CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 293

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies were, are, and should be going

Taguchi, Naoko·2015·Language Teaching
DOI 10.1017/s0261444814000263
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This paper brings together the research and developments of instructed pragmatics over the past three decades by reporting the synthesis findings of instructional intervention studies in interlanguage pragmatics. Two questions have guided this investigation: (1) is instruction effective in learning pragmatics?; and (2) what methods are most effective in learning pragmatics? Exhaustive electronic bibliographical searches yielded a body of 58 instructional intervention studies for the review. Findings across these studies are compared and explored for common patterns and inconsistencies that emerge among them. The paper concludes with implications for future research based on the survey of the existing practice.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0261444814000263

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 119

  1. Candlin, 1987, Language learning tasks, 5
  2. 10.1017/S0272263100014893 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/j.system.2005.06.003 · DOI
  4. Ishihara, 2010, Teaching and learning pragmatics: Where language and culture meet.
  5. Di Pietro, 1987, Strategic interaction: Learning languages through scenarios
  6. 10.1515/iprg.2005.2.4.453 · DOI
  7. 10.1016/j.system.2011.05.003 · DOI
  8. Takahashi, 2010, Handbook of pragmatics, 391
  9. 10.1093/applin/ams076 · DOI
  10. Bouton, 1994, Pragmatics and language learning, Monograph Series 5, 88
  11. Simin, 2014, The effects of explicit teaching of apologies on Persian EFL learners’ performance: When e-communication helps, International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 3, 71
  12. DeKeyser, 2007, Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction, 94
  13. Martínez-Flor, 2005, Special issue: Pragmatics in instructed language learning, System, 33
  14. Tateyama, 2007, JALT 2006 Conference Proceedings, 1189
  15. Bialystok, 1993, Interlanguage pragmatics, 43, 10.1093/oso/9780195066029.003.0003 · DOI
  16. Kasper, 2002, Pragmatic development in a second language
  17. 10.1017/CBO9781139524797.015 · DOI
  18. 10.1017/S0272263112000368 · DOI
  19. 10.1075/lllt.26.08tak · DOI
  20. Vygotsky, 1978, Mind in society: The development of higher mental processes
  21. 10.1002/9781444315783.ch29 · DOI
  22. Félix-Brasdefer, 2008, Pedagogical intervention and the development of pragmatic competence in learning Spanish as a foreign language, Issues in Applied Linguistics, 16, 49, 10.5070/L4161005093 · DOI
  23. Eslami-Rasekh, 2004, The effect of explicit metapragmatic instruction on the speech act awareness of advanced EFL students, TESL EJ, 8, 1
  24. Alcón-Soler, 2013, Teachability and bilingual effects on third language knowledge of refusals, Intercultural Pragmatics, 9, 511
  25. 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00629.x · DOI
  26. 10.3138/cmlr.62.1.17 · DOI
  27. 10.1017/CBO9781139524797.013 · DOI
  28. 10.3138/cmlr.66.5.739 · DOI
  29. 10.1111/j.1944-9720.2002.tb03153.x · DOI
  30. Utashiro, 2009, Pragmatic competence, 275, 10.1515/9783110218558.275 · DOI
  31. 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00738.x · DOI
  32. Kubota, 1995, Teachability of conversational implicatures to Japanese EFL learners, IRLT Bulletin, 9, 35
  33. Sykes, 2009, The second generation: Online collaboration and social networking in CALL, 2009 CALICO Monograph, 199
  34. 10.5054/tq.2010.215252 · DOI
  35. 10.1016/j.system.2005.06.008 · DOI
  36. Kondo, 2008, Investigating pragmatics in foreign language learning, teaching and testing, 153, 10.21832/9781847690869-010 · DOI
  37. 10.1515/iprg.2005.2.3.275 · DOI
  38. Ishida, 2007, Selected papers from the conference on pragmatics in the CJK classroom: The state of the art, 181
  39. Willis, 2007, Doing task-based teaching
  40. Martínez-Flor, 2006, Pragmatics and language learning, 199
  41. 10.1075/pbns.123 · DOI
  42. Houck, 2011, Pragmatics from research to practice: New directions
  43. 10.1016/j.system.2005.06.007 · DOI
  44. Usó-Juan, 2013, Refusals in instructional contexts and beyond, 65, 10.1163/9789401209717_006 · DOI
  45. 10.1016/j.system.2005.06.005 · DOI
  46. Alcón-Soler, 2013, Refusals in instructional contexts and beyond, 41, 10.1163/9789401209717_005 · DOI
  47. Anderson, 1993, Rules of the mind
  48. 10.21832/9781847690869 · DOI
  49. Roever, 2013, Pragmatics of Vietnamese as native and target language
  50. 10.1017/S0261444807004880 · DOI
  51. 10.1017/CBO9781139524797.016 · DOI
  52. Cohen, 2013, Applied linguistics and materials development, 113
  53. 10.1075/lllt.13.10jeo · DOI · Paper page
  54. Cohen, 1994, The effects of training on written speech act behavior: Stating and changing an opinion, Minnesota TESOL Journal, 12, 39
  55. 10.3138/cmlr.1279 · DOI
  56. da Silva, 2003, The effects of instruction on pragmatic development: Teaching polite refusals in English, Second Language Studies, 22, 55
  57. 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00893.x · DOI
  58. 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00255.x · DOI
  59. 10.1016/j.system.2004.12.006 · DOI · Paper page
  60. 10.1093/applin/aml051 · DOI
  61. Eslami, 2008, Investigating pragmatics in foreign language learning, teaching and testing, 178, 10.21832/9781847690869-011 · DOI
  62. 10.1017/CBO9781139524797.006 · DOI
  63. Eslami, 2013, Learning pragmatics through computer-mediated communication in Taiwan, Iranian Journal of Society, Culture, and Language, 52, 73
  64. 10.1111/j.1944-9720.2008.tb03308.x · DOI
  65. 10.1017/CBO9781139524797.012 · DOI
  66. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.01.003 · DOI · Paper page
  67. Fukuya, 2002, Effects of recasts on EFL learners’ acquisition of pragmalinguistic conventions of request, Second Language Studies, 21, 1
  68. 10.1191/0265532203lt259oa · DOI
  69. 10.1016/j.system.2009.02.010 · DOI
  70. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.05.007 · DOI
  71. 10.2307/3586501 · DOI
  72. Taguchi, 2010, Handbook of pragmatics vol.7: Pragmatics across languages and cultures, 333, 10.1515/9783110214444.2.333 · DOI
  73. Iwai, 2013, New perspectives on Japanese language learning, linguistics, and culture, 27
  74. 10.4018/jsita.2013010104 · DOI
  75. Kakegawa, 2009, Pragmatic competence, 301, 10.1515/9783110218558.301 · DOI
  76. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.030 · DOI
  77. Takahashi, 2001, Pragmatics in language teaching, 177
  78. 10.1017/S0267190599190056 · DOI
  79. 10.1075/lllt.36.04li · DOI
  80. Martínez-Flor, 2006, A comprehensive pedagogical framework to develop pragmatics in the foreign language classroom: The 6Rs approach, Applied Language Learning, 16, 39
  81. Martínez-Flor, 2008, Learning how to request in an instructed language learning context, 191
  82. Bardovi-Harlig, 2003, Teaching pragmatics
  83. Takimoto, 2007, The effects of referential oriented activity in the structured input task on the development of learners’ pragmatic proficiency, New Zealand Studies in Applied Linguistics, 13, 46
  84. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.09.016 · DOI
  85. 10.1080/09658416.2012.658810 · DOI
  86. Alcón-Soler, 2007, Investigating tasks in formal language learning, 221
  87. 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00641.x · DOI
  88. Kasper, 1995, Pragmatics of Chinese as native and target language
  89. 10.1017/CBO9781139524797 · DOI
  90. Safont, 2004, An analysis of EAP learners’ pragmatic production: A focus on request forms, Ibérica, 8, 23
  91. 10.1515/iprg.2010.013 · DOI
  92. Schmidt, 1993, Interlanguage pragmatics, 43
  93. 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00427.x · DOI
  94. 10.1111/j.1944-9720.2010.01063.x · DOI
  95. Skehan, 1998, A cognitive approach to language learning
  96. 10.1093/applin/16.3.371 · DOI · Paper page
  97. Swain, 2013, The encyclopedia of applied linguistics
  98. 10.1002/tesq.2 · DOI
  99. 10.1075/lllt.36.05syk · DOI
  100. 10.1093/applin/15.3.263 · DOI · Paper page
  101. 10.1515/9783110218558 · DOI
  102. 10.1017/S0267190511000018 · DOI
  103. 10.1075/lllt.36 · DOI
  104. 10.1016/j.system.2005.06.006 · DOI
  105. 10.1191/1362168806lr198oa · DOI
  106. 10.1093/applin/amm049 · DOI
  107. 10.1515/ip-2012-0004 · DOI
  108. 10.5539/ass.v8n15p189 · DOI
  109. Tateyama, 2009, Pragmatic competence, 129, 10.1515/9783110218558.129 · DOI
  110. VanPatten, 2012, Routledge handbook of SLA, 268
  111. 10.1515/iprg.2010.016 · DOI
  112. Wishnoff, 2000, Hedging your bets: L2 learners’ acquisition of pragmatic devices in academic writing and computer-mediated discourse, Second Language Studies, 19, 127
  113. Wolfson, 1989, Perspectives: Sociolinguistics and TESOL
  114. Kasper, 2005, Pragmatics in language teaching and learning, 317
  115. Mey, 2001, Pragmatics: An introduction
  116. 10.1017/S026144480200188X · DOI
  117. 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00560.x · DOI
  118. LoCastro, 2003, An introduction to pragmatics: Social action for language teachers
  119. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.06.009 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Taguchi, N.
Venue
Language Teaching
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2015-01
Volume
48
Issue
1
Pages
1-50
ISSN
  • 0261-4448
  • 1475-3049
DOI
10.1017/s0261444814000263
Cited by
293
References
3
Language
en
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 8 d)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review