| Body | Noriko Ishihara is Professor of TEFL/Applied Linguistics at Hosei University, Japan. Her primary interest in language teaching is the incorporation of pragmatics into the L2 curriculum and language teacher education. She has developed class-based and online curricular materials for L2 English and L2 Japanese pragmatics, and facilitates teacher development courses in instructional pragmatics in Japan and the U.S.
What is pragmatics and why is it important?
Pragmatic competence is about how we understand others’ messages and how politely or casually, formally or informally, or directly or indirectly we express our intent orally or in writing in the given context. In each sociocultural context meaning is not necessarily spelled out directly. Whether speaker and listener, we jointly construct meaning through verbal and non-verbal means based on the context. In the process, we may confuse, mislead, misunderstand, or offend others inadvertently even in our first language. Understandably, the task becomes even more challenging in a second language (L2). In fact, comprehending socioculturally negotiated meaning can take an extended period of time, perhaps over ten years even in the target language context. Although pragmatic aspects are often neglected in language teaching, research has shown that the learning process can be accelerated through explicit pragmatics-focused instruction in either the second or foreign language context (Jeon & Kaya, 2006).
What is subjectivity and how is it related to pragmatics?
In pragmatic-focused instruction, a current approach includes enhancing learners’ awareness of what language forms are often preferred in the L2 community and how language choices and the context are mutually constitutive (Kasper & Rose, 2002). Another important consideration in instruction is learners’ subjectivity, such as their multicultural identities, values, personal principles, attitudes, and investments. Pragmatic language use is known to be intertwined with subjectivity. Although learners often attempt to accommodate to pragmatic norms and community practices of the target language, they sometimes elect to diverge and behave in a unique manner in order to negotiate their subjectivity or maintain an optimal distance from the target community (Ishihara, 2010; Siegal, 1996). Given such deliberate pragmatic resistance, it would be unfair to penalize them for their pragmatically divergent behavior.
What can we do to teach language in a culturally sensitive manner?
Given the above, what would culturally sensitive instruction in pragmatics look like in the classroom? While learner subjectivity should be respected, teachers still need to assess the extent of learners’ pragmatic awareness as well as their production. It is therefore important for language teachers to address pragmatic awareness in the classroom so that learners understand typical interpretations and likely consequences of their pragmatic choices (Thomas, 1983). Teachers should also assess learner language based on what learners know as typical responses in the target language community (by asking, for example, What would be a preferred response in this situation?) rather than how learners would choose to behave (by asking, What would you say in this situation?). Discussions of cultural reasoning behind L2 norms as well as instruction in communication strategies would also support learners’ development of multicultural subjectivities (Ishihara & Cohen, 2010).
References
Ishihara, N. (2010). Maintaining an optimal distance: Nonnative speakers’ pragmatic choice. In A. Mahboob (Ed.), The NNEST lens: Nonnative English speakers in TESOL (pp. 35-53). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press.
Ishihara, N., & Cohen, A. D. (2010). Teaching and learning pragmatics: Where language and culture meet. Harlow: Pearson Education.
Jeon, E. H., & Kaya, T. (2006). Effects of L2 instruction on interlanguage pragmatic development: A meta-analysis. In J. M. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 165-211). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R. (2002). Pragmatic development in a second language. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Siegal, M. (1996). The role of learner subjectivity in second language sociolinguistic competency: Western women learning Japanese. Applied Linguistics, 17(3), 356-382.
Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 91-109.
|
|---|
