracy and comprehension.


11. Takahashi, S. (2005). Pragmalinguistic Awareness: Is it Related to Motivation and Proficiency? : Applied Linguistics, 26(1), 90-120.

The issues of attention and awareness in SLA have been explored in the framework of Schmidt’s. The purpose of this study is to explore Japanese EFL learners’ pragmalinguistic awareness in processing L2 implicit input and to what extent their awareness of the target features is related to motivation and proficiency. His central concern is to examine to what extent Japanese EFL learners notice bi-clausal complex request forms.


80 Japanese college students learning EFL participated. Four kinds of data eliciting instrument were prepared. The first instrument was Motivation Questionnaire. The second instrument was the proficiency measure, which is the listening comprehension and the Reading comprehension sections of G-TELF. The third instrument included the materials for the treatment session. The fourth instrument was a set of materials for the immediate retrospection session. At the beginning of the semester, the participants completed the motivation questionnaire and the proficiency test. Two weeks later, the participants were asked to do the treatment/retrospection tasks. the treatment /retrospection session was held over three weeks( 90 minutes per week).


Two major findings were obtained: (1) The learners differentially noticed the target pragmalinguistic features; and (2) The leraners’ awareness of the target features was correlated with motivation subscales, but not with their proficiency. In particular, the learners’ intrinsic motivation was found to be closely related to their pragmatic awareness.


12. Schauer, G. A. (2006). Pragmatics Awareness in ESL and EFL contexts: Contrast and development: Language Learning, 56(2), 269-318.

This article is intended to contribute to the body of research on pragmatic awareness by comparing English as ESL and English as EFL learners’ as well as native speakers’ recognition and severity ratings of pragmatic and grammatical errors and examining how ESL learners’ awareness and assessment of pragmatic and grammatical infelicities develop over a period of one academic year.


There were 3 participant groups. The first group consisted of 16 German learners of English in England. The second group comprised 17 German learners of English who were in their final year of a 3-year course in English translation studies at a higher education institution in Germany. The final group comprised 20 British English native speakers who were enrolled in undergraduate and graduate degree courses at a British university. Data was elicited with the combined video-and-questionnaire instrument. The video contained 20 scenarios. 8 of them were pragmatically inappropriate but grammatically correct, 8 were grammatically incorrect but pragmatically appropriate, 4 were appropriate and grammatically correct. Each scenario was shown twice. The participants were asked to just watch and listen when they were first shown the scenario. After having watched it for the second time, they filled in the questionnaire. There were also one-to-one interviews.


German learners in England and the native speakers recognized significantly more errors in scenarios containing a pragmatic infelicity than the learner group in Germany. The native speakers achieved the highest error recognition score. The data show that the German EFL students were less aware of pragmatic infelicities than the ESL group and that the ESL learners increased their pragmatic awareness significantly during their stay in Great Britain.

Ⅲ. Conclusion
I’ve read 12 articles related to the study. The purpose of the study was various. Some wanted to know the influence of L1 on the pragmatics, and others wanted to know the influence of the environment on the pragmatics. In some studies, two or three languages are compared from the pragmatic point of view. The way of the study was various as well. Interviews, tape or video-recording, role play, or reading books are used. Number 4,7,12 are saying that the environment or the amount of the exposure can have a great effect on the pragmatic competence. In number 11, it is said that the learners’ intrinsic motivation was found to be closely related to their pragmatic awareness. And number 2 and 8 said that the L1 might influence L2 acquisition of the specific grammar (reflexive and present perfect)
However some studies failed to draw what they want. In number 6, it is said that although methods such as the DCT may be appropriate for collecting pragmalinguistic data, they fail to reveal the sociopragmatic complexities of face-threatening acts such as refusals. And in number 3, it is said that although a number of developmental patterns are revealed, there is little evidence of situational variation for any of the speech acts, which may indicate the precedence of pragmalinguistics over sociopragmatics in the early stages of pragmatic development in second language.
Even if I wanted to read about pragmatics, I should have narrowed down the topic more specifically. Some are related to the grammar and some are related to the speaking, and some, culture. I am sorry not to find out common agreement or disagreement. However, from some studies about environment, I can find out the importance of the environment for the pragmatic competence. The more we are exposed to the target language environment, the more we can acquire. I think pragmatic competence is so important for the second language learner and we can’t say someone can speak fluently without consideration of the pragmatic competence.

References

Bill, J., Gabriele, K., & Steven, R. (1998). Effect of Rejoinders in Production Questionnaires: Applied Linguistics, 19(2), 157-182.

Daejin, K., & Joan, K. H. (2002). The Role of an Interactive Book Reading Program in the Development of Second Language Pragmatic Competence: Modern Language Journal, 86(3), 332-348.

Demirci, M. (2000). The role of pragmatics in reflexive interpretation by Turkish learners of English: Second Language Research, 16(4), 325-353.

Gayle L. N., Joan C., Mahmoud A.B., & Waguida E.B. (2002). Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Strategy Use in Egyptian Arabic and American English Refusals: Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 163-189.

Kenneth R.R. (2000) AN EXPLORATORY CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY OF INTERLANGUAGE PRAGMATIC DEVELOPMENT: Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(1), 27-67.

Liszka, S. A.(2004). Exploring the effects of first language influence on second language pragmatic processes from a syntactic deficit perspective: Second Language Research, 20(3), 212-231.

Márquez R. R., Rainey, I., & Fulcher, G. (2005). A Comparative Study of Certainty and Conventional Indirectness: Evidence from British English and Peninsular Spanish: Applied Linguistics, 26(1), 1-31.

Matsumura, S. (2001). Learning the Rules for Offering Advice: A Quantitative Approach to Second Language Socialization: Language learning. 51(4). 635- 679.

Matsumura S.( 2003). Modelling the Relationships among Interlanguage Pragmatic Development, L2 Proficiency, and Exposure to L2: Applied Linguistics. 24(4). 465-491.

Schauer, G. A. (2006). Pragmatics Awareness in ESL and EFL contexts: Contrast and development: Language Learning, 56(2), 269-318.
TAGUCHI, N. (2005). Comprehending Implied Meaning in English as a Foreign Language: The Modern Language Journal. 89(4), 543-562.
Takahashi, S. (2005). Pragmalinguistic Awareness: Is it Related to Motivation and Proficiency? : Applied Linguistics, 26(1), 90-120.