Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T12:21:34.513Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Research Methods in Interlanguage Pragmatics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

Gabriele Kasper  and
Merete Dahl
Gabriele Kasper
Affiliation:
University of Hawaii, Manoa
Merete Dahl
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The article reviews the methods of data collection employed in 39 studies of interlanguage pragmatics, defined narrowly as the investigation of nonnative speakers' comprehension and production of speech acts, and the acquisition of L2-related speech act knowledge. Data collection instruments are distinguished according to the degree to which they constrain informants' responses, and whether they tap speech act perception/comprehension or production. A main focus of discussion is the validity of different types of data, in particular, their adequacy to approximate authentic performance of linguistic action.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , June 1991 , pp. 215 - 247
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Andersen, E. (1989). Speaking with style: The sociolinguistic skills of children. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Banerjee, J., & Carrell, P. L. (1988). Tuck in your shirt, you squid: Suggestions in ESL. Language Learning, 38, 313–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B. S. (1990). Congruence in native and nonnative conversations: Status balance in the academic advising session. Language Learning, 40, 467–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beebe, L. M., & Cummings, M. C. (1985, April). Speech act performance: A function of the data collection procedure? Paper presented at the TESOL Convention, New York.Google Scholar
Beebe, L. M., & Takahashi, T. (1989a). Do you have a bag? Social status and patterned variation in second language acquisition. In Gass, S., Madden, C., Preston, D., & Selinker, L. (Eds.), Variation in second language acquisition: Discourse and pragmatics (pp. 103–125). Clevedon, U.K.: Multilingual matters.Google Scholar
Beebe, L. M., & Takahashi, T. (1989b). Sociolinguistic variation in face-threatening speech acts. In Eisenstein, M. (Ed.), The dynamic interlanguage (pp. 199–218). New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beebe, L. M., Takahashi, T., & Uliss-Weltz, R. (1990). Pragmatic transfer in ESL refusals. In Scarcella, R. C., Andersen, E., & Krashen, S. C. (Eds.), On the development of communicative competence in a second language (pp. 55–73). New York: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Bergman, M. L., & Kasper, G. (in press). The interlanguage of apologizing: Cross-cultural evidence. In Blum-Kulka, S. & Kasper, G. (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S. (1982). Learning how to say what you mean in a second language: A study of speech act performance of learners of Hebrew as a second language. Applied Linguistics, 3, 29–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (Eds.) (1989). Cross-ultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1984). Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP). Applied Linguistics, 5, 196–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1986). Too many words: Length of utterance and pragmatic failure. Journal of Pragmatics, 8, 47–61.Google Scholar
Bodman, J., & Eisenstein, M. (1988). May God increase your bounty: The expression of gratitude in English by native and non-native speakers. Cross Currents, 15, 1–21.Google Scholar
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. S. (1987). fbliteness: Some uniuersals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrell, P. L. (1979). Indirect speech acts in ESL: Indirect answers. In Yorio, C. A., Perkins, K., & Schachter, J. (Eds.), On TESOL 79 (pp. 297–307). Washington, DC: TESOL.Google Scholar
Carrell, P. L. (1981a). Children's understanding of indirect requests: Comparing child and adult comprehension. Journal of Child Language, 8, 329–345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carrell, P. L. (1981b). Relative difficulty of request forms in L1/L2 comprehension. In Hines, M. & Rutherford, W. (Eds.), On TESOL 81 (pp. 141–152). Washington, DC: TESOL.Google Scholar
Carrell, P. L., & Konneker, B. H. (1981). Politeness: Comparing native and nonnative judgments. Language Learning, 31, 17–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Lucy, P. (1975). Understanding what is meant from what is said: A study of conventionally conveyed requests. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 56–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crookes, G. (1989). Planning and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11, 367–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, M. (forthcoming). Authentic and role play interaction: A study of method. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Edmondson, W., House, J., Kasper, G., & Stemmer, B. (1984). Learning the pragmatics of discourse: A project report. Applied Linguistics, 5, 113–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenstein, M., & Bodman, J. W. (1986). “I very appreciate”: Expressions of gratitude by native and non-native speakers of American English. Applied Linguistics, 7, 167–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (1991). Grammaticality judgments and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 161–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, S. M., Strage, A., Lampert, M., & Bell, N. (1987). Understanding requests. Linguistics, 25, 107–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (Eds.). (1987). Introspection in second language research. Clevedon, U.K.: Multilingual matters.Google Scholar
Faerch, C, & Kasper, G. (1989). Internal and external modification in interlanguage request realization. In Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (Eds.), Cross-cltural pragmatics (pp. 221–247). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Fiksdal, S. (1988). Verbal and non-verbal strategies of rapport in cross-cultural interviews. Linguistics and Education, 1, 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, B., Rintell, E., & Walters, J. (1980). An approach to conducting research on the acquisition of pragmatic competence in a second language. In Larsen-Freeman, D. (Ed.), Discourse analysis in second language research (pp. 75–91). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Garcia, C. (1989). Apologizing in English: Politeness strategies used by native and non-native speakers. Multilingua, 8, 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W. (1981). Your wish is my command: Convention and context in interpreting indirect requests. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 431–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grotjahn, R. (1991). The Research Programme Subjective Theories: A new approach in second language research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 187–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
