Interlanguage Pragmatic Competence Test for EFL Learners’ Request Speech Act: A Systematic Review

Musli Ariani

Abstract

This paper intends to provide a range of possibilities for testing learners’ interlanguage pragmatic competence of request speech acts. A request speech act has scarcely been understood in the context of the sequences of talk that involve the pre-request, the request, and the post-request stages. Request speech acts unfold over multiple turns in conversation and are co-constructed by the interlocutors engaged in the conversation. Previous studies have provided robust sources for assessing learners’ request abilities. Some assessment tools such as the discourse completion test, both oral (ODCT) and written discourse completion test (WDCT), and role play (RP) are among the most popular tools generally used to test learners’ comprehension and production of English requests. While these tools suggest a promising outlook of learners’ interlanguage pragmatic competence, their lack of authenticity remains questionable, except for role plays based on carefully planned scenarios of learners’ daily experiences and interests. Current development of interlanguage measures has taken advantage of technology such as the use of role-play computer-based tasks (RPCBT), role-play virtual reality tasks (RPVRT), and computer-animated production tasks (CAPT). Hence, it is likely that an interactive form of assessment device that can unfold every move and act of learners’ performance during interaction may become a better alternative to resolve the problems of testing learners’ interlanguage pragmatic competence covering knowledge, comprehension, and production of pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic abilities. However, the use of ODCT or WDCT, despite the drawbacks, remains a reasonable choice for eliciting learners’ off-line knowledge of normative conventions of pragmatic language use.


 

References

1. Aini, Q., Hidayat, D. N., Husna, N., & Alek, A. (2023). Discourse Analysis of Directive Speech Acts Used by Teachers in Classroom Interactions. JET (Journal of English Teaching), 9(2), 137–150. https://doi.org/10.33541/jet.v9i2.4566
2. Akmal, H., Syahriyani, A., & Handayani, T. (2022). Request Speech Act of Indonesian English Learners and Australian English Speakers Through Cross-Cultural Pragmatic Perspectives. In Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network (Vol. 15, Issue 2). https://so04.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/LEARN/index
3. Alcón Soler, E. (2005). Does instruction work for learning pragmatics in the EFL context? System, 33(3), 417–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2005.06.005
4. Alcón-Soler, E. (2017). Pragmatic Development during Study Abroad: An Analysis of Spanish Teenagers’ Request Strategies in English Emails. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 37, 77–92. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190517000125
5. Alcón-Soler, E., & Pitarch, J. G. (2010). The effect of instruction on learners’ pragmatic awareness: A focus on refusals. International Journal of English …, 10(1), 65–80.
6. Alfghe, A., & Mohammadzadeh, B. (2021). Realisation of the Speech Act of Request, Suggestion and Apology by Libyan EFL Learners. SAGE Open, 11(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211050378
7. Azizi, Z., & Namaziandost, E. (2023). Implementing Peer-dynamic Assessment to Cultivate Iranian EFL Learners’ Interlanguage Pragmatic Competence: A Mixed-methods Approach. International Journal of Language Testing, 13(1).
8. Bagherkazemi, M., & Harati-Asl, M. (2022). Interlanguage Pragmatic Development: Comparative Impacts of Cognitive and Interpersonal Tasks. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 10(2), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.30466/ijltr.2022.121182
9. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1999). Exploring the interlanguage of interlanguage pragmatics: A research agenda for acquisitional pragmatics. Language Learning, 49(4), 677–713. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00105
10. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2005). Interlanguage Pragmatics. Interlanguage Pragmatics, 39–60. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410613776
11. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2013). Developing L2 Pragmatics. Language Learning, 63(SUPPL. 1). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00738.x
12. Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1984). Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP). Applied Linguistics, 5(3), 196–213. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/5.3.196
13. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness; Some Universals in Language Usage. In A. Jaworski & N. Coupland (Eds.), The Discourse Reader (Second, pp. 311–322). Routledge, Tyalor & Francis Group.
14. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/I.1.1
15. Cutrone, Pino. (2013). Assessing Pragmatic Competence in the Japanese EFL Context : Towards the Learning of Listener Responses. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
16. Khavidaki, D. M. (2023). The Interplay of Contextual Variables and Language Proficiency in Request Realization. SAGE Open, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231220457
17. Derakhshan, A., & Eslami, Z. (2015). The Effect of Consciousness-Raising Instruction on the Pragmatic Development of Apology and Request. Tesl-Ej, 18(4).
18. Halenko, N., & Economidou-Kogetsidis, M. (2022). Japanese learners’ spoken requests in the study abroad context: appropriateness, speech rate and response time. Language Learning Journal, 50(4), 506–520. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2022.2088441
19. Holmes, J., & Riddiford, N. (2011). From classroom to workplace : tracking socio-pragmatic development. ELT Journal, 65(4), 376–386. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccq071
20. Ishihara, N. (2011). Co-Constructed Pragmatic Awareness: Instructional Pragmatics in EFL Teacher Development in Japan. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language (TESL-EJ), 15(2).
21. Ishihara, N. (2013). Is It Rude Language? Children Learning Pragmatics through Visual Narratives. TESL Canada Journal, 30(7), 135–149. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ1033738&site=ehost-live
22. Ishihara, N., & Chiba, A. (2014). Teacher-based or Interactional ?: Exploring Assessments for Children’s Pragmatic Development. Iranian Journal of Language Testingesting, 4(1), 84–112.
23. Karatepe, Ç. (2001). Pragmalinguistic Awareness in EFL Teacher Training. Language Awareness, 10(2–3), 178–188.
24. Kasper, G. (1997). Can Pragmatic Competence be taught? Network, 6(1990), 1–12. http://static.schoolrack.com/files/4890/43904/Can_Pragmatic_Competence_Be_Taught.doc
25. Kasper, G., & Schmidt, R. (1996). Developmental issues in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(2), 149–169. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100014868
26. Kim, Y., & Taguchi, N. (2016). Learner-Learner Interaction During Collaborative Pragmatic Tasks: The Role of Cognitive and Pragmatic Task Demands. Foreign Language Annals, 49(1), 42–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12180
27. Leech, G. (2016). Principles of Pragmatics. In Principles of Pragmatics. Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315835976
28. Lenchuk, I., & Ahmed, A. (2019). Are the speech acts of EFL learners really direct? The case of requests in the omani EFL context. SAGE Open, 9(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018825018
29. Li, S., & Taguchi, N. (2014). The effects of practice modality on pragmatic development in L2 Chinese. Modern Language Journal, 98(3), 794–812. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2014.12123.x
30. McConachy, T., & Hata, K. (2013). Addressing textbook representations of pragmatics and culture. ELT Journal, 67(3), 294–301. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cct017
31. Mukhroji, M., Nurkamto, J., Subroto, H. D. E., Sri, &, & Tarjana, S. (2019). Pragmatic Forces in The Speech Acts of EFL Speakers At Kampung Inggris, Indonesia. www.jsser.org
32. Nguyen, T. T. M., Pham, T. H., & Pham, M. T. (2012). The relative effects of explicit and implicit form-focused instruction on the development of L2 pragmatic competence. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(4), 416–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.01.003
33. Nicholas, A. (2015). A concept-based approach to teaching speech acts in the EFL classroom. ELT Journal, 69(4), 383–394. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccv034
34. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. In The BMJ (Vol. 372). BMJ Publishing Group. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
35. Qadha, A. M., Al-Wasy, B. Q., & Mahdi, H. S. (2021). Using social networking tools for teaching requests to undergraduate Arab EFL learners: a study of pragmatics. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 17(2), 95–106. https://doi.org/10.1108/LTHE-09-2020-0041
36. Qari, I. A. (2021). The Effect of Explicit Instruction of Requests on Saudi EFL learners using a pre-test, post-test Approach. Arab World English Journal, 12(1), 113–127. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol12no1.8
37. Rezai, A. (2023). Cultivating interlanguage pragmatic comprehension through concurrent and cumulative group dynamic assessment: a mixed-methods study. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-022-00179-w
38. Taguchi, N. (2014). Personality and Development of Second Language Pragmatic Competence. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 16(2), 203–221.
39. Taguchi, N. (2022). Immersive Virtual Reality for Pragmatics Task Development. TESOL Quarterly, 56(1), 308–335. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3070
40. Taguchi, N., & Kim, Y. (2014). Collaborative dialogue in learning pragmatics: Pragmatic-related episodes as an opportunity for learning request-making. Applied Linguistics, 37(3), 416–437. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu039
41. Taguchi, N., Naganuma, N., & Budding, C. (2015a). Does Instruction Alter the Naturalistic Pattern of Pragmatic Development? A Case of Request Speech Act. In Naganuma & Budding (Vol. 3, Issue 3).
42. Taguchi, N., Naganuma, N., & Budding, C. (2015b). Does Instruction Alter the Naturalistic Pattern of Pragmatic Development? A Case of Request Speech Act. Tesl-Ej, 19(3). https://ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ1083978&site=eds-live&scope=site
43. Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics (First). Pearson Education Limited.
44. Xu, L., & Wannaruk, A. (2016). Testing University Learners’ Interlanguage Pragmatic Competence in a Chinese EFL Context (Vol. 52).
45. Yousefi, M., & Nassaji, H. (2024). The Impact of Corrective Feedback on L2 Pragmatics Production in Face-to-face and Technology-mediated Settings1. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 39, 305–328. https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2024.39.19
46. Zand-Moghadam, A., & Samani, F. M. (2021). Effect of Information-gap, Reasoning-gap, and Opinion-gap Tasks on EFL Learners’ Pragmatic Production, Metapragmatic Awareness, and Comprehension of Implicature (Vol. 25, Issue 1).
47. Zavialova, A. (2023). Formulaic Language in the Acquisition of L2 Pragmatic Competence in a Community-based Classroom. TESL-EJ, 27(1). https://doi.org/10.55593/ej.27105a2

Authors

Musli Ariani
Author Biography

Musli Ariani, Universitas Jember

Musli Ariani is an associate professor at Universitas Negeri Jember. She earned her Master degree in Applied Linguistics from Macquarie University, Sydney, and obtained her Doctorate degree from Universitas Negeri Malang. She focuses her research on pragmatics, English language teaching, teacher professional development, and discourse analysis.

[1]
“Interlanguage Pragmatic Competence Test for EFL Learners’ Request Speech Act: A Systematic Review”, Soc. sci. humanities j., vol. 8, no. 12, pp. 6133–6158, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.18535/sshj.v8i12.1543.