Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Multi-competence
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Multi-competence
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Book part
- 1 Premises of multi-competence
- 2 Research questions and methodology of multi-competence
- 3 Multi-competence in second language acquisition: inroads into the mainstream?
- 4 Not through a glass darkly: refocusing the psycholinguistic study of bilingualism through a “bivocal” lens
- 5 Multilingualism research
- 6 Multi-competence and dynamic/complex systems
- 7 Multi-competence and Dominant Language Constellation
- 8 Consequences of multi-competence for sociolinguistic research
- 9 A usage-based account of multi-competence
- 10 Multi-competence and syntax
- 11 Syntactic processing
- 12 Language and cognition in bilinguals
- 13 Gestures in multi-competence
- 14 Pragmatic transferin foreign language learners: a multi-competence perspective
- 15 Multi-competence and endangered language revitalization
- 16 Multi-competence and first language attrition
- 17 Cognitive consequences of multi-competence
- 18 Space, motion and thinking for language
- 19 Multi-competence and personality
- 20 Multi-competence as a creative act: ramifications of the multi-competence paradigm for creativity research and creativity-fostering education
- 21 Multi-competence and language teaching
- 22 Multi-competence and emotion
- 23 Multi-competence and English as a lingua franca
- 24 A critical reaction from second language acquisition research
- 25 Questions of multi-competence: a written interview
- 26 Epilogue: multi-competence and the TranslanguagingInstinct
- Bibliography of ‘multi-competence’ (and related topics)
- Index
- References
14 - Pragmatic transferin foreign language learners: a multi-competence perspective
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 May 2016
By
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Multi-competence
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Multi-competence
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Book part
- 1 Premises of multi-competence
- 2 Research questions and methodology of multi-competence
- 3 Multi-competence in second language acquisition: inroads into the mainstream?
- 4 Not through a glass darkly: refocusing the psycholinguistic study of bilingualism through a “bivocal” lens
- 5 Multilingualism research
- 6 Multi-competence and dynamic/complex systems
- 7 Multi-competence and Dominant Language Constellation
- 8 Consequences of multi-competence for sociolinguistic research
- 9 A usage-based account of multi-competence
- 10 Multi-competence and syntax
- 11 Syntactic processing
- 12 Language and cognition in bilinguals
- 13 Gestures in multi-competence
- 14 Pragmatic transferin foreign language learners: a multi-competence perspective
- 15 Multi-competence and endangered language revitalization
- 16 Multi-competence and first language attrition
- 17 Cognitive consequences of multi-competence
- 18 Space, motion and thinking for language
- 19 Multi-competence and personality
- 20 Multi-competence as a creative act: ramifications of the multi-competence paradigm for creativity research and creativity-fostering education
- 21 Multi-competence and language teaching
- 22 Multi-competence and emotion
- 23 Multi-competence and English as a lingua franca
- 24 A critical reaction from second language acquisition research
- 25 Questions of multi-competence: a written interview
- 26 Epilogue: multi-competence and the TranslanguagingInstinct
- Bibliography of ‘multi-competence’ (and related topics)
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Multi-Competence , pp. 298 - 320Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2016
References
Barnlund, D. C. and Yoshioka, M. 1990. ‘Apologies: Japanese and American styles’, International Journal of Intercultural Relations 14, 193–206.Google Scholar
Bergman, M. L. and Kasper, G. 1993. ‘Perception and performance in native and non-native apology’, in Kasper, G. and Blum-Kulka, S. (eds), Interlanguage Pragmatics, pp. 82–107. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S. 1990. ‘You don’t touch lettuce with your fingers: parental politeness in family discourse’, Journal of Pragmatics 14, 259–289.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J. and Kasper, G. (eds) 1989. Cross-cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S. and Olshtain, E. 1986. ‘Too many words: length of utterance and pragmatic failure’, Studies in Second Language Acquisition 8: 47–61.Google Scholar
