In the past, research in interlanguage pragmatics has primarily explained the differences between native speakers’ (NS) and non-native speakers’ (NNS) pragmatic performance based on cross-cultural and linguistic differences. Very few researchers have considered learners’ pragmatic performance based on second language comprehension. In this study, we will examine learners’ pragmatic performance using request strategies. The results of this study reveal that there is a proficiency effect for interpreting request speech acts at different levels of directness. We propose that learners’ processing strategies and capacities are important factors to consider when examining learners’ pragmatic performance.
(1993) Learning the rules of academic talk: a longitudinal study of pragmatic development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 151, 467–501.
(1999) Exploring the interlanguage of interlanguage pragmatics: a research agenda for acquisitional pragmatics. Language Learning, 491, 677–713.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Dörnyei, Z.
(1998) Do language learners recognize pragmatic violations? Pragmatic vs. grammatical awareness in instructed L2 learning. TESOL Quarterly, 321, 233–259.
(1978) A theoretical model of second language learning. Language Learning, 28, (1), 69–83.
(1991) Letters, sounds, and symbols: changes in children’s understanding of written language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 121, 75–89.
(1993) Symbolic representation and attentional control in pragmatic competence. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds) Interlanguage pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
(1989) Playing it safe: the role of conventionality in indirectness. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House & G. Kasper (Eds) Cross-cultural pragmatics: requests and apologies (pp. 37–70). Norwood, N. J.: Ablex.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J. and Kasper, G.
(1989) Cross-cultural pragmatics: requests and apologies. Norwood, N. J.: Ablex.
(1992) The interpretation of implicature in English by NNS: does it come automatically - without being explicitly taught? In L.F. Bouton & Y. Kachru (Eds) Pragmatics in language learning Vol 31. Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.
(1994) Can NNS skill in implicatures in American English be improved through explicit instruction? A pilot study. In L.F. Bouton & Y. Kachru (Eds) Pragmatics in language learning Vol 51. UrbanaChampaign, IL: University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.
(1979) Indirect speech acts in ESL: indirect answers. In C.A. Yorio, K. Perkins & J. Schachter (Eds) On TESOL ’79. Washington, DC: TESOL
(1981) Relative difficulty of request forms in L1/L2 comprehension. In M. Hines & W. Rutherford (Eds) On TESOL ’81. Washington, DC: TESOL.
Carrell, P.L. & Konneker, B.H.
(1981) Politeness: comparing native and nonnative judgments. Language Learning 311, 17–31.
(1984) Pragmatic comprehension in native speaker discourse. Language Learning, 341, 1–20.
Kasper G. & Dahl, M.
(1991a) Research methods in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 131, 215–247.
Kasper, G. & Dahl, M.
(1991b) Research methods in interlanguage pragmatics. University of Hawaii Technical Report #1. University of Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press.
Kasper, G. & Schmidt, R.
(1996b) Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 2.
Kasper, G. & Schmidt, R.
(1996a) Developmental issues in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18 (1), 49–169.
(1996) Transfer of pragmatic competence and suggestions in Spanish. In S. M. Gass & Neu, J. (Eds). Speech acts across cultures: challenge to communication in a second language. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Ohlstain, E. & Blum-Kulka, S.
(1985) Degree of approximation: nonnative reactions to native speech act behaviour. In S. M. Gass & C. Madden (Eds) Input in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 november 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.