Chapter published in:
Task-Based Approaches to Teaching and Assessing Pragmatics
Edited by Naoko Taguchi and YouJin Kim
[Task-Based Language Teaching 10] 2018
► pp. 160190
References

References

Alcón, E.
(2012) Teachability and bilingualism in effects on third language learners’ pragmatic knowledge. Intercultural Pragmatics, 9(4), 511–541.
(2013a) Mitigating e-mail requests in teenagers’ first and second language academic cyber-consultation. Multilingua, 32, 779–799.
Alcón-Soler, E.
(2015) Pragmatic learning and study abroad: Effects of instruction and length of stay. System, 48, 62–74.
Alcón, E., & Martínez-Flor, A.
(Eds.) (2008) Investigating pragmatics in foreign language learning, teaching and testing. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Baralt, M.
(2013) The impact of cognitive complexity on feedback efficacy during online versus face-to-face interactive tasks. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(4), 689–725. Crossref link
Barat, M.
(2014) Task complexity and task sequencing in traditional versus online language classes. In M. Baralt, R. Gilabert, P. Robinson (Eds). Task sequencing and second language learning (pp. 52–122). New York: Bloomsbury
Baralt, M., Gilabert, R., Robinson, P.
(2014) Task sequencing and second language learning. New York: Bloomsbury.
Baralt, M., Gilabert, R., & Robinson, P.
(Eds.) (2014) Task sequencing and instructed second language learning. London: Bloomsbury.
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B. S.
(2005) Institutional discourse and interlanguage pragmatics. In K. Bardovi-Harlig & B. S. Hartford (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics: Exploring institutional talk (pp. 7–36). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bardovi-Harlig, K.
(2013) Developing L2 pragmatics. Language Learning, 63(1), 68–86. Crossref link
Barron, A.
(2012) Interlanguage pragmatics: From use to acquisition to second language pedagogy. Language Teaching, 45(1), 44–63. Crossref link
Barron, A., Gu, Y., & Steen, G.
(Eds.) (2016) Routledge handbook of pragmatics. London: Routledge.
Biesenbach-Lucas, S.
(2006) Making requests in email: Do cyber-consultations entail directness? Toward conventions in a new medium. Pragmatics and language learning, 11, 82–107.
(2007) Students writing emails to faculty: An examination of e-politeness among native and non-native speakers of English. Language Learning and Technology, 11(2), 59–81.
Chen, C-F. E.
(2001) Making e-mail requests to professors: Taiwanese vs. American students. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Applied Linguistics in St. Louis, February 2001. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 461 299).
Council of Europe
(2001) Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
Economidou-Kogetsidis, M.
(2011) “Please answer me as soon as possible”: Pragmatic failure in non-native speakers’e-mail requests to faculty. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(13), 3193–3215.
Economidou-kogetsidis, M.
(2015) Teaching E-mail Politeness in the EFL/ESL Classroom. ELT journal, 69(4), 415–424. Crossref link.
Economidou-Kogetsidis, M.
(2015) Teaching email politeness in the EFL/ESL classroom. ELT Journal, 69, 415–424.
Ellis, R.
(2003) Task-based language teaching and learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Færch, C., & Kasper, G.
(1989) Internal and external modification in interlanguage request realization. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics (pp. 221–247). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Félix-Brasdefer, J. C.
(2012) E-mail requests to faculty. In M. Economidou-Kogetsidis, & H. Woodfield (Eds), Interlanguage Request Modification (pp.217–287). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Firth, A., & Wagner, J.
(2007) Second/Foreign language learning as a social accomplishment: elaborations on a reconceptualized SLA. The Modern Language Journal, 91(1), 800–819. Crossref link
Gilabert, R.
(2005) Evaluating the use of multiple sources and methods in needs analysis: A case study of journalists in the autonomous community of Catalonia (Spain). In M. H. Long (Ed.), Second language needs analysis (pp. 182–99). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crossref link
Gilabert, R., & Barón, J.
(2013) The impact of increasing task complexity on L2 pragmatic moves. In K. McDonough & A. Mackey (Eds.), Second language interaction in diverse educational contexts (pp. 45–69). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref link
Gilabert, R., & Levkina, M.
(2018) The impact of task complexity and task sequencing on the development of pragmatic moves. Manuscript in preparation.
Gilabert, R., Barón, J., & Levkina, M.
(2011) Manipulating task complexity across task types and modes. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 105–140). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
House, J.
(1996) Developing pragmatic fluency in English as a foreign language: routines and metapragmatic awareness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(2), 225–252. Crossref link
Hudson, T., Detmer, E., & Brown, J. D.
(1995) Developing prototypic measures of cross-cultural pragmatics. Honolulu, HI: Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
Jackson, D., & Suethanapornkul, S.
(2013) The cognition hypothesis: A synthesis and meta-analysis of research on second language task complexity. Language Learning, 63(2), 330–367.
Kasper, G.
(1998) Interlanguage pragmatics. In H. Byrnes (Ed.), Learning Foreign and Second Languages: Perspectives in Research and Scholarship (pp. 183–208). New York, NY: The Modern Language Association of America.
Kasper, G., & Rose, K.
(2002) Pragmatic development in a second language. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Kasper, G., & Schmidt, R.
(1996) Developmental issues in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 149–69. Crossref link
Kasper, G., & Blum-Kulka, S.
(1993) Interlanguage pragmatics: An introduction. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 3–17). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kasper, G.
(2010) Interlanguage pragmatics. Variation and change: Pragmatic perspectives, 6, 141–154.
Kim, Y., & Taguchi, N.
(2015) Promoting task-based pragmatics instruction in EFL classroom contexts: The role of task complexity. The Modern Language Journal, 99(4), 656–677. Crossref link
(2016) Learner–learner interaction during collaborative pragmatic tasks: The role of cognitive and pragmatic task demands. Foreign Language Annals, 49(1), 42–57.
Kim, Y., & Tracy-Ventura, N.
(2011) Task complexity, language anxiety, and the development of the simple past. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 287–306). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref link
Koike, D. A., & Pearson, L.
(2005) The effect of instruction and feedback in the development of pragmatic competence. System, 33(3), 481–501. Crossref link
Levkina, M. & Gilabert, R.
(2014) Task Sequencing in the L2 Development of Spatial Expressions. In M. Baralt, R. Gilabert, & P. Robinson (Eds). Task sequencing and instructed second language learning (pp. 37–71). New York: Bloomsbury.
Liu, J.
(2006) Measuring interlanguage pragmatic knowledge of EFL learners. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
(2011) Testing interlanguage pragmatics knowledge. In Trosborg, A. (Ed.), Pragmatics across language and cultures (pp. 467–488). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
(2006) Assessing EFL learners’ interlanguage pragmatic knowledge: Implications for testers and teachers. Reflections on English Language Teaching, 5(1), 1–22.
Long, M. H.
(2005) Second language needs analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crossref link
Long, M.
(2015a) Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Malika, A., & Levkina, M.
(2012) Measuring task complexity: Does EFL proficiency matter? In A. Shebadeh & C. Combee (Eds.), Task-based language teaching in foreign language contexts (pp.43–66). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref link
Martínez-Flor, A., & Usó-Juan, E.
(2010) Pragmatics and speech act performance. In A. Marínez-Flor & E. Usó-Juan (Eds.), Speech act performance: Theoretical, empirical and methodological issues (pp. 3–20). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref link
Michel, M. C.
(2011) Effects of Task Complexity and Interaction on L2-Performance. In: Robinson, P. (ed.). Second Language Task Complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of Language Learning and Performance (pp. 141–174). John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
Michel, M., Gilabert, R., & Révész, A.
(2018) Eye-tracking and stimulated recall as means of investigating cognitive load and processes during L2 tasks. Manuscript in preparation.
Norris, J. M.
(2010) Understanding instructed SLA: Constructs, contexts, and consequences. Plenary address delivered at the annual conference of the European Second Language Association (EUROSLA), Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L.