House, J. (1988). “Oh excuse me please…”: Apologizing in a foreign language. In Kettemann, B., Bierbaumer, P., Fill, A., & Karpf, A. (Eds.), Engtisch als Zweitsprache (pp. 303–327). Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
House, J., & Kasper, G. (1987). Interlanguage pragmatics: Requesting in a foreign language. In Lörscher, W. & Schulze, R. (Eds.), Perspectives on language in performance: Festschrift for Werner Hüllen (pp. 1250–1288). Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. (1989). A cognitive view of interlanguage variability. In Eisenstein, M. (Ed.), The dynamic interlanguage (pp. 17–31). New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kasper, G. (1981). Pragmatische Aspekte in der Interimsprache. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Kasper, G. (1984). Pragmatic comprehension in learner-native speaker discourse. Language Learning, 34, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kasper, G. (1989). Variation in interlanguage speech act realization. In Gass, S., Madden, C., Preston, D., & Selinker, L. (Eds.), Variation in second language acquisition: Discourse and pragmatics (pp. 37–58). Clevedon, UK.: Multilingual matters.Google Scholar
Kasper, G. (1990). Linguistic politeness: Current research issues. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 193–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kellerman, E., & Sharwood Smith, M. (Eds.). (1986). Cross-linguistic influence in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Kirk, J., & Miller, M. L. (1986). Reliability and validity in qualitative research. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. H. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Levenston, E., & Blum, S. (1978). Discourse completion as a technique for studying lexical features of interlan-guage. Working Papers in Bilingualism, 15, 13–21.Google Scholar
Maeshiba, N., Yoshinaga, N., & Kasper, G. (forthcoming). On saying you're sorry in English and Japanese. Unpublished manuscript. University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu.Google Scholar
Olshtain, E. (1983). Sociocultural competence and language transfer: The case of apology. In Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (Eds.), Language transfer in language learning (pp. 232–249). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Olshtain, E. (1989). Apologies across languages. In Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kaspar, G. (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 155–173). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Olshtain, E., & Blum-Kulka, S. (1985). Degree of approximation: Nonnative reactions to native speech act behavior. In Gass, S. M. & Madden, C. (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 303–325). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Olshtain, E., & Cohen, A. (1983). Apology: A speech act set. In Wolfson, N. & Judd, E. (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 18–35). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Olshtain, E., & Weinbach, L. (1987). Complaints: A study of speech act behavior among native and non-native speakers of Hebrew. In Verschueren, J. & Bertucelli-Papi, M. (Eds.), The pragmatic perspective (pp. 195–208). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rintell, E. (1981). Sociolinguistic variation and pragmatic ability: A look at learners. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 27, 11–34.Google Scholar
Rintell, E. (1984). But how did you feel about that? The learner's perception of emotion in speech. Applied Linguistics, 5, 255–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rintell, E., & Mitchell, C. J. (1989). Studying requests and apologies: An inquiry into method. In Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 248–272). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Scarcella, R. (1979). On speaking politely in a second language. In Yorio, C. A., Perkins, K., & Schachter, J. (Eds.), On TESOL '79 (pp. 275–287). Washington, DC: TESOL.Google Scholar
Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. B. K. (1983). Face in interethnic communication. In Richards, J. C. & Schmidt, R. W. (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 156–188). London: Longman.Google Scholar
Selinker, L. (1969). Language transfer. General Linguistics, 9, 67–92.Google Scholar
Slethei, K. (1990). “Speech acts,” spraakhandlinger og spraakforskning. Et svar til Bjørg Svanes. Maal og Minne, 1–2, 1–18.Google Scholar
Stemmer, B. (1981). Kohäsion im gesprochenen Diskurs deutscher Lerner des Englischen (Manuskripte zur Sprachlehrforschung, 16). Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Germany.Google Scholar
Svanes, B. (in press). En undersøkelse av realisasjonsmønstret for spraakhandlingen“aa be noen orn “aa gjørenoen.” Maal og Minne, 3–4.Google Scholar
Takahashi, S. (1987). A contrastive study of indirectness exemplified in LI directive speech acts performed by Americans and Japanese. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Illinois, Urbana.Google Scholar
Takahashi, S. (1990). Exploring comprehension processes of nonliteral utterances and some implications for automaticity. University of Hawaii Working Papers in ESL, 9(2), 67–97.Google Scholar
Takahashi, S., & DuFon, P. (1989). Cross-linguistic influence in indirectness: The case of English directives performed by native Japanese speakers. Unpublished manuscript, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu.Google Scholar
Takahashi, T., & Beebe, L. M. (1987). The development of pragmatic competence by Japanese learners of English. JALT Journal, 8, 131–155.Google Scholar
Takahashi, T., & Beebe, L. M. (in press). Cross-linguistics influence in the speech act of correction. In Blum-Kulka, S. & Kaspar, G. (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tanaka, N. (1988). Politeness: Some problems for Japanese speakers of English. JALT Journal, 9, 81–102.Google Scholar
Tanaka, S., & Kawade, S. (1982). Politeness strategies and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 5, 18–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trosborg, A. (1987). Apology strategies in natives/non-natives. Journal of Pragmatics, 11, 147–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walters, J. (1979). The perception of deference in English and Spanish. In Yorio, C. A., Perkins, K., & Schachter, J. (Eds.), On TESOL '79 (pp. 288–296). Washington, DC: TESOL.Google Scholar
Walters, J. (1980). Grammar, meaning and sociocultural appropriateness in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 34, 337–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, R. M. (1988). Questionnaires. In Keeves, J. P. (Ed.), Educational research, methodology, and measurement (pp. 478–482). Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Wolfson, N. (1989a). Perspectives: Sociolinguistics and TESOL. New York: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Wolfson, N. (1989b). The social dynamics of native and nonnative variation in complimenting behavior. In Eisenstein, M. (Ed.), The dynamic interlanguage (pp. 219–236). New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar