Considerations in assessing pragmatic appropriateness in spoken language

Abstract

This paper is a revised version of a plenary prompted by the upsurge of interest in the role of pragmatics in teaching, learning, and assessment, and has as its purpose to take a fresh look at recent developments in the assessment of target-language (TL) pragmatics in spoken language. The first issue considered is the question of whether to attempt to assess pragmatics as it unfolds naturally in interactions, and if so, how to do it. Next, micro-level and macro-level factors in the assessment of TL pragmatics are considered. Third, a close look is given to the specific elements of TL pragmatics to assess. Fourth, there is attention to the matter of which instruments are most appropriate for collecting the desired data in the given context. Fifth, issues relating to data analysis are discussed. Finally, matters pertaining to the assessment of classroom instruction are looked at. Recommendations are given as to potentially viable directions for dealing with these issues both in terms of research studies and for assessment of classroom instruction.

Social distance and speech behavior: A case of Pakistani English speakers’ apology responses

“…The former is concerned with knowing "the particular resources which a given language provides for conveying particular illocutions" (Leech, 2016, p. 11), while the latter focuses on the influence of social and contextual factors on our linguistic choices. L2 pragmatics, a sub-field of second language acquisition (SLA), investigates how L2 learners develop knowledge of pragmalinguistics and sociopragmatics, and what factors affect the process of development (e.g., target language experiences, proficiency, and instruction) (Adams & Kampf, 2020;Cohen, 2020;McConachy, 2019;Shakki et al, 2020;Taguchi, 2019;Taguchi & Kim, 2018Taguchi & Roever, 2017.…”

Cognitive Processes of ESL Learners in Pragmatic Role-Play Tasks in Academic Settings

“…However, the taxonomies were based on general language-use situations rather than specific language-use contexts, such as an academic setting. Therefore, more empirical research is needed in order to validate the taxonomies and develop a more finetuned measure for cognitive processes in L2 pragmatics (Cohen, 2005(Cohen, , 2020.…”

“…Compared to other language skills, pragmatic strategies have drawn relatively less attention (Oxford, 2017 ; Cohen, 2020 ). Nonetheless, researchers (e.g., Cohen, 2005 ) have already developed the taxonomies of pragmatic strategies.…”

“…However, the single-turn refusal responses of learners in DCTs do not involve the online pragmatic performance in spoken interaction. Despite the common use, DCTs are not suitable for eliciting a wide range of L2 pragmatic abilities (Golato, 2003 ; Kasper, 2008 ; Cohen, 2020 ).…”

From saying it right to doing it right: a model of pragmatic competence development

“…According to the noticing hypothesis of Schmidt (1993), the central place of pragmatic teaching is occupied by joint reflection on the link between linguistic form and pragmatic function needed for a specific communicative situation (Martinez-Flor & Usò-Juan, 2010). Moreover, the zone of proximal development of Vygotsky (1978) prompts a significant role of explicit instructions and guided discovery procedures in raising learners' awareness of a contextual variation and perlocutionary effects of pragmalinguistic choices (Alcon Soler & Martinez-Flor, 2008;Ishihara & Cohen, 2010;Tatsuki & Houck, 2010;Cohen, 2020). In such a way, both social and cognitive perspectives of the learner are exploited for a significant learning experience which can be delivered within a specifically designed teaching model.…”