(2003) Defining and measuring SLA. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 716–761). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Crossref link
Plonsky, L., & Kim, Y.
(2016) Task-based learner production: A substantive and methodological review. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 73–97.
Prabhu, N. S.
(1987) Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Révész, A.
(2014) Towards a fuller assessment of cognitive models of task-based learning: Investigating task-generated cognitive demands and processes. Applied Linguistics, 35(1), 87–92. Crossref link.
(2011) Task complexity, focus on L2 constructions, and individual differences: A classroom-based study. The Modern Language Journal, 95(1), 162–181. Crossref link
Révesz, A., Michel, M. & Gilabert, R.
(2016) Measuring cognitive task demands using dual task methodology, subjective self-ratings, and expert judgments: A validation study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38, 703–737.
Révész, A., & Gurzynski-Weiss, L.
(2016) Teachers’ perspectives on second language task difficulty: insights from think-alouds and eye tracking. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 36 182–204. Crossref link.
Révész, A., Michel, M. C., & Gilabert, R.
(2016) Measuring cognitive task demands using dual task methodology, subjective self-ratings, and expert judgments: a validation study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(4), 703–737. Crossref link
Révész, A., Sachs, R., & Hama, M.
(2014) The effects of task complexity and input frequency on the acquisition of the past counterfactual construction through recasts. Language Learning, 64, 615–650.
Robinson, P.
(2001) Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 27–57. Crossref link
(2005) Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 43(1), 1–32. Crossref link
(2011) Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref link
Robinson, P., & Gilabert, R.
(2007) Task complexity, the cognition hypothesis and second language learning and performance. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(3), 161–176. Crossref link
Robinson, P.
(2007) Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: Effects on speech production, interaction, uptake and perceptions of task difficulty. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45, 195–215.
Rose, K.
(2001) An exploratory cross-sectional study of interlanguage pragmatic development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(1), 27–67.
Skehan, P.
(1998) A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sasayama, S., Malicka, A., & Norris, J.
(2015) Primary challenges in cognitive task complexity research: Results of a comprehensive research synthesis. Paper presented at the 2015 Task-Based Language Teaching Conference in Leuven, Belgium.
Sasayama, S.
(2016) Is a ‘complex’ task really complex? Validating the assumption of cognitive task complexity. Modern Language Journal, 100(1), 231–254. Crossref link.
Safont, P.
(2005) Third language learners: pragmatic production and awareness (Vol. 12). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
Sasayama, S.
(2013) Is a “complex” task really complex? Measuring task complexity independently from linguistic production. Paper presented at the 5th Biennial International Conference on Task-Based Language Teaching, Banff, Alberta, Canada.
Sweller, J., Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F.
(1998) Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251–295 Crossref link
Taguchi, N.
(2007) Task difficulty in oral speech act production. Applied linguistics, 28(1), 113–135. Crossref link
(2015) Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies were, are, and should be going. State-of-the-art article. Language Teaching, 48(1), 1–50. Crossref link
Tagouchi, N. & Roever, C.
(2017) Second language pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Takahashi, S.
(2001) The role of input enhancement in developing pragmatic competence. Pragmatics in language teaching, 171–199.
Takimoto, M.
(2008) The effects of deductive and inductive instruction on the development of language learners’ pragmatic competence. The Modern Language Journal, 92(3), 369–386. Crossref link
Walters, F. S.
(2007) A conversation-analytic hermeneutic rating protocol to assess L2 oral pragmatic competence. Language Testing, 24(2), 155–183. Crossref link
Woodfield, H., & Economidou-Kogetsidis, M.
(2010) “I just need more time”: a study of native and non-native students’ requests to faculty for late submission. Multilingua, 1, 77–118.
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Barón Parés, Júlia, M. Luz Celaya & Mayya Levkina
2020. Learning pragmatics through tasks. Applied Pragmatics 2:1  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
González-Lloret, Marta & Lourdes Ortega
2018.  In Task-Based Approaches to Teaching and Assessing Pragmatics [Task-Based Language Teaching, 10],  pp. 192 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 may 2020. 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.