Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T13:02:04.743Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Replication research in contextual and individual influences in pragmatic competence: Taguchi, Xiao & Li (2016) and Bardovi-Harlig & Bastos (2011)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2017

Naoko Taguchi  and
Shuai Li
Naoko Taguchi
Affiliation:
Carnegie Mellon University, USAtaguchi@andrew.cmu.edu
Shuai Li
Affiliation:
Georgia State University, USAsli12@gsu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent development in L2 pragmatics research in a study abroad context has witnessed an emerging line of studies investigating the joint influences of contextual and individual learner factors on second language (L2) pragmatic development. This paper argues for the replication of two representative quantitative studies in this new research direction. Situated within the field's increasing emphasis on explaining the development of L2 pragmatic competence, the first part of this paper makes a case for the necessity of replicating quantitative studies investigating the study abroad context, highlighting why and how the field can benefit from replication research. The second part of this paper presents detailed accounts of the two focus studies and suggests several options for approximate and conceptual replications.

Type
Replication Research
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 52 , Issue 1 , January 2019 , pp. 128 - 140
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Atkins, S., Lewin, S., Smith, H., Engel, M., Fretheim, A. & Volmink, J. (2008). Conducting a meta-ethnography of qualitative literature: Lessons learnt. BMC Medical Research Methodology 8: 21.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1999). Exploring the interlanguage of interlanguage pragmatics: A research agenda for acquisitional pragmatics. Language Learning 49, 677–713.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., (2012). Pragmatics in second language acquisition. In Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of SLA. London: Routledge, 147–167.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Bastos, M. T. (2011). Proficiency, length of stay, and intensity of interaction and the acquisition of conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics. Intercultural Pragmatics 8, 347–384.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Do language learners recognise pragmatic violations? Pragmatic versus grammatical awareness in instructed L2 learning. TESOL Quarterly 32, 233–259.Google Scholar
Barron, A. (2003). Acquisition in interlanguage pragmatics: Learning how to do things with words in a study abroad context. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1993). Symbolic representation and attentional control. In Kasper, G. & Blum-Kulka, S. (eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press, 43–57.Google Scholar
Bollen, K. A. & Curran, P. J. (2006). Latent curve models: A structural equation perspective (vol. 467). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Bouton, L. (1994). Can NNS skill in interpreting implicature in American English be improved through explicit instruction? A pilot study. Pragmatics and Language Learning 5, 88–108.Google Scholar
Byrne, B. M. (2009). Structural equation modelling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd edn.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
de Bot, K. (2008). Introduction: Second language development as a dynamic process. The Modern Language Journal 92, 166–178.Google Scholar
Duff, P. A. (2007). Second language socialization as sociocultural theory: Insights and issues. Language Teaching 40, 309–319.Google Scholar
Edmonds, A. (2014). Conventional expressions: Investigating pragmatics and processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 36, 69–99.Google Scholar
Fantini, A. E. (2006). Exploring and assessing intercultural competence. Retrieved 15 February 2012 from www.sit.edu/publications/docs/feil_research_report.pdf.Google Scholar
Fantini, A. E. (2012). Multiple strategies for assessing intercultural communicative competence. Language: an essential component of intercultural competence. In Jackson, J. (ed.), The Routledge handbook of language and intercultural communication. Oxford: Routledge, 390–406.Google Scholar
Félix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2004). Interlanguage refusals: Linguistic politeness and length of residence in the target community. Language Learning 54, 587–653.Google Scholar
Garrett-Rucks, P. (2016). Intercultural competence in instructed language learning. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc.Google Scholar
Hammer, M. R. (2005). Assessment of the impact of the AFS study abroad experience. New York: AFS Int.Google Scholar
Hassall, T. (2015). Individual variation in L2 study abroad outcomes: A case study from Indonesian pragmatics. Multilingua 34, 33–59.Google Scholar
Iwasaki, N. (2011). Learning L2 Japanese ‘politeness’ and ‘impoliteness’: Young American men's dilemmas during study abroad. Japanese Language and Literature 45, 67–106.Google Scholar
Jackson, J. (2015). Becoming interculturally competent: Theory to practice in international education. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 48, 91–107.Google Scholar
Kasper, G. & Rose, K. R. (2002). Pragmatic development in a second language. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Kecskes, I. (2000). Conceptual fluency and the use of situation-bound utterances. Links & Letters 7, 145–161.Google Scholar
Kelley, C. & Meyers, J. (1995). Cross-cultural adaptability inventory manual. Arlington, VA: Vangent.Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Li, Q. (2016). Variations in developmental patterns across pragmatic features. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 6.4, 587–617.Google Scholar
Matsumura, S. (2003). Modelling the relationships among interlanguage pragmatic development, L2 proficiency, and exposure to L2. Applied Linguistics 24.4, 465–491.Google Scholar
Mor, S., Morris, M. & Joh, J. (2013). Identifying and training adaptive cross-cultural management skills: The crucial role of cultural metacognition. Academy of Management Learning Education 12, 453–475.Google Scholar
Moyer, A. (2005). Formal and informal experiential realms in German as a foreign language: A preliminary investigation. Foreign Language Annals 38, 377–387.Google Scholar
Niezgoda, K. & Röever, C. (2001). Pragmatic and grammatical awareness: A function of learning environment? In Rose, K. & Kasper, G. (eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press, 63–79.Google Scholar
Porte, G. (2012). Replication research in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Porte, G. & Richards, K. (2012). Focus article: Replication in second language writing research. Journal of Second Language Writing 21, 284–293.Google Scholar
Schauer, G. (2006). Pragmatic awareness in ESL and EFL contexts: Contrast and development. Language Learning 56, 269–318.Google Scholar
Schieffelin, B. B. & Ochs, E. (1986). Language socialization across cultures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shively, R. L. (2011). L2 pragmatic development in study abroad: A longitudinal study of Spanish service encounters. Journal of Pragmatics 43.6, 1818–1835.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2008). Cognition, language contact, and development of pragmatic comprehension in a study-abroad context. Language Learning 58, 33–71.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2011). The effect of L2 proficiency and study-abroad experience on pragmatic comprehension. Language Learning 61.3, 904–939.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2012). Context, individual differences, and pragmatic competence. New York/Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2015). Developing interactional competence in a Japanese study abroad context. Bristol/New York: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2016). Context and pragmatics learning: Problems and opportunities of the study abroad context. Language Teaching 1–14.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N., Li, S. & Xiao, F. (2013). Production of formulaic expressions in L2 Chinese: A developmental investigation in a study abroad context. Chinese as a Second Language Research Journal 2, 23–58.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N., Xiao, F. & Li, S. (2016). Development of pragmatic knowledge in L2 Chinese: Effects of intercultural competence and social contact on speech act production in a study abroad context. The Modern Language Journal 100.4, 775–796.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N. & Röever, C. (2017). Second language pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Van Oudenhoven, J. P. & Van der Zee, K. I. (2002). Predicting multicultural effectiveness of international students: The multicultural personality questionnaire. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 26, 679–694.Google Scholar
Warga, M. & Schölmberger, U. (2007). The acquisition of French apologetic behavior in a study abroad context. Intercultural Pragmatics 4, 221–252.Google Scholar
Xiao, F. (2015). Proficiency effect on L2 pragmatic competence. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 5.4, 554–581.Google Scholar
Xu, W., Case, R. E. & Wang, Y. (2011). Pragmatic and grammatical competence, length of residence, and overall L2 proficiency. System 37, 205–216.Google Scholar