Brown, A. and Gullberg, M. 2011. ‘Bidirectional cross-linguistic influence in event conceptualization? Expressions of Path among Japanese learners of English’, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 14, 79–94.Google Scholar
Brown, P. and Levinson, S. C. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bylund, E. and Jarvis, S. 2011. ‘L2 effects on L1 event conceptualization’, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 14, 47–59.Google Scholar
Byon, A. 2004. ‘Sociopragmatic analysis of Korean requests: pedagogical settings’, Journal of Pragmatics 36, 1673–1704.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J. 2003. ‘The Intercultural Style Hypothesis: L1 and L2 interaction in requesting behaviour’, in Cook, V. J. (ed.), pp. 62–80.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J. and Valencia, J. 1996. ‘Cross-cultural communication and interlanguage pragmatics: American vs. European requests’, Pragmatics and Language Learning 7, 41–54.Google Scholar
Chen, H.-L. 2006. A Study of Chinese EFL Interlanguage Requests. Unpublished MA thesis, National Sun Yat-sen University, Taiwan.Google Scholar
Cook, V. J. 1991. ‘The poverty-of-the-stimulus argument and multi-competence’, Second Language Research 7, 103–117.Google Scholar
Cook, V. J. (ed.) 2003. Effects of the Second Language on the First. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Dussias, P. E. and Sagarra, N. 2007. ‘The effects of exposure on syntactic parsing in Spanish–English bilinguals’, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 10, 101–116.Google Scholar
Gass, S and Neu, J. (eds) 1996. Speech Acts across Cultures. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Gass, S. and Selinker, L. 1992. Language Transfer in Language Learning. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hymes, D. 1964. ‘Directions in ethnolinguistic theory’, American Anthropology 6, 6–56.Google Scholar
Laufer, B. 2003. ‘The influence of L2 on L1 collocational knowledge and on L1 lexical diversity in free written expression’, in Cook, V. J. (ed.), pp. 19–31.Google Scholar
Lee-Wang, S.-M. 1994. ‘Imperatives in requests: direct or impolite: observations from Chinese’, Pragmatics 4, 491–515.Google Scholar
Maeshiba, N., Yoshinaga, N., Kasper, G. and Ross, S. 1996. ‘Transfer and proficiency in interlanguage apologizing’, in Gass, S. and Neu, J. (eds), pp. 155–187.Google Scholar
Mennen, I. 2004. ‘Bi-directional interference in the intonation of Dutch speakers of Greek’, Journal of Phonetics 32, 543–563.Google Scholar
Pavlenko, A. and Jarvis, S. 2002. ‘Bidirectional transfer’, Applied Linguistics 23, 190–214.Google Scholar
Shih, H.-Y. 2006. An Interlanguage Study of the Speech Act of Apology Made by EFL Learners in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Sun Yat-sen University.Google Scholar
Stavans, A. 2003. ‘Bilinguals as narrators: a comparison of bilingual and monolingual Hebrew and English narratives’, Narrative Inquiry 13, 151–191.Google Scholar
Su, I-R. 2001. ‘Transfer of sentence processing strategies: a comparison of L2 learners of Chinese and English’, Applied Psycholinguistics 22, 83–112.Google Scholar
Su, I-R. 2010. ‘Transfer of pragmatic competences: a bi-directional perspective’, Modern Language Journal 94, 87–102.Google Scholar
Su, I-R. 2012. ‘Bi-directional transfer in Chinese EFL learners’ apologizing behavior’, Concentric: Studies in Linguistics 38, 237–266.Google Scholar
Trosborg, A. 1987. ‘Apology strategies in natives/non-natives’, Journal of Pragmatics 11, 147–167.Google Scholar
Tsai, P.-C. 2002. A Study of the Speech Act of Apology in Chinese. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan.Google Scholar
Valdes, G. and Pino, C. 1981. ‘Muy a tus ordenes: compliment responses among Mexican–American bilinguals’, Language in Society 10, 53–72.Google Scholar
Yu, M.-C. 1999. ‘Universal and cultural-specific perspectives on variation in the acquisition of pragmatic competence in a second language’, Pragmatics 9, 281–312.Google Scholar
Yu, M.-C. 2004. ‘Interlinguistic variation and similarity in second language speech act behavior’, Modern Language Journal 88, 102–119.Google Scholar
Zampini, M. L. and Green, K. P. 2001. ‘The voicing contrast in English and Spanish: the relationship between perception and production’, in Nicol, J. L. (ed.), One Mind, Two Languages, pp. 23–48. Boston: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Zareva, A. 2010. Multi-competence and L2 users’ associative links: being unlike native-like. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 20, 2–22.Google Scholar