The Theory and Practice of Teaching Pragmatics: Distinguishing Myths from Realities

Talk under the auspices of Institute for Advanced Studies in Social Sciences and Humanities & Faculty of Pedagogy and Fine Arts, Adam Mickiewicz University in Kalisz -- IAS Invited Lecture Series on Issues in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 29 Mar 22.

​

Andrew D. Cohen, Professor Emeritus, U. of Minnesota adcohen@umn.edu, https://z.umn.edu/adcohen

INTRODUCTION� SETTING THE STAGE FOR THE PRESENTATION OF 12 ISSUES� INVOLVING MYTHS AND REALITIES�

• Note: Pragmatics primarily focuses on speech, but also includes texting and other forms of written discourse.
• Although I take sole responsibility for generating a list of 12 issues involving myths and realities for this talk, the inspiration for the list comes from interactions with and reading the writings on applied pragmatics by many of my colleagues: Naoko Taguchi, Kathleen Bardovi-Harlig, Elite Olshtain, César Félix-Brasdefer, Noriko Ishihara, Julie Sykes, Carsten Roever, Rachel Shively, Diana Boxer, and many others.

2

INTRO (CONTD.)

• A caveat regarding attempts to dichotomize issues in pragmatics:

There tends to be a continuum from what is not at all true to what is absolutely true regarding every issue.

• Determining the reality in a given case calls for empirical investigation.

​

3

INTRO (CONTD.)

• Practically-oriented claims about pragmatics run the risk of being myopic, as in touching different parts of an elephant while blindfolded.
• To what extent do researchers give adequate attention to the Pedagogical Implications section of their research articles on target language (TL) pragmatics?
• How many operationalizable takeaways are there for teachers in the average pedagogical section of an empirical study?

​

4

INTRO (CONTD.)

• To what extent is applied pragmatics more an erudite domain for researchers than a source of pedagogical ideas that make a contribution to how instructors actually teach the TL and how learners learn it?
• So, how fruitful is it for teachers to read the current research literature on pragmatics if they want practical takeaways?

5

#1 – “TEACHING THE LANGUAGE CURRICULUM DOESN’T LEAVE TIME FOR TL PRAGMATICS”

• To what extent do the following statements reflect the reality in TL classrooms?
• “What is explicitly taught about pragmatics is likely to be learned.”
• “Learners enjoy learning pragmatics since it enhances their performance.”
• To what extent can learners benefit from self-access to pragmatics materials out of class? For example:
• through self-access websites,
• through data gathering with NSs and highly competent NNSs.

6

#2 – “IT IS BEST TO RESERVE THE TEACHING OF PRAGMATICS TO HIGHER-PROFICIENCY STUDENTS”

• To what extent is there a need in beginning TL lessons for instruction dealing with the pragmatics of greetings, thanking, and requesting?
• To what extent do beginning students benefit from strategies for performing certain routine behaviors in pragmatically acceptable ways?

7

#3 – “THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN NATIVE AND NONNATIVE PRAGMATICS IS ELUSIVE”

• In critical applied pragmatics parlance, teaching ESL/EFL towards idealized UK/US/Australian norms is inappropriate. Instead, the view is expressed that the pragmatics of international varieties of English (e.g. World Englishes) needs to be promoted.
• To what extent are native speakers (NSs) of the so-called “prestigious” English varieties considered by teachers and learners of the TL to be a resource regarding what is considered acceptable performance in pragmatics for the given situation and context?
• To what extent are there limits to the “international varieties of English” position?
• And what about international varieties of other TLs?

8

#4 – “IF IT’S YOUR NATIVE LANGUAGE, YOU ARE LIKELY TO GET THE PRAGMATICS RIGHT”

• Not all NSs get it “right” if other NSs are put off by their:
• boorishness,
• rudeness,
• unthoughtfulness,
• patronizing behavior,
• belittling,
• teasing.

9

#5 – “NO NEED TO TEACH PRAGMALINGUISTICS EXPLICITLY SINCE IT’S ACQUIRED”

• Is untutored exposure the best teacher when it comes to the niceties of pragmalinguistics?
• My experience as a hyperpolyglot: after having lived in Israel for over10 years, I still hadn’t acquired the pragmalinguistic options for expressing an apology (assuming the sociopragmatics indicated the need) – from a trivial to a substantial apology.

10

#6 – “MUCH OF SOCIOPRAGMATICS IS TOO SUBTLE TO TEACH”

• Researchers seem to spend more time studying the niceties of pragmalinguistics than they do investigating the ins and outs of sociopragmatics.
• Why is there not more research on sociopragmatic failure? Examples:

11

#6 – “SOCIOPRAGMATICS…” (CONTD.)

• Asking questions about topics that are taboo,
• Cursing inappropriately,
• Offering criticism where and/or when it is inappropriate to do so,
• Not perceiving when others’ sarcasm is aimed at you, or unintentionally coming across as sarcastic.

​

12

#7 – “WHY FOCUS ON DIFFERENCES IN CULTURAL INTERACTION RATHER THAN ON SIMILARITIES?”

• While there are clearly similarities in pragmatic performance across language communities, aren’t there also striking differences as well?
• The speech acts of apologizing, requesting, complimenting, and complaining are researched extensively due to sometimes glaring cross-cultural differences. What about exploring similarities and differences in performance on less-researched speech acts – e.g. extending condolences?

13

#8 – “SINCE NONVERBAL TL PRAGMATICS IS NOT A COMMON RESEARCH FOCUS, WHY TEACH IT?”

• Should what is researched dictate what is taught?
• Some crucial but under-researched areas of nonverbal behavior:
• physical contact,
• facial expressions,
• gestures,
• stress and intonation.

14

#9 – “MANY SPEECH ACTS ARE TOO COMPLEX TO TEACH”

• True, propositional and grammatical analyses of speech acts (e.g. as pertains to politeness theory) may be too much for learners to grasp.
• However, teaching the basics of speech act performance is doable:
• Learners may welcome a class discussion about strategies for performing speech acts in general.
• They may also welcome suggested strategies for performing

high-stakes speech acts – i.e., whether to, where, when, and how.

​

15

#10 – “PRAGMATIC FAILURE IS USUALLY A RESULT OF NEGATIVE TRANSFER”

• To what extent is negative transfer a cause of pragmatic failure?
• Whereas pragmatic failure in the TL can be due to negative transfer from the dominant language(s), overgeneralization of learned TL behaviors can also impact performance – e.g.
• using the formal Iie, kekkoudesu ‘No thanks’ in an informal meal setting, or
• asking an American about his salary after he has shared intimacies on a plane.
• In addition, learners’ sense of agency may play a role – i.e. self-identity including an unwillingness to perform pragmatically as TL speakers would.

16

#11 – “ASSESSMENT OF PRAGMATICS IS FOR RESEARCHERS, NOT FOR CLASSROOM TEACHERS”

• To what extent does the assessment of classroom language include measures of pragmatics?
• If the assessment of pragmatics is lacking, what may be reasons for this?
• Such assessment often involves time-consuming ratings,
• Teachers may not feel comfortable rating such performance.
• A powerful counter-argument: The positive washback effects of including pragmatics in assessment.
• Opportunities for innovative types of assessment.

17

#12 – “LEARNERS CANNOT EXPLAIN HOW THEY LEARN OR PERFORM PRAGMATICS”

• With regard to learners’ ability to describe how they deal with TL pragmatics:
• To what extent do learners vary in terms of their awareness of and attention to TL pragmatics?
• To what extent do learners vary in terms of how their sensory, cognitive, and personality-related style preferences influence their handling of TL pragmatics?

18

#12 – “LEARNERS…” (CONTD.)

• What else could help to explain why some learners are better at analyzing their performance metapragmatically than others?
• where they fall on the continuum toward native proficiency in the TL,
• the extent to which they have been exposed to explicit instruction in pragmatics,
• the extent to which they have frequented websites offering pragmatics information and performance strategies,
• learning style preferences.

​

​

​

19

SUMMARY OF ISSUES INVOLVING MYTHS AND REALITIES�

#1 – “TEACHING THE LANGUAGE CURRICULUM DOESN’T LEAVE TIME FOR TL PRAGMATICS”

#2 – “BEST TO RESERVE THE TEACHING OF PRAGMATICS FOR HIGHER-PROFICIENCY STUDENTS”

#3 – “THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN NATIVE AND NONNATIVE PRAGMATICS IS ELUSIVE”

#4 – “IF IT’S YOUR NATIVE LANGUAGE, YOU ARE LIKELY TO GET THE PRAGMATICS RIGHT”

#5 – “NO NEED TO TEACH PRAGMALINGUISTICS EXPLICITLY SINCE IT’S ACQUIRED”

#6 – “MUCH OF SOCIOPRAGMATICS IS TOO SUBTLE TO TEACH”

#7 – “WHY FOCUS ON DIFFERENCES IN CULTURAL INTERACTION RATHER THAN ON SIMILARITIES?”

#8 – “SINCE NONVERBAL TL PRAGMATICS IS NOT A COMMON RESEARCH FOCUS, WHY TEACH IT?”

#9 – “MANY SPEECH ACTS ARE TOO COMPLEX TO TEACH”

#10 – “PRAGMATIC FAILURE IS USUALLY A RESULT OF NEGATIVE TRANSFER”

#11 – “ASSESSMENT OF PRAGMATICS IS FOR RESEARCHERS, NOT FOR CLASSROOM TEACHERS”

#12 – “LEARNERS CANNOT EXPLAIN HOW THEY LEARN OR PERFORM PRAGMATICS”

20

CONCLUSIONS

• It is somewhat of a myth that pragmatics is mostly for researchers to explore theories about the role of intention in verbal (and nonverbal) communication.
• It is somewhat of a myth that much of the material is too sophisticated for classroom instruction.
• It appears to be a propitious moment to move beyond myths based on inaccurate beliefs.

​

​

21

CONCLUSIONS (CONTD.)

• There is now ample evidence that teaching and learning of pragmatics contributes to successful communication across languages and cultures.
• A reasonable goal for applied pragmatics research would be to generate pedagogically operationalizable findings.
• Good news that ITAP was founded in Spain – the International Association for Teaching Pragmatics (ITAP).

​

22

CONCLUSIONS (CONTD.)

• Also, check out the Second and Foreign Language Pragmatics Wiki, a TL pragmatics wiki meant to give teachers access to pragmatics materials for the classroom in a variety of languages: http://wlpragmatics.pbworks.com/w/page/99620139/Second%20and%20Foreign%20Language%20Pragmatics%20Wiki
• Current work with Julie Sykes and Stephanie Knight at the Center for Applied Second Language Studies (CASLS,) University of Oregon, with pragmatics modules for high school and college teachers of Spanish.

​

23