Elaborations on L2 interactional competence: the development of L2 grammar-for-interaction
Abstract
This paper argues for a broadening of the analytic scope of research on L2 interactional competence so as to embrace systematic investigation of the linguistic resources that L2 speakers put to use for the specific purpose of coordinating social interaction. The paper first offers a conceptualisation of interactional competence in terms of systematic procedures (or: methods) for action that is firmly grounded in Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis. Drawing on interactional linguistics, the paper then discusses an understanding of grammar as an adaptive and emergent set of resources by means of which participants accomplish actions in mutually recognisable ways, and suggests that this understanding can fruitfully be brought to bear on L2 development. In the main body of the paper, evidence is provided for the development of an L2 grammar-for-interaction regarding three distinct grammatical constructions, and an initial sketch of a developmental trajectory is proposed. Based on the findings, the paper argues that a fuller understanding of L2 interactional competence requires systematic investigation of the entire multisemiotic toolbox, including linguistic and embodied resources that participants draw on for meaning-making in social interaction. It concludes with implications for understanding the affordances of classroom interaction and with avenues for future research.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Repair is one of the most-cited features of interactional competence.
“Repair is one of the most-cited features of interactional competence (e.g., Hellermann, 2011; Kasper, 2006; Pekarek Doehler, 2018)”
From Teachers’ Classroom Interactional Competence: Scale Development and Validation (2023) · cites this paper as Pekarek Doehler, 2018
Cites
Ellis, N. C. (2002) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263102002024 · Cited by 2,230 · see citing works
CONSTRUCTING A LANGUAGE: A USAGE-BASED THEORY OF LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
Foster-Cohen, S. (2004) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263104363059 · Cited by 969 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Konzett-Firth, C. (2020) · Classroom Discourse · doi:10.1080/19463014.2019.1597744 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
“…2014; Farina, Pochon-Berger, and Pekarek Doehler 2012; Hall, Hellermann and Pekarek Doehler 2011; Hellermann 2007; Hellermann and Lee 2014; Nguyen 2012; Pekarek Doehler and Berger 2018; Pekarek Doehler and Pochon-Berger 2015; Watanabe 2017; Young and Miller 2004; Hall 2018; Pekarek Doehler 2018).”
BackgroundInfluentialTeachers’ Classroom Interactional Competence: Scale Development and Validation
Tajeddin, Z., & Kamali, J. (2023) · Language Teaching Research Quarterly · doi:10.32038/ltrq.2023.35.01 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
- Authors
- Pekarek Doehler, S.
- Affiliations
- Center for Applied Linguistics, FLSH, University of Neuchâtel, Neuchâtel, Switzerland
- Venue
- Classroom Discourse
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-01-02
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-24
- ISSN
- 1946-3014 (ISSN-L)
- 1946-3022
- OpenAlex
- W2793351603
- Cited by
- 157
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 24 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 6 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 73.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Classroom Discourse (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and Language Analysis
- Keywords
- second language acquisition, grammatical constructions, interactional linguistics, emergent grammar, embodied resources, meaning-making, developmental trajectories
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