Teaching and Learning Pragmatics

Where Language and Culture Meet

Noriko Ishihara and Andrew D. Cohen Teaching and Learning
An understanding of sociocultural context is crucial in second language learning, yet developing this
awareness often poses a real challenge to the typical language learner. Pragmatics
This book is a practical language teachers’ guide that focuses on how to teach socially and culturally Where Language and Culture Meet
appropriate language for effective communication. Moving beyond a purely theoretical approach to
pragmatics, the volume offers practical advice to teachers, with hands-on classroom tasks included

Andrew D. Cohen
Noriko Ishihara
in every chapter.

Readers will be able to:

l Identify possible causes of learner errors and choices in cross-cultural communication

Understand second language acquisition theories that support their classroom practices
Noriko Ishihara
Andrew D. Cohen
l

l Develop a pragmatics-focused instructional component, classroom-based assessments

and curricula
l Help learners to become more strategic about their learning and performance of speech acts
l Incorporate technology into their approach to teaching pragmatics

Teaching and Learning Pragmatics

This book aims to close the gap between what research in pragmatics has found and how
language is generally taught today. It will be of interest to all language teachers, graduate
students in language teaching and linguistics, teacher educators and developers of materials
for teaching language.

Noriko Ishihara is Associate Professor of English as a Foreign Language at Hosei University, Japan,
and leads language teachers’ professional development courses in the US and Japan. Her work has
appeared in various journals and she is co-author of a Japanese language textbook with Magara
Maeda, Advanced Japanese: Communication in Context (2010).

Andrew D. Cohen is Professor in Second Language Studies at the University of Minnesota. He has
had many encounters with pragmatics, as a Peace Corps Volunteer in rural development with
Aymara Indians in Bolivia, a Fulbright Scholar in Brazil, and a professor in Israel for many years.
He is co-editor with Ernesto Macaro of Language Learner Strategies (2007).

Longman Applied Linguistics

General Advisor: Professor Christopher N. Candlin

Macquarie University, Sydney
Cover image © Getty Images

www.pearson-books.com Longman Applied Linguistics

CVR_COHE4573_01_SE_CVR.indd 1 1/2/10 15:37:27

 CHAPTER 1

Coming to terms with

pragmatics
Andrew D. Cohen

Pragmatic ability

T he notion of pragmatics has numerous meanings depending on

the context. When we say that someone is taking a “pragmatic
approach” to something, for example, the implication is that the person is
being practical. Yet, the word assumes a more specialized meaning in applied
linguistics. The term pragmatic ability as used in this volume refers both to
knowledge about pragmatics and to the ability to use it.1
Pragmatic ability actually encompasses the four main channels for com-
munication, the receptive ones, listening and reading, and the productive
ones, speaking and writing. Whether the reception or production is prag-
matically successful in the given L2 depends on various factors, such as:
(1) our proficiency in that L2 and possibly in other (especially related) lan-
guages, (2) our age, gender, occupation, social status, and experience in the
relevant L2-speaking communities, and (3) our previous experiences with
pragmatically competent L2 speakers and our multilingual/multicultural
experiences in general. Let’s look at the different skill areas:

1 As listeners, we need to interpret what is said, as well as what is not

said, and what may be communicated non-verbally. These verbal and
non-verbal cues transmit to us just how polite, direct, or formal the
communication is and what the intent is (e.g., to be kind, loving,
attentive, or devious, provocative, or hostile). The input could be

1
As indicated in the introductory chapter, we will generally be characterizing
pragmatic ability in terms of situational competence, rather than native or non-
nativeness.
4 GROUNDING IN THE TEACHING AND LEARNING OF L2 PRAGMATICS

through language (e.g., through words, phrases, or extended discourse),

though gestures, or through silence.

2 As readers, we need to comprehend written messages, identifying

the rhetorical structure of the message and catching sometimes subtle
indications of tone or attitude in the communication (e.g., anything
from a humorous, sincere, sympathetic, or collaborative tone to one
that is teasing, sarcastic, angry, threatening, patronizing, or sexist).

3 As speakers, we need to know how to say what we want to say with

the proper politeness, directness, and formality (e.g., in the role of boss,
telling employees that they are being laid off; or in the role of teacher,
telling students that their work is unacceptable). We also need to know
what not to say at all and what to communicate non-verbally. What do
we as speakers need to do in order for our output to be comprehensible
pragmatically to those interacting with us, and what do we need to
know about the potential consequences of what we say and how we
say it? What do we need to know as learners in order to accommodate
to the local speech community’s norms for pragmatic performance,
such as in, say, making an oral request? There are various factors that
can stand in the way of pragmatically appropriate performance (see
Chapter 5 on pragmatic divergence).

4 As writers, we need to know how to write our message intelligibly,

again paying attention to level of politeness, directness, and formality,
as well as considering issues of rhetorical structure (e.g., in the role
of concerned tenant, composing a message to post in an apartment
building warning neighbors not to exit the parking lot too fast; or in
the role of employee, requesting a promotion and a raise, or a paid
vacation from the boss).

It is worth mentioning at this juncture that pragmatics has convention-

ally focused on the spoken medium and has paid little attention to writing,
so that we know little about how learners acquire the ability to be function-
ally appropriate in their written language.2 Though some efforts have been
made in the research literature to focus on the pragmatics of written lan-
guage,3 this is still more the exception than the rule. Given that issues relating
to pragmatics are relevant to written language, we will make an effort in this
book to include this focus. There are, of course, various hybrid genres of

2
Ellis (1994: 187–8).
3
See, for example, Cohen and Tarone (1994).
 COMING TO TERMS WITH PRAGMATICS 5

written language, such as e-mail messages, which contain elements of both

oral and written language.
Having pragmatic ability means being able to go beyond the literal
meaning of what is said or written, in order to interpret the intended mean-
ings, assumptions, purposes or goals, and the kinds of actions that are being
performed.4 The interpretation of pragmatic meaning can sometimes pose a
challenge – even to natives of the language – since speakers do not always
communicate directly what they mean and listeners do not always interpret
the speakers’ meaning as it was intended. So, the speakers and the listeners
need to collaborate to assure that genuine communication takes place. In
fact, pragmatics deals with meaning that the speaker needs to co-construct
and negotiate along with the listener within a given cultural context and
given the social constraints.5 Inevitably, learners will relate the pragmatic
ability that they have in their first language (L1), the language other than
their first one which is currently their dominant one, or perhaps some other
language (if they are multilinguals) to the pragmatics of the target language
community. In part, it entails drawing on the latent knowledge that they
already possess to help sort out the pragmatics of the L2, and in part, it calls
for the acquisition of new knowledge.
Why are messages not communicated directly? One reason is that
members of the given speech community may find it inappropriate and
even rude to come right out and ask point blank, “Why haven’t you gotten
married yet?” In that speech community, the shared knowledge may be that
it is necessary to be indirect and to make innuendos, and then see if the
other person wishes to comment on his or her personal situation. In another
language community, it may be perfectly acceptable to ask this question.
The direct question was the approach that the Aymara Indians used with
co-author Cohen when he was a Peace Corps Volunteer in rural community
development on the high plains of Bolivia in the mid-1960s.
Another reason why members of a given speech community do not
always communicate messages directly is that it might sometimes be con-
sidered more appropriate in that community to hint about the matter rather
than to spell it out. For example, there may be rules about “being on time”
which are largely left unsaid. So if someone is too early or too late, according
to expectations, a hint is made to that effect (e.g., “Oh, you’re here in time to
help us finish preparing the hors d’oeuvres”), and it would be rude to spell it
out. This leaves the listener or reader to intuit what is probably meant.

4
Yule (1996: 3–4).
5
LoCastro (2003); Thomas (1995).
6 GROUNDING IN THE TEACHING AND LEARNING OF L2 PRAGMATICS

While correctly interpreting the innuendo may even be difficult for

highly competent speakers, it may be a far more daunting task for less com-
petent learners – both to perceive the hint and to interpret the meaning of
the message correctly. There are also instances where what someone says is
not what they mean. So, for example, in American English, “We must get
together” is usually not to be taken seriously, and a reply like “OK, let’s make
a firm date” would be met with surprise. It is often just a polite way to end
an encounter in a friendly way.
The field of pragmatics is broad and encompasses matters of reference,
presupposition, discourse structure, and conversational principles involving
implicature and hedging.6 This volume will focus primarily on speech acts,
since they are have an important role to play in L2 communication, and are
teachable and learnable. In addition, they are among the most rigorously
researched of the areas in pragmatics, which was what motivated us to
demonstrate how to draw on this empirical resource in the teaching of
L2 pragmatics.

Speech acts
Within the realm of pragmatic ability, the ways in which people carry out
specific social functions in speaking such as apologizing, complaining,
making requests, refusing things/invitations, complimenting, or thanking
have been referred to as speech acts. Speech acts have a basic meaning as
conceived by the speaker (“Do you have a watch?” = do you own a watch?)
and an intended or illocutionary meaning (e.g., “Can you tell me what time
it is?”), as well as the actual illocutionary force on the listener, also referred
to as the uptake (i.e., a request to know the time, and hence, a reply like
“It’s 10:30 AM right now.”). In this instance, a young child or a facetious
adult might respond to “Do you have a watch?” with “Yes, I do.” If so, the
uptake would not work for the speaker, who might then need to ask, “What
is the time, then?” While sometimes speech acts are accomplished by a
single word like “thanks,” at other times they involve complex and indirect
speech over a series of conversational turns.
Many of these speech acts tend to follow regular and predictable patterns
for members of the given community. In the case of “greetings,” for
example, let us say that in a US context you are greeted in English by an
associate at work with something on the order of “How’re ya’ doing?” You
are expected to say, “Fine, thanks,” “OK, thanks,” or something of that sort,

6
Mey (2001).