Pragmatic aspects of learner language

1
Pragmatic aspects of learner language

From The Study of Second Language
Acquisition By Rod Ellis
2
Introduction

• The growing interest in interlanguage pragmatics
  reflects the enormous developments in the
  theoretical and empirical study of pragmatics
  over the last two decades (see Levinson 1983
  Coulthard 1985 Hatch 1992, for surveys of the
  field).
• Pragmatics is the term used to refer to the field
  of study where linguistic features are considered
  in relation to users of the language (Levinson
  1983).

3
Introduction

• According to Crystal, "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 1985, p. 240).
• Pragmatics is the study of communicative action
  in its sociocultural context. Communicative
  action includes not only speech acts - such as
  requesting, greeting, and so on - but also
  participation in conversation, engaging in
  different types of discourse, and sustaining
  interaction in complex speech events.

4
Introduction

• When speakers perform utterances in context they
  accomplish two things (1) interactional acts and
  (2) speech acts.
• Interactional acts impose structure on the
  discourse by ensuring that one utterance leads
  smoothly to another.
• Speech acts constitute attempts by language users
  to perform specific actions, in particular
  interpersonal functions.

5
Introduction

• Interlanguage Pragmatics is defined as the study
  of 'learners' use and acquisition of linguistic
  action patterns in a second language
  (Bardovi-Harlig, 1996 Kasper, 1999 Rose, 2000).
• There is a basic premise in interlanguage
  pragmatics that it is not enough just to know
  the equivalent words and phrases in a second
  language (L2). Learners need to determine the
  situationally-appropriate utterances, namely
• what can be said,
• where it can be said,
• when it can be said,
• how to say it most effectively.

6
Introduction

• In social psychology, impression management is
  the process through which people try to control
  the impressions other people form of them. It is
  usually synonymous with self-presentation.
• Impression management (IM) theory states that any
  individual or organization must establish and
  maintain impressions that are congruent with the
  perceptions they want to convey to their publics
  (Goffman, 1959).

7
Introduction

• From both a communications and public relations
  viewpoint, the theory of impression management
  encompasses the vital ways in which one
  establishes and communicates this congruence
  between personal or organizational goals and
  their intended actions which create public
  perception. The goal is for one to present
  themselves the way in which they would like to be
  thought of by the individual or group they are
  interacting with. This form of management
  generally applies to the first impression.

8
Introduction

• Impression management (IM) is the goal-directed
  conscious or unconscious attempt to influence the
  perceptions of other people about a person,
  object or event by regulating and controlling
  information in social interaction. If a person
  tries to influence the perception of his image,
  this activity is called self-presentation.
• Impression management in SLAthe way learners
  make use of their L2 resources in interaction to
  create social meanings favorable to themselvesas
  this relates closely to work on speech acts.

9
Speech acts and illocutionary meaning

• A speech act is an utterance which serves as a
  functional unit in communication. Utterances have
  a literal or propositional meaning (e.g., "Where
  was I when that cell phone rudely interrupted
  me?" as uttered by a speaker who was just
  distracted away from his talk).
• Utterances also have a functional or
  illocutionary meaning (i.e., the effect that the
  utterance or written text has on the reader or
  listener, in the cell phone instance serving as a
  complaint with the remedy that the participant
  turn it off so there will not be another similar
  interruption).

10
Speech acts and illocutionary meaning

• According to speech act theory (Austin 1962
  Searle 1969) the performance of a speech act
  involves the performance of three types of act a
  locutionary act (the conveyance of propositional
  meaning), an illocutionary act (the performance
  of a particular language function), and a
  perlocutionary act (the achieving of some kind of
  effect on the addressee).

11
Speech acts and illocutionary meaning

• Searle (1975) distinguished direct and
  indirect speech acts.
• In a direct speech act, there is a transparent
  relationship between from and function as when an
  imperative is used to perform a request (e.g.,
  Pass me the salt.).
• In an indirect speech act, the illocutionary
  force of the act is not derivable from the
  surface structure, as when an interrogative form
  serves as a request (e.g., Can you pass me the
  salt?).

12
Speech acts and illocutionary meaning

• Politeness, according to Brown and Levinson
  (1987), is the phrasing of ones remarks in such
  a way so as to manage the face, or public
  identity (Goffman, 1967), of each interactant.
• There are assumed to be two universal face wants
  negative face, the desire to have ones actions
  unimpeded by others, and positive face, the
  desire for connection or closeness with others.

