2 of 17

Pragmatics

“Pragmatics is the study of language from the point of view of users, especially of the choices they make, the constraints they encounter in using language in social interaction, and the effects their use of language has on other participants in the act of communication” (Crystal, 2008, p. 379).

3 of 17

Pragmatic Competence

“the knowledge of the linguistic resources available in a given language for realizing particular illocutions, knowledge of the sequential aspects of speech acts, and finally, knowledge of the appropriate contextual use of the particular language’s linguistic resources” (Barron, 2003 p.10).

“the ability to perform language functions and the knowledge of socially appropriate language use” (Kusevska, Ulanska, Ivanovska & Daskalovska (2015, p. 152).

�

4 of 17

Pragmatic Competence

“… the study of contextual meaning as co-constructed by participants in social interaction. From a practical and pedagogical perspective, it may be defined simply as the socially and culturally appropriate use of language in interaction” ((Nguyen Thi Thuy Minh & Le Van Canh, 2019, p. 2).

5 of 17

Major Aims of Pragmatics Instructions

a. decide which register is appropriate to use when communicating with others in a particular setting;�b. express their purposes, intentions, and meanings appropriately in different situational and cultural contexts to achieve the intended effects of their communication; and�c. recognize others’ communicative intentions and respond appropriately.

(Nguyen Thi Thuy Minh & Le Van Canh, 2019, p. 7) �

6 of 17

Main elements of Pragmatic Competence

�

Pragmalinguistics	Sociopragmatics
Linguistic resources (forms or structures) to express intended meaning.	Participants’ perceptions of social power, social distance, social rules, and norms of appropriateness that influence their choice of particular linguistic forms in particular contexts �

7 of 17

Main elements of Pragmatic Competence

�

Pragmalinguistics	Sociopragmatics
Pragmatics across languages (interlanguage) Exposure to TL context Language proficiency ≠ Pragmatic competence (Kasper & Schmidt, 1996; Kasper, 1992)	Intercultural communication Differences of pragmatic norms Situation-based ((Wolf & Polzenhagen, 2006) �

8 of 17

The Importance of teaching Pragmatic Competence in ELT

To avoid communication breakdown and misunderstanding (Crandal & Basturkmen, 2004)
Textbooks and ELT materials do not provide adequate opportunities for developing pragmatic competence-the need to add exposure and practices.
Enhance L2 learning.
Lack of L2 pragmatic competence
Assessment of pragmatic competence.

9 of 17

Research on Pragmatic-related issues

Politeness and impoliteness strategies (Eshghinejad & Moini, 2016; Flores-Salgado & Castineira-Benitez, 2018; Jumanto, Rizal, & Nugroho, 2017; Nurdiyani & Sasongko, 2022).
Pragmatics teaching/instructions (Barón & Celaya, 2022; Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen, Thi Hanh Pham, Minh Tam Pham, 2012; Nan Huang, 2022).
Textbooks and teaching materials (Mehzudil Tuğba Yıldız Ekin, 2013; Prayitno, Markhamah, Nasucha, Huda, Ratih, Ubaidullah, Rohmadi, Boeriswati, Thambu, 2022).
Pragmatic aspects in acts and utterances (House, Kádár, Fengguang Liu, Zhuo Bi, 2021).

10 of 17

�Pedagogical Implications�

Implicit and explicit instructions (Koike & Pearson, 2005)
Awareness raising (Bardovi-Harlig & Griffin, 2005).
All parties involved in an interaction/communication must attempt for cooperative principles. � ��

�

11 of 17

6 general teaching principles (Nguyen Thi Thuy Minh & Le Van Canh, 2019):

Developing awareness of form, function, and form-function-context connections
Developing the ability to use language not only accurately and appropriately, but also fluently
Providing exposure to language input, opportunities for input noticing, and sustained practice of the target form.
Providing systematically planned and sustained instruction.
Developing intercultural awareness and negotiation skills as well as cultivating tolerance of cultural differences
Cultivating learner autonomy and self-directed learning

12 of 17

Thoughts?

As teachers, how do we respond to these cases?
How do we utilize these ‘authentic’ examples to teach or improve the students’ pragmatic competence?
What research opportunities are opened?

13 of 17

Common cases:

15 of 17

Thesis Acknowledgements

16 of 17

Work cited:

Eshghinejad, S., & Moini, M. R. (2016). Politeness Strategies Used in Text Messaging: Pragmatic Competence in an Asymmetrical Power Relation of Teacher–Student. SAGE Open, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016632288
Nurdiyani, N., & Sasongko, S. (2022). Students' Politeness to Lecturers in WhatsApp Application Measured Using Leech Maxim. Journal of Pragmatic Research, 4(2), 107-121.
Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen, Thi Hanh Pham, Minh Tam Pham (2012). The relative effects of explicit and implicit form-focused instruction on the development of L2 pragmatic competence, Journal of Pragmatics, 44(4), 416-434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.01.003
Barón, J., & Celaya, M. L. (2022). ‘May I do something for you?’: The effects of audio-visual material (captioned and non-captioned) on EFL pragmatic learning. Language Teaching Research, 26(2), 238–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211067000
Prayitno, H. J., Markhamah, Nasucha, Y., Huda, M., Ratih, K., Ubaidullah, Rohmadi, M., Boeriswati, E., Thambu, N. (2022). Prophetic educational values in the Indonesian language textbook: pillars of positive politeness and character education, 8(8)
Juliane House, Dániel Z. Kádár, Fengguang Liu, Zhuo Bi (2021). Altered speech act indication: A problem for foreign language learners?, System, 101.
Mehzudil Tuğba Yıldız Ekin (2013). Do current EFL Coursebooks work for the Development of L2 Pragmatic Competence? The case of Suggestions, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1306-1310,

1 of 17