Advertisement

The Acquisition of Pragmatically Appropriate Requests by Second Language Learners of Spanish Using an Input-Based Virtual Environment

  • Karina CollentineEmail author
Chapter
  • 8 Downloads
Part of the New Language Learning and Teaching Environments book series (NLLTE)

Abstract

This study explores the types of input-oriented instruction that best promote pragmatic development in a virtual environment (VE). VEs provide immersive environments containing contextual support and provide feedback responses where learners experience the results of their pragmatic choices immediately and meaningfully, factors found to be essential for developing pragmatic competence. Third-year university learners of Spanish explored a VE by approaching avatars and requesting objects or favors essential to solving a task. Results show that both treatment groups benefited, and that structured input seems to help learners process input most appropriately, especially with respect to incorporating a second language perspective and using the appropriate tense and impersonal forms of address—both of which seem to contribute to the overall acceptability of learners’ production of requests.

References

  1. Alcón Soler, E. (2005). Does instruction work for learning pragmatics in the EFL context? System, 33(3), 417–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bataller, R. (2010). Making a request for a service in Spanish: Pragmatic development in the study abroad setting. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43, 159–174.Google Scholar
  3. Clennell, C. (1999). Promoting pragmatic awareness and spoken discourse skills with EAP classes. ELT Journal, 53(2), 82–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cohen, A. (2013). Commentary on technology in interlanguage pragmatics research and teaching. In N. Taguchi & J. Sykes (Eds.), Technology in interlanguage pragmatics research and teaching (pp. 261–269). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Collentine, K. (2011). Learner autonomy in a task-based 3D world and production. Language Learning & Technology, 15, 50–67.Google Scholar
  6. Cornillie, F., Clarebout, G., & Desmet, P. (2012). Between learning and playing? Exploring learners’ perceptions of corrective feedback in an immersive game for English pragmatics. ReCALL, 24(3), 257–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ellis, R. (1997). SLA research and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Félix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2007). Pragmatic development in the Spanish as a FL classroom: A cross-sectional study of learner requests. Intercultural Pragmatics, 4, 253–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Félix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2008). Pedagogical intervention and the development of pragmatic competence learning Spanish as a foreign language. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 16, 49–84.Google Scholar
  10. Freiermuth, M. (2002). Internet chat: Collaborating and learning via e-conversations. TESOL Journal, 11(3), 36–40.Google Scholar
  11. Holden, C., & Sykes, J. (2013). Complex L2 pragmatic feedback via place-based mobile games. In N. Taguchi & J. Sykes (Eds.), Technology in interlanguage pragmatics research and teaching (pp. 155–184). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Huth, T., & Taleghani-Nikazm, C. (2006). How can insights from conversation analysis be directly applied to teaching L2 pragmatics? Language Teaching Research, 10(1), 53–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ishihara, N., & Cohen, A. (2010). Teaching and learning pragmatics: Where language and culture meet. Harlow, Essex: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
  14. Koike, D., & Pearson, L. (2005). The effect on instruction and feedback in the development of pragmatic competence. System, 33(3), 481–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Long, M., & Crookes, G. (1992). Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly, 26(1), 27–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Long, M., & Crookes, G. (1993). Units of analysis in syllabus design: The case for task. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks in pedagogical context: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 9–56). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  17. Martínez-Flor, A., & Fukuya, Y. (2005). The effects of instruction on learners’ production of appropriate and accurate suggestions. System, 33(3), 463–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Meier, A. (1997). Teaching the universals of politeness. ELT Journal, 51(1), 21–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mwinyelle, J. (2005). The acquisition of pragmatic competence in an L2 classroom: Giving advice in Spanish. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
  20. Pinto, D. (2005). The acquisition of requests by second language learners of Spanish. Spanish in Context, 2, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rodríguez, S. (2001). The perception of requests in Spanish by instructed learners of Spanish in the second- and foreign-language contexts: A longitudinal study of acquisition patterns. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.Google Scholar
  22. Roever, C. (2009). Teaching and testing pragmatics. In M. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 560–577). West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rose, K. (2005). On the effects of instruction in second language pragmatics. System, 33(3), 385–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rutherford, W., & Sharwood Smith, M. (1985). Consciousness-raising and universal grammar. Applied Linguistics, 6, 274–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Schmidt, R. (1993). Consciousness, learning, and interlanguage pragmatics. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 21–42). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Shively, R. (2011). L2 pragmatic development in study abroad: A longitudinal study of Spanish service encounters. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 1818–1835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Shively, R. (2014). Language in context: Pragmatics in second language Spanish. In K. Geeslin (Ed.), The handbook of Spanish second language acquisition (pp. 331–350). West Sussex: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
  28. Shively, R., & Cohen, A. (2008). Development of Spanish requests and apologies during study abroad. Íkala, Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura, 13(20), 57–118.Google Scholar
  29. Sykes, J. (2009). Learner requests in Spanish: Examining the potential of multiuser virtual environments for L2 pragmatic acquisition. In L. Lomika & G. Lord (Eds.), The next generation: Social networking and online collaboration in foreign language learning (pp. 199–234). San Marcos: CALICO Monograph Series.Google Scholar
  30. Sykes, J. (2013). Multiuser virtual environments: Learner apologies in Spanish. In N. Taguchi & J. Sykes (Eds.), Technology in Interlanguage Pragmatics Research and Teaching (pp. 71–100). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sykes, J. (2015). Emerging technological contexts for teaching Spanish. In M. Lacorte (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of Hispanic applied linguistics (pp. 238–257). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Takahashi, S. (2001). The role of input enhancement in developing pragmatic competence. In K. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 200–222). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Takimoto, M. (2009). The effects of input-based tasks on the development of learners’ pragmatic proficiency. Applied Linguistics, 30(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tomasello, M. (2000). The social-pragmatic theory of word-learning. Pragmatics, 10(4), 401–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction in second language acquisition. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  36. Vinther, T., & Jensen, E. (2008). El aprendizaje de la cortesía verbal a traves de ínput audiovisual o escrito. In A. Briz, A. Hidalgo, M. Abelda, J. Contreras, & N. Hernández Flores (Eds.), Cortesía y conversación: De lo escrito a lo oral (pp. 798–809). Valencia: Programa EDICE.Google Scholar
  37. Witten, C. (2002). The effects of input enhancement and interactive video viewing on the development of pragmatic awareness and use in the beginning Spanish L2 classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Northern Arizona UniversityFlagstaffUSA

Personalised recommendations