13
Speech acts and illocutionary meaning

• Many acts threaten the positive or negative face
  (or both) of the speaker and/or hearer (by
  imposing on him or her) disagreements threaten
  the hearers positive face.
• Acts threatening the face of an interactant can
  be made more polite (less face threatening) by
  performing them with one of Brown and Levinsons
  politeness super-strategies.

14
Speech acts and illocutionary meaning

• For doing FTAs (Face Threatening Acts), Brown and
  Levinson (1978/1987) proposes 5 super-strategies
• (1) do the FTA on record, without redressive
  action, baldlyreferred to as bald-on-recordwhe
  n the FTA is of low face risk to the addressee.
• (2) do the FTA on record with redressive
  actionpositive politeness, when the face risk is
  a little higher
• (3) do the FTA on record with redressive
  actionnegative politeness when the face risk is
  even higher
• (4) do the FTA off record and
• (5) dont do the FTA when the face risk is too
  high to the addressee.

15
Speech acts and illocutionary meaning

• Speech acts, indirectness and politeness have
  received a great deal of attention in
  interlanguage pragmatics research, especially
  request (Blum-Kulka, 1982 Blum-Kulka Olshtain,
  1986 House Kasper, 1987 Færch Kasper, 1989
  Takahashi DuFon, 1989 Ellis, 1992 Hassall,
  1997 Rose, 1998), apology (Olshtain Cohen,
  1983 Trosborg, 1987 Olshtain, 1989 Maeshiba,
  Yoshinaga, Kasper Ross, 1996), refusal
  (Takahashi Beebe, 1987 Beebe, Takahashi
  Uliss-Weltz, 1990), and complaint (Olshtain
  Weinbach, 1987, 1993 Trosborg, 1995).

16
Pragmatic Competence asAbility to Perform Speech
Acts

• accepting
• accusing
• advising
• agreeing
• apologizing
• arguing
• asserting
• bragging
• changing the subject
• commanding
• commenting
• complaining
• complimenting

• congratulating
• criticizing
• demanding
• denying
• disagreeing
• evaluating
• flattering
• greeting
• insisting
• insulting
• interrupting
• inviting
• making excuses

• ordering
• parting
• persuading
• probing
• questioning
• refusing
• reminding
• reporting
• requesting
• suggesting
• sympathizing
• threatening
• warning

17
A Website on Speech Acts for Teachers

• At the Center for Advanced Language Acquisition
  (CARLA), Noriko Ishihara and Andrew D. Cohen have
  developed over the last three years this source
  of information for language teachers, materials
  developers, learners, and researchers
  http//www.carla.umn.edu/speechacts/teaching.html.
  
• This website was created in response to a felt
  need expressed by a curriculum writer that basic
  information about speech acts was not readily
  available, and that he did not have time to seek
  it out in research reports.

18
Speech acts and illocutionary meaning

• The study of speech acts in interlanguage has
  concentrated on illocutionary meanings, or
  language functions as they are commonly known.
• The questions that have been addressed are (1)
  To what extent and in what ways do learners
  perform illocutionary acts in the L2 differently
  from native speakers of the target language?
• (2) How do learners lean to perform different
  illocutionary acts?

19
Illocutionary ForceThe Day After Tomorrow
??????? vs. ????

20
Illocutionary Force ????????,????????????(??)??
????,??????
21
Research methods for studying illocutionary acts
in learner language

• Ideally, the study of illocutionary acts in
  learner language should involve the collection of
  three sets of data
• (1) samples of the illocutionary act performed
  in the target language by L2 learners,
• (2) samples performed by native speakers of the
  target language,
• (3) samples of the same illocutionary act
  performed by the learners in their L1.

22
Research methods for studying illocutionary acts
in learner language

• The study of learners production of
  illocutionary acts had made use of (1) discourse
  completion tasks, (2) role play, and (3)
  naturally occurring speech.
• Discourse completion tasks (DCTs) have been
  extensively used. In the Cross-Cultural Speech
  Act Realization Project (Blum-Kulka, House, and
  Kasper 1989) a series of studies involving
  subjects from a variety of language backgrounds
  (for example, American, British, and Australian
  English, Canadian French, Hebrew, German, and
  Danish) made use of a questionnaire consisting of
  eight request and eight apology contexts.

23
Research methods for studying illocutionary acts
in learner language

• Kasper and Dahl (1991) distinguish data
  collection methods according to the modality of
  the data elicited (perception/comprehension/intuit
  ion vs. production) and the degree of control
  over learners speech (elicited vs.
  observational).
• They also point out that some of the most
  successful studies have employed combined methods
  of data collection.

24
Research methods for studying illocutionary acts
in learner language

• As with any set of measures, there are trade-offs
  associated with using more open as opposed to
  more closed types of assessment.
• Open role play, for example, allows for the full
  operation of turn-taking, sequencing of moves,
  and negotiation of meaning (Kasper and Dahl,
  1991 228-9). Written response, on the other
  hand, may foster more thoughtful responses,
  possibly more indicative of a speaker's
  competence.

25
How to Assess Speech Acts

• Perception of a Speech Act
• Rate the following responses according to whether
  they are "acceptable," "more or less acceptable,"
  or "unacceptable" in an American English
  situation
• (1) A student forgets to return a book to a
  professor. Student
• a. ____ Oh, damn! I forgot it.
• b. ____ Sorry. I forgot.
• c. ____ Oh, I'm really sorry. I completely
  forgot.
• d. ____ Oh, well, I've had a lot on my mind
  lately.
• (2) A young woman bumps into your shopping cart
  at the supermarket and some of your groceries
  spill onto the floor. Aside from helping you pick
  them up, she says
• a. ____ Sorry.
• b. ____ Please forgive me.
• c. ____ I'm very sorry.
• d. ____ I'm really sorry.

26
How to Assess Speech Acts

• Production of a Speech Act Classical DCT
• (1) You promised you'd buy your neighbor medicine
  for her sick child while in town, but you forgot.
  
• Your neighbor "Did you get the medicine?"
• You _________________________
• (2) You don't stop in time at a red light and
  bump into the car in front of you. The other
  driver and you get out and see that there is
  damage to the other car. The other driver is very
  upset.
• You _________________________

27
How to Assess Speech Acts

• Production of a Speech Act Multiple-Rejoinder
  DCT
• (1) You find a bargain air ticket to a city where
  you have great friends. In order to take
  advantage of this deal, you need to ask your
  instructor for an extension on a paper that you
  were supposed to hand in after the weekend.
• You __________________________
• Professor Well, you know, you had plenty of time
  to work on this paper already. There was no need
  to wait until the last minute to prepare it.
• You __________________________
• Professor I'm sorry, but I can't really agree to
  give you an extension on this paper. I don't
  think that going to visit some friends during the
  semester is a good enough reason for an
  extension.
• You _________________________
• Professor Well, I'm not so thrilled about doing
  it. It's not my policy.
• You _________________________
• Professor Ok, well, just this time.

28
Research methods for studying illocutionary acts
in learner language

• A widely used and fruitful elicitation procedure
  is the Discourse Completion Test/Task (DCT),
  originally developed by Blum-Kulka (1982) and
  used by such researchers as Olshtain and Cohen in
  their study of apologies in Hebrew and English,
  Beebe in her work on refusals in Japanese and
  English, and Eisenstein and Bodman in their
  investigation of expressions of gratitude among
  native and nonnative speakers of English.

29
Research methods for studying illocutionary acts
in learner language

• In most cases, the major aim of studies using
  this method of elicitation is to collect data
  which may be compared for the purpose of
  cross-linguistic study and also to investigate
  the sociolinguistic problems faced by second
  language learners.
• The use of naturally occurring speech as a basis
  for studying interlanguage pragmatics has been
  less common, partly because of the difficulty of
  assembling a sufficient corpus of data. Wolfson
  (1989), however, used this approach to
  investigate learners complimenting behavior.

30
Research methods for studying illocutionary acts
in learner language

• Discourse completion tests have become
  increasingly widespread in the collection of data
  on speech act realization both within and across
  language groups. Like all methods used in the
  collection of sociolinguistic data, they have
  disadvantages as well as advantages.

31
Research methods for studying illocutionary acts
in learner language

• The Advantages of Elicitation Method
• One great advantage of this type of data
  collection is that it permits the researcher to
  control for specific variables of the situation,
  thus giving a coherence to the findings which may
  be very difficult to achieve otherwise. If, for
  example, the investigator wants to test the
  effect of the social status of the participants
  in a given speech act, it is possible to include
  this in the questionnaire descriptions, thus
  leading subjects to take this factor into account
  in their responses.

32
Research methods for studying illocutionary acts
in learner language

• The Advantages of Elicitation Method
• Another great advantage of elicited data, and one
  which cannot ignored, is that they allow
  investigators to collect a considerable amount of
  data on a given type of speech behavior within a
  relatively short time. Not all speech acts occur
  with equal frequency, and some, which may provide
  valuable insight into cultural rules, may occur
  in situations which are inaccessible to the
  researcher. Even the collection of data on a
  speech act as commonly heard as apologies
  requires much less effort to accomplish through
  elicitation than by, for example, observation.

33
Research methods for studying illocutionary acts
in learner language

• The Disadvantages ( Limitations) of Elicitation
  Method
• While it is true that the use of such
  questionnaires is a quick means of acquiring a
  large amount of data about a communitys
  perceptions regarding correct speech behavior, it
  is necessary to recognize that the data collected
  in this way cannot be expected to give us all the
  information we need about the ways in which a
  speech act is performed in spontaneous
  interactions.

34
Research methods for studying illocutionary acts
in learner language

• The Disadvantages ( Limitations) of Elicitation
  Method
• In some respects, there is a high degree of
  convergence between subjects responses to this
  sort of elicitation procedure and the actual
  behavior found to occur spontaneously, while in
  other respects, we must face the fact that the
  nature of the task will produce intrinsic
  differences. That is, it must always be
  recognized that responses elicited within a
  written frame are, by their very nature, not the
  same as spontaneous speech.

35
Research methods for studying illocutionary acts
in learner language

• The Disadvantages ( Limitations) of Elicitation
  Method
• On the one hand, the conventional rules for
  speech differ considerably from those for written
  communication, and this cannot fail to have an
  effect on the results obtained. On the other
  hand, the simple fact that writing an answer
  permits more time to plan and evaluate it than
  one normally has while participating in an
  ongoing interaction must also be taken into
  account when comparing the results of these two
  modes of responding to a given situation.

36
Research methods for studying illocutionary acts
in learner language

• A number of studies which have compared data
  obtained from discourse completion questionnaires
  with that from observational studies have found
  differences with regard to the actual wording
  used, the semantic formulas employed, the length
  of learners responses, and the size of the
  discourse context created.
• These differences raise questions about the
  extent to which the elicited data can serve as
  evidence of learners pragmatic competence, as
  they may not accurately reflect actual language
  use.

37
Research methods for studying illocutionary acts
in learner language

• While DCT elicits speakers performance data and
  focuses on speakers point of view, the
  metapragmatic judgment task (MJT) is from
  hearers point of view and to elicit hearers
  judgment on whether a strategy is acceptable in a
  given situation.

38
Research methods for studying illocutionary acts
in learner language

• With the intent of obtaining complementary data,
  many studies in interlanguage pragmatics have
  collected two sets of data on a particular
  politeness phenomenon. Often, at least one
  observational method is chosen to obtain data on
  the learners production and another method is
  used to elicit information about unobservable
  phenomena, that is, perceptions of metapragmatic
  judgments.

39
Description of paper extension situation in DCT
and MJT

• An Example of DCT
• You are writing a term paper for one of your
  courses. You are working hard on the paper, but
  you have to stop because you also have to study
  for final exams in your other courses. The paper
  is due tomorrow, and you need a few more days to
  finish it. You decide to ask Professor Brown,
  whom you dont know very well, for an extension.
  Professor Brown hesitates because it wont be
  fair to other students in the class, but then
  he/she agrees to give you an extension. A few
  days later, when you turn in the paper, what
  would you say to Professor Brown?

40
Description of paper extension situation in DCT
and MJT

• An Example of MJT
• A student is writing a term paper for a course.
  The student is working hard on the paper, but has
  to stop because the student also has to study for
  final exams in other courses. The paper is due
  tomorrow, but the student needs a few more days
  to finish it. The student decides to ask
  Professor Brown, whom the student doesnt know
  very well, for an extension. Professor Brown
  hesitates because it wont be fair to other
  students in the class, but then agrees to give
  the student an extension. A few days later, when
  the student turns in the paper to Professor
  Brown, the student says
• 1 2 3 4 5 (A) Im really sorry for asking the
  extension.
• Reason(s) ______________________________________
  _______
• _____________________________________________

41
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• Thomas (1983) discusses the problem of
  sociolinguistic miscommunication. For Thomas,
  pragmatic failure is the inability to
  understand what is meant by what is said. The
  term pragmatics is used for descriptions of
  patterns having to do with interpersonal
  interaction.

42
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• Pragmatic failure can be divided into two types
  pragmalinguistic failure and sociopragmatic
  failure.
• Pragmalinguistic failure arises because of the
  language users ignorance or unfamiliarity with
  the linguistic strategies and conventional
  formulaic expression of foreign language, and he
  thus resorts to inappropriate direct language
  transfer from first language.

43
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• Sometimes NNS (Non-Native Speakers) use 'proper'
  grammar, but it doesn't sound natural, i.e., it
  doesn't sound natural like a NS (Native Speaker)
  would use language.
• a.  NNS  It is another my essay.
• b.  NS  It is another essay of mine.
• c.  NNS  I sleep now.
• d.  NS  I will go to sleep now.

44
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• Sociopragmatic failure is a failure that stems
  from the language users unawareness of the
  different sociocultural rules and different
  concepts of politeness in first-language and
  foreign language societies the user applies
  inappropriate strategies in given social
  contexts.
• It is difficult to draw an absolute distinction
  between them they form a continuum.

45
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• Research into the use and acquisition of
  illocutionary acts has been somewhat limited. It
  has tended to concentrate on a fairly small set
  of speech acts.
• Many of these acts have two points in common.
  First, they constitute relatively well-defined
  acts in the sense that they are realized by means
  of a small set of easily recognizable linguistic
  elements (many formulaic).
• Second, these acts are face-threatening in nature
  different L1 backgrounds are able to use
  native-like politeness strategies.

46
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• Requests
• Nine sub-levels of strategy types
• (scale of indirectness)
• (Blum-Kulka et al., 1989)
• Direct Strategies
• 1. Mood derivable (The grammatical mood of the
  verb in the utterance marks its illocutionary
  force as a request.)
• Leave me alone.Clean up this mess, please.
• 2. Explicit performatives (The illocutionary
  force of the utterance is explicitly named by the
  speakers.)
• Im asking you to clean up the kitchen.Im
  asking you not to part the car here.

47
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• Requests
• Direct Strategies
• 3. Hedged performatives (Utterances embedding the
  naming of the illocutionary force.)
• Id like to ask you to clean the kitchen.Id
  like you to give your lecture a week earlier.
• 4. Obligation statements (The illocutionary point
  is directly derivable from the semantic meaning
  of the locution.)
• Youll have to clean up the kitchen.Maam,
  youll have to move your car.
• 5. Want statements (The utterance expresses the
  speakers intentions, desire or feeling vis á vis
  the fact that the hear do X.)
• I really wish youd clean up the kitchen.I
  really wish youd stop bothering me.

48
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• Requests
• Conventionally indirect strategies
• 6. Suggestory formulae (The sentence contains a
  suggestion to X.)
• How about cleaning up?Why dont you get
  lost?So, why dont you come and clean up the
  mess you made last night?
• 7. Query preparatory (The utterance contains
  reference to preparatory conditions, such as
  ability or willingness, the possibility of the
  act being performed, as conventionalized in any
  specific language.)
• Could you clean up the kitchen, please?Would
  you mind moving your car, please?

49
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• Requests
• Non-conventionally indirect strategies (hints)
• 8. Strong hints (The utterances contains partial
  reference to object or to elements needed for the
  implementation of the act, directly pragmatically
  implying the act)
• You have left the kitchen in a right mess.
• 9. Mild hints (Utterances that make no reference
  to the request proper or any of its elements but
  are interpretable through the context as
  requests, indirectly pragmatically implying the
  act)
• Im a nun (in response to a persistent hassler).
• These subcategories of conventional indirectness
  vary across languages in conventions of form.

50
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• Apologies
• According to the Olshtain and Cohens analysis,
  the major strategies used to express an apology
  are the following (1) expression of apology
  (formulaic) Im sorry, (2) expression of
  responsibility It was my fault. Either of
  these two strategies could stand alone as an
  apology, but in addition it was found that three
  other strategies often occur in conjunction with
  them, depending on the speakers evaluation of
  the severity of the offense and also on the
  social distance and/or the status of the victim.

51
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• Apologies
• Speakers may employ the following additional
  three strategies intended to make amends for the
  offense, or use one or both of the first two
  along with any or all of the following (3)
  explanation, (4) offer of repair, (5) promise of
  forbearance.

52
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• Refusals
• Classification of Refusals
• (Beebe et al. 1990 72-73)
• I. Direct
• A. Performative (e.g., I refuse)
• B. Nonperformative statement
• 1. No
• 2. Negative willingness/ability
• (I cant. I wont. I dont think so.)

53
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• Refusals
• Classification of Refusals
• II. Indirect
• A. Statement of regret (e.g., Im sorry . . .
  I feel terrible . . . )
• B. Wish (e.g., I wish I could help you . . .)
• C. Excuse, reason, explanation
• (e.g., My children will be home that nigh.
  
• I have a headache.)
• D. Statement of alternative
• 1. I can do X instead of Y
• (e.g., Id rather . . . Id prefer )
• 2. Why dont you do X instead of Y
• (e.g., Why dont you ask someone else?)

54
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• II. Indirect
• E. Set condition for future or past acceptance
  (e.g., If you had asked me earlier, I would have
  . . .)
• F. Promise of future acceptance (e.g., Ill do
  it next time I promise Ill . . . or Next
  time Ill . . .using will of promise or
  promise)
• G. Statement of principle (e.g., I never do
  business with friends.)
• H. Statement of philosophy (e.g., One cant be
  too careful.)

55
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• II. Indirect
• I. Attempt to dissuade interlocutor
• 1. Threat or statement of negative consequences
  to the requester (e.g., I wont be any fun
  tonight to refuse an invitation)
• 2. Gilt trip (e.g., waitress to customers who
  want to sit a while I cant make a living off
  people who just order coffee.)
• 3. Criticize the request/requester, etc.
  (statement of negative feeling or opinion)
  insult/attack (e.g., Who do you think you are?
  Thats a terrible idea!)
• 4. Request for help, empathy, and assistance by
  dropping or holding the request.
• 5. Let interlocutor off the hook (e.g., Dont
  worry about it. Thats okay. You dont have
  to.)
• 6. Self-defense (e.g., Im trying my best.
  Im doing all I can do. I no do nutting
  wrong.)

56
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• II. Indirect
• J. Acceptance that functions as a refusal
• 1. Unspecific or indefinite reply
• 2. Lack of enthusiasm
• K. Avoidance
• 1. Nonverbal
• a. Silence
• b. Hesitation
• c. Do nothing
• d. Physical departure
• 2. Verbal
• a. Topic switch
• b. Joke
• c. Repetition of part of request, etc. (e.g.,
  Monday?)
• d. Postponement (e.g., Ill think about it.)
• e. Hedging (e.g., Gee, I dont know. Im not
  sure.)

57
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• Impression Management
• The study of impression management has been
  informed by interactional sociolinguistics.
• This examines how speakers achieve communicative
  effects by manipulating their linguistic and
  nonlinguistic resources.
• When learners participate in conversation with
  native speakers and other learnerparticularly if
  the encounters are of the unequal kindthey need
  to negotiate the impression they wish to create.
  Frequently, they lack knowledge of the relevant
  contextualization cues.

58
Illocutionary acts in learner language

• Impression Management
• One solution is to accept the social role
  allocated to thema kind of avoidance strategy.
  Another is to substitute cues from their native
  languagea form of transfer. A third solution is
  to make creative use of their interlanguage
  resources to exploit their status as language
  learners.
• Little is currently known about how learners use
  of contextualiztion cues develops over time and
  how they learn to manage impressions in a manner
  compatible with target-language norms.

59
Conclusion

• Although quite a lot is now known about how
  learner use an L2, very little is known about how
  rules of speaking are acquired. For this,
  longitudinal studies are needed.
• The studies to date suggest that three factors
  are of major importance in the acquisition of
  pragmatic competence. The first is the level of
  the learners linguistic competence. The second
  is transfer. The third is the status of the
  learner.

60
Conclusion

• The study of interlanguage pragmatics acts in L2
  acquisition has focused on the spoken medium and
  has paid little attention to writing.
• Although we know something about how
  contextualized acts such as requests,
  apologies, and refusals are acquired, we know
  little about how learners acquire the ability to
  perform acts found in decontextualized, written
  language.
• If the study of interlanguage pragmatics is to
  progress it will need to examine written as well
  as spoken learner language.