Skip to main content
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 74
  • Cited by
    This chapter has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    DeCapua, Andrea 2018. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching. p. 1.

    Ghavamnia, M. Eslami-Rasekh, A. and Vahid Dastjerdi, H. 2018. The effects of input-enhanced instruction on Iranian EFL learners' production of appropriate and accurate suggestions. The Language Learning Journal, Vol. 46, Issue. 2, p. 114.

    Yuan, Zhou-min and Zhang, Runhan 2018. Investigating longitudinal pragmatic development of complaints made by Chinese EFL learners. Applied Linguistics Review, Vol. 9, Issue. 1, p. 63.

    Stavans, Anat and Webman Shafran, Ronit 2018. The pragmatics of requests and refusals in multilingual settings. International Journal of Multilingualism, Vol. 15, Issue. 2, p. 149.

    Kaliska, Marta 2018. Using digital resources to enhance language learning – case studies in Italian. p. 5.

    Shirinbakhsh, Salva Rasekh, Abbass Eslami and Tavakoli, Mansoor 2018. Metapragmatic instruction (6Rs) versus input-based practice: a comparison of their effects on pragmatic accuracy and speed in the recognition and oral production of English refusals. The Language Learning Journal, Vol. 46, Issue. 4, p. 514.

    Krulatz, Anna 2018. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching. p. 1.

    Li, Wei 2018. Pragmatic Transfer and Development. Vol. 287, Issue. ,

    Sydorenko, Tetyana Daurio, Phoebe and L. Thorne, Steven 2018. Refining pragmatically-appropriate oral communication via computer-simulated conversations. Computer Assisted Language Learning, Vol. 31, Issue. 1-2, p. 157.

    Blattner, Geraldine and Dalola, Amanda 2018. I Tweet, You Tweet, (S)He Tweets. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, Vol. 8, Issue. 2, p. 1.

    Derakhshan, Ali and Arabmofrad, Ali 2018. The Impact of Instruction on the Pragmatic Comprehension of Speech Acts of Apology, Request, and Refusal Among Iranian Intermediate EFL Learners. English Teaching & Learning, Vol. 42, Issue. 1, p. 75.

    Félix-Brasdefer, J. César and Mugford, Gerrard 2017. The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness. p. 489.

    Sobhy, Nashwa Nashaat 2017. Applied Linguistics Perspectives on CLIL. Vol. 47, Issue. , p. 67.

    Nguyen, Minh Thi Thuy 2017. Using conversation tasks and retrospective methodology to investigate L2 pragmatics development: the case of EFL criticisms and responses to criticisms. The Language Learning Journal, Vol. 45, Issue. 3, p. 399.

    Sykes, Julie M. 2017. The Handbook of Technology and Second Language Teaching and Learning. p. 118.

    Gauci, Phyllisienne Ghia, Elisa and Caruana, Sandro 2017. Current Issues in Intercultural Pragmatics. Vol. 274, Issue. , p. 323.

    Fant, Lars and Denke, Annika 2016. Negotiating with the Boss. Pragmatics and Society, Vol. 7, Issue. 4, p. 540.

    John Paul O. Dela, Rosa and Lorna B., Castro 2016. Is it too Late Now to Say Sorry? – the Language of Public Apologies in the Contexts of American and Philippine Television. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, Vol. 6, Issue. 2, p. 29.

    Blattner, Geraldine Dalola, Amanda and Lomicka, Lara 2016. Handbook of Research on Learning Outcomes and Opportunities in the Digital Age. p. 769.

    Limberg, Holger 2016. Teaching how to apologize: EFL textbooks and pragmatic input. Language Teaching Research, Vol. 20, Issue. 6, p. 700.

  • Print publication year: 2001
  • Online publication date: October 2012

Chapter 2 - Evaluating the empirical evidence: Grounds for instruction in pragmatics?



Everyone who works with a second or foreign language, whether learners, teachers, or researchers, knows a funny story about crosscultural pragmatics – or maybe the stories are really not that funny. From the perspective of the speaker, they may be about feeling silly, helpless, or rude; from the perspective of the listener, they may be about feeling confused, insulted, or angry. Anecdotal evidence inspires us to say that we ought to teach, as one of our ESL students said, the “secret rules” of language. Much research has gone into identifying how speakers of various languages realize speech acts, take turns, and use silence, for example, so that what our student called the secret rules are not unknown; and even if our knowledge is incomplete at this stage, could it form the basis of an informed pedagogy? In other words, is there empirical evidence that warrants the development and implementation of a pedagogy of pragmatics in second and foreign language instruction? In this chapter, I will review the empirical evidence that shows that native speakers (NSs) and nonnative speakers (NNSs) of a given target language appear to have different systems of pragmatics, discuss the factors that influence the development of L2 pragmatics systems, and then address the question of whether differences in pragmatics systems warrant instructional treatment.

The evidence

This review adopts a speech act perspective. Although it is not the only way of viewing pragmatics, speech act research has been well represented in crosscultural and interlanguage pragmatics research, and provides a common analytic framework which facilitates comparison across studies.

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

Pragmatics in Language Teaching
  • Online ISBN: 9781139524797
  • Book DOI:
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *