Makale Birleştirme

JOSEPH SIEGEL
Japan
Pragmatic Activities for the

Speaking Classroom
B
eing able to speak naturally and appropriately with others in a variety
of situations is an important goal for many English as a foreign
language (EFL) learners. Because the skill of speaking invariably
involves interaction with people and using language to reach objectives
(e.g., ordering food, making friends, asking for favors), it is crucial for
teachers to explore activities that help students learn the typical ways to
express these and other language functions.
To interact successfully in myriad contexts and and desired objectives can influence linguistic
with many different speakers, learners need and strategic choices of what to say. The
to develop a repertoire of practical situation- ability to account for and adjust to these
dependent communicative choices. The variables when speaking English defines one’s
study of how language is used in interactions pragmatic competence.
is called pragmatics, and while appropriate
interactions come naturally to native speakers Despite its importance in EFL communication,
of a language, EFL learners need to be aware the teaching of pragmatics is often overlooked
of the many linguistic and strategic options in the classroom and underrepresented in
available to them in certain situations. Though teaching materials and teacher education
pragmatics is an extensive field within courses. Reasons include insufficient class time,
linguistics, much pragmatic research has lack of interest, or inadequate recognition of its
focused on speech acts performed by learners importance in interpersonal communication.
and the linguistic and strategic choices they There may also be a shortage of practical and
employ (Mitchell, Myles, and Marsden 2013). achievable activities for the classroom that
introduce and promote the development of
To use pragmatically appropriate speech, EFL such nuanced language use. While teachers may
users must account for not only the form recognize the importance of pragmatics and
and function of a second language, but the want to use it in their lessons, many are unsure
context as well (Taguchi 2015). In doing so, how to select and incorporate pragmatic
they will be more comfortable speaking to teaching activities in EFL classes. This seems
interlocutors who may vary in age, gender, to be the case in Japan, where I teach, and
social class, and status (Kinginger and Farrell I suspect the situation is similar in other
2004; Ishihara and Cohen 2010). Special EFL contexts.
conversational choices are also required based
on the relationship between speakers— The purpose of this article is to demonstrate
whether they know each other and for how how to identify pragmatic teaching points, to
long. In addition, conversational expectations introduce related activities, and to generally
12 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 2 01 6 americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum

encourage attention to pragmatic speaking and contexts. Speakers are required to
ability in language classrooms. This article consider options and select among alternatives
promotes the idea that pragmatic skills to produce contextually appropriate speech
identified and developed in EFL settings (Kasper and Rose 2002). For instance,
contribute to communicative success. It begins speaking to a friend in a cafe about a low
by discussing pragmatics as a general field within test score may necessitate different language
EFL education before moving on to present the and strategies than talking about the same
notion of speech act sets (SASs), which are step- topic to the instructor who graded the test.
by-step conversational options normally used to Apologizing about forgetting a meeting
successfully communicate a variety of language with a potential employer would likely
functions. SASs are considered valuable tools involve a different level of formality than
for examining language and strategic choices if the meeting were with a close friend.
made during speech production, and they also Complaints to a colleague of the same rank
provide useful templates for language teachers about working conditions would probably
who want to add a pragmatic element to their come out differently if made to the manager.
speaking lessons; as such, the concept of SASs Such situations call for the ability to operate
is promoted in the literature in an effort to within pragmatic norms, which are a “range
advance pragmatic studies through a speech act of tendencies or conventions for pragmatic
perspective (Ishihara and Cohen 2010). Through language use that are … typical or generally
comparisons of student output from two SASs preferred in the L2 community” (Ishihara and
for the language functions of apologizing and Cohen 2010, 13).
requesting, this article demonstrates how to
identify specific pragmatic teaching points and Failure to adhere to these norms may lead
use them to inform pragmatic instruction. This to unintended consequences and unequal
article also suggests classroom activities that treatment of the speaker. On the other
teachers can use to help learners develop and hand, culturally appropriate choices when
refine their pragmatic abilities in English. interacting with different subgroups will
potentially lead to more positive experiences,
PRAGMATIC DEVELOPMENT increased motivation, and appealing outcomes
for learners. Based on this line of thinking,
Pragmatics has been defined as “the study the following questions may be of interest
of language from the point of view of users, to educators involved in intercultural
especially the choices they make … and the communication and speaking classes:
effects their use of language has on other
participants in the act of communication” • Do students have an appropriate linguistic
(Crystal 1997, 301). The aspects of “choice” and strategic range to vary their speech
and “effect” are particularly relevant depending on context?
for achieving desired outcomes during
interpersonal communication. In terms of • Do they understand the consequences
pragmatic choices, EFL learners need to be of using one utterance or strategy over
aware of the many linguistic and strategic another?
options they can use in certain circumstances.
The linguistic options will likely differ from • How can pragmatic instruction be
their first language (L1); depending on the implemented in second language (L2)
L1 and/or cultural background, the strategic classrooms?
alternatives in English may also be different
(Blum-Kulka and Olshtain 1984). It is important for students to be conscious
of their options and the consequences that
Regarding “effect,” learners need to result from appropriate and inappropriate
understand the ramifications of utilizing choices. Even though L1 patterns for language
different linguistic options in certain situations functions may differ from L2 patterns,
americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum 2016 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 13

Given the importance of pragmatics, educators teaching spoken
interaction may want to include pragmatic elements in lessons.
learners will benefit from familiarity with formulas that allow users to accomplish a
appropriate L2 SASs. This awareness will given function. They consist of patterns of
allow them to communicate within standard output in an effort to establish frameworks
organization patterns that native language and options typically employed for specific
users expect, although language learners may purposes. As this article relates to EFL
not always have the goal of attaining native- learners and teachers in particular, English-
like fluency, and the relevance of “native based SASs are used; however, SAS patterns
speaker” norms is changing (McKay 2003). may vary by language and culture.
However, given the importance of pragmatics,
educators teaching spoken interaction may The linguistic moves for two SASs displayed
want to include pragmatic elements in lessons. in Figure 1—apologizing and requesting—are
SASs offer a straightforward way of identifying based on Ishihara and Cohen (2010) and the
specific areas in need of development and Center for Advanced Research on Language
assessing pragmatic output. Acquisition (2015). (Note: Letters in
parentheses are referred to in the analysis and
SPEECH ACT SETS (SASs) discussion.)
As noted earlier, an SAS is a group of These formulaic groups of pragmatic

possible strategies that speakers may employ routines provide language educators with
when performing a speech act. For instance, practical, research-based archetypes with
there is a specific SAS for apologizing, which to compare their students’ output.
another for requesting, and another for Teachers can research the pragmatic
thanking. These SASs include strategic routines and conduct needs analyses
options, linguistic moves, and semantic (Brown 1995) to both inform their
instructional decisions and elucidate
the pragmatic evolution of learners. For
example, a small-scale research project
Apologizing Requesting I conducted with Japanese EFL learners
revealed where to focus attention on their
Expressing the pragmatic speaking ability. For the study,
Getting attention (a) learners responded to situational prompts
apology (a)
to apologize to a friend and request a ride
Head act (the actual
from someone. Based on findings from that
Taking responsibility (b)
request) (b) study, I identified certain linguistic and
strategic options that were missing from
student responses and used that data to
Explaining the Supporting moves
incorporate speaking activities that targeted
situation (c) (moderates request –
can come before or
pragmatic competence.
after the head act) (c)
Offering repair or Similar activities are presented in Table 1
compensation (d) (apology output) and Table 2 (request output).
Potential teaching points and pedagogic
Promising it won’t options for the classroom follow each table.
happen again (e) Lowercase letters after each step correspond
to the SASs depicted in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Speech act sets for apologizing and requesting

Example A: I’m sorry I forget my note at Example B: I’m so sorry I left my note in
my house (a). If we have time for project my house (a). If you have time today, I can I
mm, ah, meeting, I’m sorry I come back to back to my house and bring my note? (d) Or
my house (possibly d). if you don’t have time, can I change meeting
schedule? (d)
Example C: I’m sorry I forget my notes (a), Example D: Ah, I forget my notebook.
so could you take me some notes? Sorry (a), ah please give me just a moment,
so I go back to ah, classroom last classroom,
classroom to get, to get to bring the my notes
(d). I’ll be back soon.
Table 1. Students’ apology speech samples
APOLOGY SCENARIO in Figure 1 could be used as checklists for this

type of evaluation. Alternatively, teachers could
The students’ pragmatic ability to apologize create their own basic evaluation checklists
is depicted in Table 1. According to the that might include points for “Appropriate
scenario, the speaker must apologize to a Greeting,” “Use of Taking Responsibility,”
classmate because the speaker forgot to bring “Appropriate Grammar Choices,” and so on.
a notebook to a study session. Here is the
prompt (adapted from Taguchi 2014): Another teaching point relates to the student’s
question “can I change meeting schedule?” in
Apology scenario: You and your friend, Example B. Teachers may wish to introduce
Jessica, are working on a class project grammatical options such as “could I” or
together. You meet Jessica at a school “would I possibly be able to” instead of “can
cafeteria to talk about the project. I.” By adjusting the formality of the situation,
You forgot to bring the notes that you which effectively modifies the scenario to
promised to bring to the meeting. What a less abrupt apology or elevates the status
do you say to Jessica? of the interlocutor, students practice more
formal grammar and make the apology more
PRAGMATIC ACTIVITIES BASED ON acceptable. Further, teachers can present
STUDENT APOLOGIES alternatives for the “so” in “I’m so sorry” (e.g.,
“very” or “really”) and discuss which option is
When examining student responses, teachers most appropriate under certain circumstances.
may find a number of relevant teaching One may also note that the speaker does not
points to incorporate in their classes. One begin the apology with any kind of pre-apology
straightforward classroom activity is to ask signal, such as “Listen, … ” or “You won’t
learners to make the necessary grammatical believe this, but … .” Teachers can introduce
corrections to the output and have them these signals to learners and then encourage
practice the revised response. This activity their use in subsequent role-play activities.
could be done with stock samples like those
in Table 1 or, preferably, with output from the By comparing these speech samples to the SAS
learners themselves. The former option may for apologizing, teachers can assess whether
be easier for classrooms without recording learners are effectively accomplishing the
equipment for individual students, but the desired conversational steps. Another step
latter would allow learners to identify and self- (offering repair or compensation) is successfully
correct their own mistakes. Video recordings employed in both Examples B and D. However,
of student output also provide options for the other three steps in the apology SAS (i.e.,
peer- and/or teacher-review. The sample SASs taking responsibility, explaining the situation,

and promising it won’t happen again) are asking learners to brainstorm and write down
not attempted. It could be that the learners apology scenarios and SASs, which they then
were aware of these options and chose not to exchange with classmates for apology practice.
incorporate them or that they felt the situation The teacher should ensure that each situation
did not warrant their use. However, another has specific elements (e.g., age, context, past
possibility is that learners were not able to relationship) to help students understand the
attempt them in English. As such, learners pragmatic dimensions.
may benefit if teachers focus on the omitted
steps in speaking classes. This can be done REQUEST SCENARIO
in a few ways. Teachers can prepare apology
scripts that illustrate each of the five SAS steps The students’ pragmatic ability to make a
for apologizing shown in Figure 1, as in the request is depicted in Table 2. In this scenario,
following: the speaker needs to ask an eight-year-old
sibling to turn the TV volume down so the
1 . Expressing the apology: “Listen, I’ve got speaker can study. By noting the utterance
some bad news. I’m really sorry, but I length, politeness, and sophistication of the
got into an accident with your bike, and request examples in Table 2, teachers can
the frame is broken.” identify appropriate responses. Here is the
prompt (adapted from Taguchi 2014):
2 . Taking responsibility: “It was totally my
fault. I should have been more careful.” Request scenario: You are doing homework
in your host family’s house. Your host
3 . Explaining the situation: “You see, it was brother, Ken, is an eight-year-old boy and
raining, and the road was slippery. I lost you often play with him. He is watching
control of the bike and I crashed.” TV, and it is very loud. It distracts you
from your study. You want Ken to turn
4 . Offering repair or compensation: “Of course, down the volume. What do you say to
I’ll pay to have it replaced.” Ken?
5 . Promising it won’t happen again: “It’ll never PRAGMATIC ACTIVITIES BASED ON

happen again.” STUDENT REQUESTS
After teachers cut these speech samples into These extracts show that in Example C, the
single strips, the learners mix them up and learner omitted the attention getter (a), an
then reorder. In doing so, they are exposed to element of the SAS that when left out makes
alternate options for apologizing that they may the request seem unduly harsh; this indicates
not have realized were steps of the apologizing that learners should be informed of this
SAS in English. As there is not always a important component of the request SAS.
standard order for SASs, teachers can also In Examples A, B, and D, learners were able
discuss possible variations and implications to incorporate all three parts of the request
of those options. Such an activity helps raise SAS—getting attention (a), actual request (b),
awareness of pragmatic options and targets and supporting moves (c)—though to varying
pragmatic knowledge at a receptive level. degrees. Example A is very brief and direct.
There is a noticeable difference between
At the productive level, students then create Examples B and D in terms of supporting
their own apologies based on prompts from moves (c), both before and after the head act
the teacher (e.g., “You bumped into an elderly (b), the actual request. What is more, the
person on the train” or “You spilled coffee on a opening question of Example B (“What are
work computer and have to explain it to your you watching?”) is particularly noteworthy,
boss”). Building on this type of controlled as the learner is able to strategically and
practice, teachers personalize the activity by indirectly address Ken and his TV viewing. To

Example A: Ken (a), can you turn down? (b) Example B: Ken (a), what, what are you
It’s noisy (c). I want to study (c). watching? (c) It’s good, ah, so actually,
I study, I’m studying (c). I’m doing
homework (c), so could you could you
turn, turn down volume a little bit? (b) I ah,
after that I, when I finish the homework, ah,
I want to watch with you (c).
Example C: I’m doing my homework now, Example D: Eh, Ken (a), I want to study (c).
but I can’t focus on that because TV is noisy So the room is too loud (c), so could you
(c), so would you turn down the volume? (b) turn down the TV volume? (b)
Table 2. Students’ request speech samples
build on the linguistic and strategic knowledge A range of interlocutors

students have exhibited, teachers may wish to Another lesson is to ensure that learners
focus on incorporating native-like expressions are able to make a request to a range of
for the actual request (b), such as “Would you interlocutors by adjusting age, position,
mind … ?” or “Do you think you could … ?” and social status in role plays. For practice
in the classroom, the teacher creates a
The use of softeners list of people and writes it on the board
Teachers may also wish to focus attention as follows: Person 1 = an elderly man;
on softeners, which make a request more Person 2 = a woman in a business suit;
polite and are largely missing from the rather Person 3 = a boy younger than you, etc.
direct responses above. Instead of an abrupt The teacher also writes a scenario on the
“It’s noisy,” teachers can introduce softening board; for example, “You have your hands
modifiers such as “a bit,” “kind of,” or “a full of shopping bags. You drop one and
little” and encourage learners to incorporate can’t pick it up by yourself. Ask (another
them in role plays. These softeners can also person) to help you.” In pairs or small
be used in controlled practice in which groups, students then roll a die or choose
the teacher makes a direct statement (e.g., a number to determine which person they
“It’s chilly in here. Close the window.”) will talk to. Depending on which person
that students must soften and make more they are asking for help, their output
polite (e.g., “It’s a bit chilly in here. Would should be altered accordingly. The teacher
you mind closing the window?”). After may need to demonstrate. For example,
some controlled examples, students work a response to Person 1, “an elderly man,”
in pairs to create and practice with their might be, “Excuse me, sir. Sorry to trouble
own conversations, including both a less you. Would you be able to pick up my bag
formal and a more formal version. Pairs then for me?” For Person 3, “a boy younger than
exchange dialogues and practice with their you,” it might be, “Hey, can you do me a
classmates’ original materials. Feedback from favor and hand me that bag?” The teacher
the teacher and other students helps learners and other students provide feedback on
refine their linguistic choices. strategic and linguistic choices.
After some controlled examples, students work in pairs

to create and practice with their own conversations,
including both a less formal and a more formal version.

Pragmatic appropriateness The specific activities described earlier can
Another classroom activity is for teachers to be adapted and used in relation to these
engage students in discussions about pragmatic speech acts as well. The staples of adjusting
appropriateness, which hinges largely on the interlocutor factors, introducing a range of
person being addressed (requesting something sentence stems, and practicing softening or
from a close friend or a new classmate), the intensifying language can be applied to these
situation at hand (requesting a ten-minute car and other language functions.
ride or a two-hour car ride), time constraints
(asking an employer for a letter of reference ADDING BACKGROUND TO ROLE PLAYS
with a three-day deadline or with a one-month
deadline), and so on. Question prompts may One obstacle to pragmatic practice in
include the following: language classrooms is the important element
of previous experience and personal history.
• How might your approach change When learners role-play scenarios in class,
depending on the person you are the relevance and stakes that are involved
speaking to? in a real-life situation are absent. As such, it
can sometimes be challenging for learners
• In what type of situation might you use to adopt a role and ask a friend to borrow
________ (a given strategy or utterance)? money, for instance, because they are not
able to draw on or refer to any previous
Teachers can provide any related feedback or relationship between them and their “friend.”
suggestions. If teachers notice a lack of contextual
information becoming a hindrance, they could
ADDITIONAL SPEECH ACTS either supply extra information in the role-
play setup or encourage students to imagine
The previous paragraphs have demonstrated the background.
how a needs analysis can inform pragmatic
speaking instruction for language classrooms Another solution is to use pictures (for
using the SASs for apologies and requests. example, from magazines or the Internet) to
The same approach can be used with other illustrate who the interlocutors are. Visual
language functions, such as these: images stimulate learners’ schema and make
the interaction more interesting. From a
• Complimenting: You are taking an stack of pictures face down, students select
American literature class. A good friend their own “character” prior to role-playing,
of yours, Kathy, has made an excellent thereby adding an element of spontaneity to
presentation in class today. After class, the conversation. By augmenting role plays
you want to compliment her on her in such ways, teachers increase awareness
performance. and encourage discussion about how
past interactions, relationships, and first
• Inviting: You are interested in trying a impressions affect how we strategize and say
new Italian restaurant that opened near things to people.
your campus. You know your friend Andy
likes Italian food, too. Invite him to the CONCLUSION
restaurant.
This article has suggested a number
• Thanking: Your bicycle had a flat tire, and of classroom activities that can be
you could not ride home after school. It incorporated into speaking lessons
would have taken you one hour to walk. to target pragmatic development and
Your teacher gave you a ride, along with prepare students to interact with a range
your bicycle, back to your house. Thank of interlocutors and within varying
your teacher. contextual factors. As illustrated above,

using SAS analysis of language functions • www.carla.umn.edu/speechacts/index.
such as apologizing and requesting informs html (includes descriptions, examples, and
pragmatic speaking instruction, ensuring background reading on several speech acts)
that teachers are identifying and targeting
areas their students have not yet acquired, REFERENCES
an approach to curriculum planning that
aligns with needs analysis principles (Brown Brown, J. D. 1995. The elements of language curriculum:
1995). When patterns of general student A systematic approach to program development. Boston:
performance are identified, such analysis Heinle and Heinle.
provides empirical data from which to Blum-Kulka, S., and E. Olshtain. 1984. Requests
identify students’ pragmatic needs, a and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act
realization patterns (CCSARP). Applied Linguistics 5
course of action preferable to relying on
(3): 196–213.
intuition. Once underdeveloped linguistic Center for Advanced Research on Language
and strategic areas are identified, they Acquisition. 2015. Pragmatics and speech acts.
can be used to develop exercises in the University of Minnesota: Center for Advanced
EFL classroom. In cases where individual Research on Language Acquisition. www.carla.umn.
student output varies noticeably, teachers edu/speechacts/index.html
may tailor instruction to meet specific Crystal, D. 1997. English as a global language.
student needs, either by making the content Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
more challenging or by emphasizing SAS Ishihara, N., and A. D. Cohen. 2010. Teaching and
steps that students may be unaware of or learning pragmatics: Where language and culture meet.
underutilizing. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education.
Kasper, G., and K. Rose. 2002. Pragmatic development in
a second language. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
This type of informed instruction lets students
Kinginger, C., and K. Farrell. 2004. Assessing
know what their options are in various development of meta-pragmatic awareness in study
situations, so that they can communicate and abroad. Frontiers:The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study
express themselves in the manner they intend Abroad 10: 19–42.
rather than being vulnerable to undeserved McKay, S. L. 2003. Toward an appropriate EIL
consequences due to low pragmatic speaking pedagogy: Re-examining common ELT assumptions.
ability. Through informed teaching practices, International Journal of Applied Linguistics 13 (1): 1–22.
learners will expand their range of pragmatic Mitchell, R., F. Myles, and E. Marsden. 2013.
choice and then exercise that range to achieve Second language learning theories. 3rd ed. New York:
intended interpersonal effects, thereby Routledge.
addressing two cornerstones of pragmatic Taguchi, N. 2014. Cross-cultural adaptability and
ability. development of speech act production in study
abroad. International Journal of Applied Linguistics.
www.researchgate.net/publication/263738374_
Teachers interested in addressing pragmatics Cross-cultural_adaptability_and_development_
in their classrooms may wish to consult the of_speech_act_production_in_study_abroad
following websites for additional lesson ideas –––. 2015. Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where
and resources: instructional studies were, are, and should be going.
Language Teaching 48 (1): 1–50.
• americanenglish.state.gov/resources/
teaching-pragmatics (includes practical
classroom-based lesson plans for Joseph Siegel, PhD, is Associate Professor at Meiji
pragmatics) Gakuin University, Tokyo, where he coordinates and
teaches EFL and study abroad programs. His research
• www.ello.uos.de/field.php/Pragmatics/ interests include pragmatic development, intercultural
Exercises (has sections targeting various communication, and second language listening.
types of pragmatic competence, including This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant
speech acts, politeness, and conversation Number 2677020.
structure)

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 232 (2016) 354 – 361
International Conference on Teaching and Learning English as an Additional Language,

GlobELT 2016, 14-17 April 2016, Antalya, Turkey
Indirectness in Requests in Complaint Letters to the Higher

Institution by Turkish EFL Students
Çi÷dem Karatepea*
a
Uluda÷ University Faculty of Education, Bursa, 16059, Turkey
Abstract
One of the defining characteristics of pragmatic competence is the ability to use appropriate lexico-grammatical
and syntactic indirectness strategies (Blum-Kulka et al 1989) within a particular situation. Writing a complaint letter
to an authority figure requires high pragmatic competence. However, even if learners have a good command of
grammar, they fail to express and comprehend the intended illocutionary meaning. This study aims to examine
request forms used by Turkish learners of English and NSs of English in complaint letters. The NS informants (N:
38) are mainly teachers teaching in the city of Bursa, Turkey and learners are all Turkish ELT teacher candidates
(N:295) studying at Uluda÷ University. Informants composed a letter where they asked the student registrar of
Uluda÷ University to correct their grade which appeared to be incorrectly entered as FAIL into the electronic
records. Majority of NSs made ‘conventionally indirect requests’ (Blum-Kulka et al 1989) such as ‘I’d be grateful if
you re-check your records and amend this mistake’. Besides, quite many NSs did use the imperative form. But these
are used to ask for notification about the result. On the other hand, NNSs used mainly three strategy types: Explicit
Performative (I request from you to correct this mistake), Want Statement (I want you to correct control this mistake
(please) and Suggestory Formula (If you can help in this matter, I would be really pleased). The results indicate that
teacher candidates have difficulty in choosing the right verb form and using modal verbs to indicate indirectness
appropriately.
© 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of GlobELT 2016
Keywords:Speech acts; formal requests; language awareness
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +90-224-297-2264.

E-mail address:ozlem1@uludag.edu.tr
1877-0428 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of GlobELT 2016
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.050
Çiğdem Karatepe / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 232 (2016) 354 – 361 355
1. Introduction
Language is shaped by power relations. In the case where students writing a complaint letter to a higher
education institution, they are required to use appropriate language expressing the right degree of formality and
indirectness to reflect the ‘institutionally unequal relationship’ (Economidou-Kogetsidis 2011: 3194). Language
used in formal correspondence in academic or institutional settings ‘…is characterized by higher formality,
avoidance of imperative requests (preference for conventional indirectness instead), a fairly high level of mitigation
and acknowledgement of the imposition involved’ (ibid. p. 3194). For this reason, for NNSs achieving this is a
challenging task. It requires high levels of pragmatic ability in L2. Pragmatic ability has been defined by Yule
(1996) :
The ability to deal with meaning as communicated by a speaker (or writer) and interpreted by a listener or
(a reader) and to interpret people’s intended meanings, their assumptions, their purposes or goals, and the
kinds of actions (e.g. making a request) they are performing when they speak or write (3-4) .
In fact, they have acquired this ability in their mother tongue. That is, we can expect them to put the preexisting
ability into use when they communicate in another language. But it does not happen by default. Nor can they exploit
their L2 grammar knowledge in order to use language appropriately (e.g. Felix-Brasdefer and Cohen 2012: 651).
Many studies have concluded that learners need their awareness raised so that they capitalize on’transferable L1
pragmatic knowledge in L2 contexts’ (Rose and Kasper 2001: 7). This kind of awareness-raising would enable them
to put their L2 grammar knowledge into use (Bardovi-Harlig 2001).
Turkish EFL teacher trainees do not have much experience of using English in real contexts. For this reason, they
have been observed having troubles in interaction. Nonetheless, these trainees have got a heavily grammar based
language learning background. This is partly because Turkish education is excessively test focused as the university
entrance exams play a key role in students’ lives. Therefore, our teacher trainees have always studied English in
order to pass tests.
However, research findings suggest that pragmatic competence can increase only when there is sufficient amount
of input exemplifying the use of pragmalinguistic features of language (Bialystok 1993). Thus, the present study
aims to investigate to what extent Turkish EFL teacher trainees can make use of their knowledge of pragmatics
which is based on Turkish conventions and their knowledge of grammar and appropriate use in English.
2. Method
This study examines request forms used by Turkish learners of English and NSs of English in complaint letters.
The aim is not really to see if our students can write a formal letter in the way native speakers do. This particular
text type has been selected as it is a real life activity for the students. It is possible for them to find themselves in a
position where they have to write such a letter. It gives a natural reason for using of a request and a complaint.
2.1. Research Questions
1. Do Turkish teacher candidates’ requests promote more direct or indirect request strategies?
2. Is there a preferred linguistic realization by NSs and my students for different request types?
2.2. Informants and Data Collection Tool
Turkish informants are 295 Turkish teacher candidates studying in the ELT Department of Uluda÷ University,
Faculty of Education. Their age range is 20-27 years. NS informants are from various countries: USA, UK, Ireland,
Australia and Canada. Their age group is between 20-65 years. The English corpus contains 46 letters.
Data was collected by means of a task. It is based on a hypothetical situation where a university student notices
that the grade of one the course s/he has taken in the previous term appears on the university’s web-site mistakenly
as fail. His/her academic advisor too agrees that it is an error. Students are required to compose a complaint letter to
356 Çiğdem Karatepe / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 232 (2016) 354 – 361
appeal to the registrar’s office. The nature of this kind of complaint letter allows the researcher to collect at least one
request per letter.
3. Findings and discussion
The analysis of the requests in both corpuses is based on the coding scheme described in CCSARP.
3.1. Direct Strategies
The analysis of the requests in both corpuses is based on the coding scheme described in Cross- Cultural Speech
Act Realisation Poject (CCSARP) (Blum-Kulka, House and Kasper 1989). Some letters contained more than one
request statement.
Five direct strategies have been defined:
x Mood derivable (Clean up the kitchen.)

x Explicit performative (I am asking you to move your car.)
x Hedged performative (I must/have to ask you to clean the kitchen right now.)
x Locution derivable (You’ll have to /should/ must/ ought to move your car.)
x Want Statements (I’d like to borrow your notes for a little while.) (Blum-Kulka, House and Kasper 1989: 278-
281)
Table 1: Mood derivable (Frq: frequency of occurence)
Mood derivable (imperative) Frq %
NS a) Please check your records and rectify the situtation forthwith. (request for action) 6 13.04
b) Please let me know what I can do to help correct this as soon as possible. (requests for info)
NNS a) Please check my notes again. (request for action) 17 5.76
b) Please confirm me about this situation. (request for info)
Kasper and Rose (2002:146) described four stages of the process of request development. They reported that the
imperatives were the characteristic of the second stage. The NSs informants used the imperative only when they
wanted to make a request for information (e.g. Economidou-Kogetsidis 2011: 3194).
Turkish students attempted to soften the imperative with politeness marker ‘please’. It is the only lexical
downgrader NNSs used. However, as Hartford and Bardovi-Harlig (1996) commented that this politeness marker
alone is not sufficient to mitigate to soften the force of the imperative when communicating with authorities.
Hartford and Bardovi-Harlig (1996) also reported inappropriate and insufficient mitigation and lack of deference in
learner language. They concluded that students typically made their requests with the unrealistic expectation that the
faculty members were obliged to comply with. The authors have also added that ‘requests which do not employ
sufficient mitigation or fail to address the precarious balance of the faculty as institution vs. the faculty as (over-
worked) fellow humans risk negative evaluation’ (ibid p. 67).
The next direct strategy type is the use of explicit performative. Requests with a performative verb is regarded as
the least polite form after imperatives (MartÕ 2006:1850).
Table 2: Explicit performative

Explicit performative Frq %
NS I kindly ask that this be corrected. 4 8.69
NNS a) I request you to take your time and have a look at my results. 114 36.64
b) I beg you to analyse my lessons results again and correct this mistake.
As seen in Table 2, NNS informants tended to use explicit performative often. Their choice of performative verb
was not always the right one.
Table 3: Performative Verbs

Verb NS Frq NS % NNS Frq NNS%
Request 0 0 86 30.0
Require 0 0 7 2.37
Demand 0 0 6 2.03
Ask 1 2.22 2 0.67
Beg 0 0 2 0.67
Appeal 1 2.22 0 0
Table 4: Hedged performative

Hedged performative Frq %
NS I would ask you to treat the matter with utmost urgency and rectify the error. 2 4.34
Turkish learners used no hedged performative. A close look at the example in Table 4 will show the reason why
as these two statements are heavily moralized and hedged by means of various lexical items. Our students have
never been so crafty in using their existing lexis this way.
Table 5: Locution derivable or obligation statement

Locution derivable or obligation statement Frq %
NS a) I should therefore require your office to make the appropriate changes which will I 8 17.40
hope set the records straight.
Turkish learners used no locution derivable or obligation statements.
Table 6: Want statements

Want Statements Frq %
NS I would like my transcript to be corrected as quickly as possible. 10 21.73
NNS a) I want the problem to be solved. 93 31.5
b) Therefore, I would like you to check and correctthis problem. 16 5.42
c) I am waiting for a solution. 3 1.01
NNS total 114 38.64
The most striking finding about the ‘Want Statements’ is the use of ‘I want ....’. It occurred 93 times (31.5%).
Not surprisingly, none of the NSs used it. Biesenbach-Lucas (2007) also found that NNSs tended to use this form
rather than conventionalized indirect forms. Röver and Al-Gahtani (2015) reports that beginner group preferred to
use this form.
Of 93 ‘I want ...’ statements, 23 of which look like the Turkish formulaic expression ‘Gere÷inin yapÕlmasÕnÕ
(saygÕlarÕmla) arz ederim.’.
One linguistic means for expressing deference is using impersonalized and conventionalized formula. Our
Turkish teacher trainees may know about conventional language which the register of Turkish formal letter writing
tradition requires.It seems that those students created an impersonal form which sounds like the Turkish formula.
Cohen says that L1 knowledge is both blessing and a curse. In the process of development of pragmatic skills,
learners are able to improvise as their knowledge of grammar and vocabulary increases (Brasdefer and Cohen 2012;
Kasper and Rose 2002). Economidou-Kogetsidis (2011) points out that particularly learners in EFL contexts are at a
disadvantageous position as they have little contact with the culture and its conventions. For this reason, they strive
to adapt their existing knowledge of request conventions to a particular situation.
Table 7: Expectation statements (NNS only)

Want Statements Frq %
NNS a) I hope you will concern my problem. 24 8.13
b) I wish to be done what is necessary. 11 3.72
5 different forms (I inform you, I believe, I consult you, I inform you) 9 3.05
Total 45 15.25
In addition to the categories described in Blum-Kulka, House and Kasper (1989), a category of expectation
statements have emerged from the NNS data in the present study. NS informants did not prefer to use any
expectation statement. NNS informants made use of their verb repertoire to create different types of expectation
statements. It is interesting to note that using this kind of statements does not meet the requirements of Turkish
formal letter writing traditions.
3.2. Conventionally indirect requests
There are 2 sub-strategies under the title of Conventionally Indirect Strategies:

• Suggestory formula (How about cleaning up the kitchen.)
• Query preparatory (Can/ could I borrow your notes.)(Source: Blum-Kulka, House and Kasper 1989: 278-
281)
Table 8: Suggestory formula

Suggestory formula Frq %
NS a) I should be grateful if you would alter your records as soon as you can. 10 21.73
b) I would appreciate it very much if you could at your earliest convenience
look into this matter for me to see if / where an error has occurred.
NNS a) I would be very grateful if you don’t mind you spent some time and deal 42 14.23
with it.
‘I should be grateful if you would...’ is a formulaic expression. Formulaic expressions are used to express the
writer’s gratefulness for immediate action to amend the mistake and his/her appreciation of the action on his/her
behalf. 4 NSs informants used the verb ‘appreciate’ as the main verb to expresses gratitude. Lin (2009) explains
effect of this expression as follows:
‘...The modal would together with the conditional clause starting with ‘if’ make the formula a very indirect query
preparatory, which is used in formal and or high-imposition situations... ‘ (p.1648).
Lin (2009) reported that Taiwanese English majors failed to use this formula. Even if they attempted to create a
similar effect by using their language repertoire, they could not use some lexical features appropriately. One of such
features is the use of ‘will’ instead of ‘would’ as in ‘I will appreciate it if you can ...’ (p. 1649). Röver and Al
Gahtani (2015) refers to if clause without a modal verb as ‘bare-if clause’ (p. 399).
In the present study, NNS informants too attempted to express appreciation by using verbs like ‘I would be glad/
thankful/ pleased’. There are 42 different variations of combination of such vocabulary but none of them is the
conventional form.
Table 9: Query preparatory

Query preparatory Frq %
NS a) Could you please correct your records accordingly and notify me 11 24
that necessary change has been made?
b) Could you please set up a meeting with the prof of the classand
someone from your office asap to correct this mistake?
NNS a) Would you deal with and make a correction there, please? 3 1.01
b) Could you do what is necessary to correct my mark?
There is only one modal initial interrogative request form: ‘Could you (please)…?’. This occurred 8 times with 7
different verbs in the English corpus. Six of them are with a politeness marker ‘please’. All these requests are with
YOU-orientation. This form is described as a conventionally indirect negative politeness strategy. Interrogative form
appears to give the reader freedom of action as it seemingly gives the option of saying ‘no’ to the requester (Vergaro
2002).
‘Can you....?’ and ‘Could you....?’ structure is used frequently occurring in classroom environment? However,
learners did not tend to use it.
Another form our learners did not use is ‘looking forward to hearing from you.’
Maier (1992) says it has ‘an optimistic tone. It still invites the authorities to take action and correct the mistake. In
all instances it was used by NSs it is the second request. In a sense, it can be regarded as a post-request which is
used to highlight the main request. It also asks for a reply. With its conventionalized formulaic structure, it is a good
way of rounding up the letter.
It also indicates a different type of relationship between an authority and the people who get service from them. In
Turkish situation we do not expect to receive any reply. But Anglo American way apparently indicates that the
student can get a reply from the authorities. In formal letters in English, use of modality plays an important role in
expressing politeness.
Another category which is not included in the CCSRP is the avoidance strategy. Five NSs and 11 NNSs did not add
request statement in the letter. They appeared to expect the reader to make interpretation from the explanation of the
problem.
4. Conclusion and implications
In the light of the findings reported above the answer to the research questions will be presented. The research
questions are:
1-Do Turkish teacher candidates’ requests promote more direct or indirect request strategies?
2-Is there a preferred linguistic realization by NSs and Turkish EFL teacher trainees for different request types?
Table 10: Total distribution of strategy types

Type of NS NNS
Request
Direct strategies Number % Number %
Mood derivable 6 13.04 17 5.76
Explicit performative 4 8.69 114 36.64
Hedged performative 2 4.34 0 0
Locution derivable or obligation 8 17.40 0 0
statement
Want statements 10 21.73 114 31.5
Expectation statements 0 0 45 15.25
TOTAL 30 65.21 290 98.30
Conventionally indirect strategies

Suggestory Formula 10 21.73 42 14.23
Query preparatory 11 24.0 3 1.01
TOTAL 21 32.30 45 15.25
Avoidance strategy 5 10.86 113.72
GRAND TOTAL 56 346
Table 10 shows an overwhelming number of students preferred a direct statement. That is, NNS informants show
a clear tendency to use direct statements in requests while composing a formal complaint letter. Perhaps due to the
severity of the error committed by the faculty registrar in the hypothetical situation, 65 % NSs preferred direct
strategies but with their selection of modal verb and form their direct requests are not as blunt as those of the ones in
NNSs’ letters. They used the imperative to ask for information. Unlike the NNSs , they used want statements with a
modal verb.
Our Turkish teacher trainees tend to use direct requests which are ‘imperatives’ and ‘explicit performatives’,
‘want statements’ and ‘expectation statements’. Even if they show a tendency towards formulaic forms and usage
modal verbs, these have issues regarding accuracy and appropriate vocabulary choice.
NSs also used the imperative form but their purpose was different. They asked for information in these requests.
However, NNSs asked for action in these imperative forms. Other forms which are absent in the NNS data are:
interrogative form with ‘could’, asking for feedback at the end of the letter and rounding up the letter with the
formulaic expression ‘I will look forward to hearing from you soon.’. It is significant that several NSs avoided
making an explicit request.
Economidou-Kogetsidis (2011) points out that particularly learners in EFL contexts are at a disadvantageous
position as they have little contact with the culture and its conventions. Our Turkish teacher trainees may know
about conventional language which the register of a formal letter requires in Turkish but as they had not been taught
this in English, they failed to make use of their grammar and vocabulary repertoire.
Research findings indicate that a solid grammar and vocabulary knowledge does not necessarily lead to
appropriate language use. Brasdefer and Cohen (2012) and Röver and Al Gahtani (2015) argue for explicit teaching
about appropriateness so that learners learn to notice functional use of language.
Acknowledgement
I would like to thank all my NS informants, many of whom I have never met personally. I also thank my former
students (and now colleagues) who kindlyhelped me either by collecting NS data and/or by composing letters
themselves.
References
Akar, D.(2002). The macro contextual factors shaping business discourse: the Turkish case. International Research in Applied Linguistics,40,
305-322.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2001). Evaluating the empirical evidence: Grounds for instruction in pragmatics? InRose, K. R. and Kasper, G.
(Eds),Pragmatics in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bialystok, E. (1993). Symbolic representation and attention control in pragmatic competence. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka
(Eds.),Interlanguage pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Biesenbach-Lucas, S.(2007). Students writing e-mails to the faculty: An examination of e-politeness among native and nonnative speakers of
English, Language Learning and Technology, 11(2), 59-81.
Blum-Kulka, S., H. Juliane &K. Gabriele (Eds.), (1989).Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Norwood: Ablex Publishing
Coorporation.
Economidou-Kogetsidis, M.(2011). ‘Please answer me as soon as possible’: Pragmatic failure in non-native speakers’ e-mail requests to faculty.
Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 3193-3215.
Economidou-Kogetsidis, M.(2008). Internal and external mitigation in interlanguage request production: the case of Greek learners of English
Journal of Politeness Research, 4, 111-138.
Felix-Brasdefer, J. Cesar, A. D. Cohen (2012).Teaching Pragmatics in the foreign language classroom: grammar as a communicative resource.
Hispania, 95(4), 650-669.
Hartford, B.& K. Bardovi-Harlig (2006). ‘At your earliest convenience’:a study of written student requests to the faculty. In Bouton, L. (Ed.),
Pragmatics and Language Learning, vol.7. Urbana-Campaign: Division of English as an International Language, University of Illinois, 55-
69.
Kasper, G. &K. R. Rose(2001). Pragmatics in Language Teaching InRose, K. R. and Kasper, G. (2001). Pragmatics in Language Teaching.
Kasper, G. &K. R. Rose (2002). Pragmatic Development in a Second Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
LoCastro, V.(2003).An introduction to pragmatics: Social action for language teachers. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.
Lin, Y.(2009). Query preparatory modal: Cross-linguistic and cross-situational variations in request modification. Journal of Pragmatics, 41,
1636-1656.
Maier, P.(1992), Politeness Strategies in Business Letters by Native and Non Native English Speakers, English for Specific Purposes, 11, 189-
205.
MartÕ, L.(2006). Indirectness and politeness in Turkish-German bilingual and Turkish monolingual requests, Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 1836-
1869.
Röver, C. &S. Al-Gahtani (2015), The development of ESL proficiency and pragmatic competence, ELT Journal, 69(4), 395-404.
Rose, K. R. &G. Kasper (2001). Pragmatics in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vergaro, C.(2002). ‘Dear Sirs, what would you if you in our position?, Discourse strategies in Italian and English money chasing letters’, Journal
of Pragmatics, 34, 1211-1233.
Yule, G.(1996). Pragmatics. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
AMANDA HILLIARD
United States
Twelve Activities for

Teaching the Pragmatics of
Complaining to L2 Learners
T
ake a moment to think of your students. Can they use English
politely to talk to a variety of people without offending anyone?
Would they be able to interact with someone from Asia just as
effectively as with someone from South America? Do they know how
to complain appropriately in English and to respond in English to the
complaints of others? If you answered “no” to any of these questions,
your students would definitely benefit from an increased focus on
pragmatics in your English language classes.
Pragmatic competence, or the ability to use from different language backgrounds (Olshtain
language appropriately in a variety of contexts, and Weinbach 1993; Murphy and Neu 1996).
is a critical skill for communication in a second Even advanced learners tend to transfer
language (L2).Thus, teaching that focuses on pragmatics from their first language and culture
developing students’ abilities to communicate to their L2. For example, when comparing the
effectively in an L2 must also include a focus on complaints of native and non-native speakers
developing students’ pragmatic competence. of Hebrew, Olshtain and Weinbach (1993)
This article discusses issues related to pragmatics found that non-native learners tended to give
in general as well as specific pragmatic challenges longer and less severe complaints, while native
one group of English as a second language speakers’ complaints were shorter, more
(ESL) students in the United States faced direct, and more severe.
when complaining in their L2. Next, activities
for teaching the pragmatics of complaining Although pragmatic differences can result in
are suggested. It is hoped that by highlighting positive transfer if the speech act is similar
specific problems with one group of students in the first and second languages, it can also
and presenting ways to address these issues, result in negative transfer if there are cultural
this article will encourage teachers to examine and pragmatic differences between the two
their own classes, discover their own students’ languages. For example, when Russians and
pragmatic issues, and incorporate activities to Moroccans were asked to react to the idea
teach pragmatics into their own classes. of someone stealing their parking space in
a parking lot, the Russians responded with
SECOND-LANGUAGE LEARNERS AND warnings and threats, while the Moroccans
PRAGMATIC COMPETENCE either opted not to complain or used much
softer strategies. The Russians felt that people
Research clearly shows that cultural differences should “play fair” in a parking lot, while
lead to pragmatic differences among learners the Moroccans felt that it was not a serious

offense and something that they might even their students will not develop a sufficient
do themselves (Olshtain and Weinbach 1993). level of pragmatic competence for effective
Similarly, Eslami-Rasekh (2005) tells the story communication in English.
of a female graduate student in the United States
feeling offended after being complimented on In brief, pragmatic and cultural differences can
her appearance by a male office mate because result in negative transfer and inappropriate
in her country, “compliments on looks and behavior and speech for L2 learners. In
appearances by a male to a female can have addition, students’ pragmatic competence
sexual connotations” (203). These examples may lag behind their other skills and language
show that different cultural and language knowledge; it may also suffer from insufficient
backgrounds can lead to miscommunication input and lack of coverage in English language
and pragmatic errors for L2 learners. textbooks. As pragmatic competence is
critical for communication in any language,
In addition, research shows not only that lessons targeting the instruction of pragmatics
the pragmatics of native speakers and L2 through various speech acts should be
learners are often quite different, but also that incorporated into the L2 curriculum.
learners’ pragmatic competence is often less
advanced than their grammatical knowledge THE SPEECH ACT OF COMPLAINING
(Bardovi-Harlig and Dörnyei 1998). Röver
(2005) suggests that developing pragmatic Speech acts are the most basic unit of
competence may be especially difficult for communication, with each speech act
students in an English as a foreign language accomplishing a different communicative
(EFL) environment; while ESL students— function. This article focuses on developing
living in an English-speaking country—are L2 students’ pragmatic competence for the
exposed to plentiful pragmatic input through speech act of complaining, which is used to
daily interactions with English language express the speaker’s dissatisfaction. Speech
speakers, for many EFL students the greatest acts can be broken down into smaller
source of pragmatic input is most likely their components, or strategies, that speakers use
English language teacher. Furthermore, to accomplish the communicative function.
research shows that pragmatic activities For example, Murphy and Neu (1996, 199–
in English language textbooks suffer from 203) identify four strategies that can be used
a lack of contextualization, insignificant in the speech act of complaining. The speaker
coverage of pragmatic information, and first initiates the conversation and explains
inconsistent coverage of various pragmatic the purpose, then makes a complaint. This
features (Diepenbroek and Derwing 2013). is followed by a justification or explanation
This finding suggests that if EFL teachers rely for the complaint and a request to rectify the
solely on materials from language textbooks, situation, as shown in Table 1.
Strategy Example
1 . Initiation and explanation of “Excuse me, professor, but I wanted to talk to you
purpose about my grade.”
2 . A complaint “My grade’s too low.”
3 . A justification “I come to every class, and I study hard. I just didn’t

do well on one test.”
4 . A request “Can I do an extra credit assignment to improve my
grade?”
Table 1. Four strategies for complaining (adapted from Murphy and Neu 1996, 199–203)

Depending on the relationship of the Results
speakers, the situation, and the context, not For all three complaint role plays, the native
every complaint will include every strategy. speakers followed the same format, including
However, knowing the available strategies an initiation, a statement of the complaint, a
for completing a specific speech act is a good justification or explanation of the complaint,
starting place for analyzing L2 learners’ ability and a request. In contrast, the L2 students did
to accomplish pragmatically appropriate not always include all four strategies in their
speech acts in their L2, as well as for creating complaints. Although all the students included
materials and classroom activities to develop a clearly stated complaint in their role
students’ pragmatic competence for a plays, some did not include an initiation, a
particular speech act. justification or explanation of their complaint,
or a request. To many English speakers,
ESL STUDENTS’ PRAGMATIC leaving out an initiation or justification makes
COMPETENCE FOR COMPLAINTS the student appear rude or impolite, while
not including a request could mean that
To determine the pragmatic competence the student will not receive a satisfactory
of my own ESL students, I recorded the resolution to the complaint.
complaints of 27 students completing a role
play in pairs. The students were allowed to The students’ videos were also evaluated
choose from three scenarios: complaining to determine whether they successfully
to a server at a restaurant, complaining to a completed the speech act. Eighty-six percent
neighbor about a noisy party, and complaining of the students successfully completed the
to a teacher about a grade. The students’ complaint in the restaurant role play; the most
videos were analyzed for the speech act of common problem was that students were too
complaining and then compared to videos aggressive and wound up criticizing rather
of six native-speaking English teachers than complaining. For the noisy-neighbor
completing the same tasks. Finally, the overall situation, 73 percent of the students offered
pragmatic appropriateness of the L2 learners pragmatically correct complaints; the most
was judged by a native speaker to determine common problems were being either too
whether the students were able to successfully aggressive or too indirect. Only 56 percent
complain in their L2. of students successfully completed the
Problem Example from Video
Aggressive Complaint “Is there something wrong with me? Why you hate me?”
“It’s not fair. Everyone in the class get A, A. Just me. It’s not fair.”
Criticism of Teacher “And you put me low grade. And you, you didn’t grade me that
well.”
Distrust of Teacher “I have my American friend, he always help me. So I’m sure 100
percent of my answers, they are correct. So don’t tell me it’s wrong
or something, because I’m sure.”
“But when you check and you write on blackboard, are you sure
this is my name? You put my grades in my name, you don’t put
somebody else? Because you have some guys, you know, they are
lower grade, but you put for them A.”
Threat “I will gonna go to the office and complain about you. I will wait
till tomorrow. Nothing change, I will gonna go to the office and
complain. I don’t want to do that, but … ”
Table 2. Pragmatically inappropriate complaint to a teacher by an L2 student

When complaining, L2 learners who lack pragmatic competence in
their second language may appear rude, impolite, or aggressive,
particularly if they are speaking to someone with higher status.
complaint to the teacher; common problems complaining as the native speakers. In addition,
included making inappropriate requests and between 14 and 44 percent of the students
aggressively blaming the teacher. were not successful at making a pragmatically
appropriate complaint in English, with
When complaining, L2 learners who lack common problems of being too aggressive or
pragmatic competence in their second language criticizing rather than complaining to their
may appear rude, impolite, or aggressive, partner. These results indicate that L2 students
particularly if they are speaking to someone with make pragmatic errors and highlight the need
higher status. In this study, students either were for explicit instruction of pragmatics in the
often too aggressive when making a complaint language classroom.
or initiated a criticism blaming their interlocutor,
as in the example shown in Table 2.When this HOW TO TEACH THE PRAGMATICS OF
student role-played a complaint to a teacher about COMPLAINING
his grade, he started with an aggressive complaint,
asking why the teacher hated him, and went on to It is clear from the results of the video analysis
criticize the teacher directly. After his partner— that my students needed targeted instruction
the “teacher” in the role play—explained that the to develop pragmatic competence for
low grade was due to a low test score, the student complaining in English. The following section
argued with the teacher, saying that his American presents 12 activities teachers can incorporate
friend told him his test answers were correct into their classroom to help develop students’
and suggesting that the teacher had put another pragmatic competence. While the examples
student’s scores in his gradebook online. Finally, here focus on the speech act of complaining,
the student finished by threatening to lodge an teachers can easily adapt the activities to focus
official complaint, to which his partner responded on other speech acts.
that he was scared of the student. Clearly,
this is not a pragmatically appropriate way to Activity 1: Discussion of speech act
complain to a professor in the United States, According to Limberg (2015), class discussions
or nearly any other country for that matter. that compare students’ native language
(L1) and culture with the target language
In summary, analysis of the students’ videos and culture help raise students’ pragmatic
showed that students did not use the same awareness of cultural norms. Students discuss
strategies to accomplish the speech act of the questions in Table 3 in small groups
Discussion Questions for Complaining

1 . What is a complaint? What are some situations in which you might complain to
someone?
2 . What do people say to express a complaint in your first language? How is it different
from what people say to express a complaint in English?
3 . Is it common to complain about bad service in your country? Is it common to complain
to a parent, a boss, or a teacher? Why or why not?
4 . Would you complain differently to a friend, a server, and a teacher? Why or why not?
Table 3. Discussion questions for the complaint speech act

Instructions: Imagine you are complaining to someone in your first language. Write down
what you would say for the three situations in the chart below, and then translate them
directly to English without changing anything. How does the English version sound?
Your First Language English
Situation 1:
Your classmate always comes late to group
meetings and is not helping at all with your
group’s presentation. Complain to that classmate.
Situation 2:
Your son was supposed to clean his room and
take out the trash. He has not done either of these
chores. Complain to your son.
Situation 3:
Your supervisor has been giving you a lot of extra
work and projects, but your coworkers are not
busy. Complain to your supervisor.
Table 4. Worksheet for comparing complaints in the L1 and English
and then as a class to highlight pragmatic • In your first language, how do you complain
differences between the students’ L1 and L2 differently to a friend, a child, a supervisor,
speech acts of complaining. As students may and a teacher? Is this the same for
be unaware of the pragmatic and cultural complaining in English? Why or why not?
differences between their L1 and L2, these
discussions help them avoid negative pragmatic • How can you improve the complaints you
transfer when they complain in their L2. wrote in English?
Activity 2: Compare L1 and L2 complaints • Why can’t you just translate complaints
Eslami-Rasekh (2005) and Limberg (2015) directly from your first language?
both suggest activities in which students
compare speech acts in their native language When comparing the L1 response with the
with speech acts in their target language in English translation, students notice which
order to raise their pragmatic awareness. For responses may be inappropriate in their L2.
example, teachers start by asking students Moreover, as the situations include three
about the last time they complained and different power relations, the translations may
exactly what they said in their L1. Then, using a reveal how social status affects complaints
translation activity described by Eslami-Rasekh differently in their first and second languages.
(2005), students complete the worksheet in
Table 4 and discuss their translations. Activity 3: Reading texts or listening to
passages about complaining in other cultures
After completing the worksheet and sharing Another way to raise students’ pragmatic
their answers, students discuss the following awareness is to have them read texts, listen
questions in small groups to highlight possible to passages, or watch videos that give explicit
negative pragmatic transfer from their L1 to information about the speech act in another
English: country. After students read or listen to
information about the speech act, they will
• Do your complaints seem polite and not only be able to compare the information
appropriate in English? Why or why not? with their knowledge of the speech act in their

Effective Complaining: USA TODAY News Video and Transcript
Source: www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2013/05/25/money-quick-
tips-effective-complaining/2352371
1 . What pieces of advice does the woman give for complaining? List them below:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
2 . Which piece of advice do you agree with the most? Do you disagree with any of the
advice? Why?
3 . How is the advice different from advice you would give for complaining in your first
language?
Table 5. Video source for effective complaining and related discussion questions
first language, but they will also be able to teachers may want to include passages and
apply the information and produce the speech information from countries where English
act in their second language. An example of is not the main language spoken. This is
a USA TODAY video source for complaining helpful when students are more likely to use
along with discussion questions for students is English to interact with other non-native
included in Table 5. English speakers from neighboring countries;
learning about the pragmatics for complaining
Another resource for teachers can be found in these contexts may be more practical for
at: www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learning students. For example, a teacher in Korea
english/radio/specials/1331_howto_feedback/ could have students read English passages
index.shtml. This BBC learning resource about Japanese and Chinese cultural norms
includes activities for making a complaint, related to complaining, take notes in the chart
apologizing, accepting an apology, and other shown in Table 6, and then discuss as a class.
speech acts. The website has complaints This activity will raise students’ pragmatic
students can listen to, along with explanations awareness for complaining with other non-
and useful phrases and vocabulary. After native English speakers in the region.
listening, students compare what they learned
with their knowledge of complaints in their L1 Activity 4: Giving examples of complaints in
to help raise their pragmatic awareness. the second language
Limberg (2015) suggests giving students
Although the examples above focus on specific examples and scenarios so they can
complaining in the United States and England, compare speech acts in their first and second
Cultural Group Notes Similarities to Differences from

Korean Complaints Korean Complaints
Chinese complaints
Japanese complaints
Table 6. Chart for comparing complaining pragmatics among languages

languages. These examples can be taken from 4 . How do these compare to the complaint
textbook dialogues, websites, or television expressions used in the given example?
shows and movies. After students listen to a
complaint, they discuss the example to raise An added benefit of using online materials,
their awareness of differences in cultural television shows, or movies is that students
norms. For example, Limberg (2015, 281) have a chance to listen to people making
suggests having advanced students discuss the authentic complaints in English. This provides
following questions after listening to the L2 them with both linguistic and cultural
example (these questions are adapted to the information that develops their pragmatic
topic of complaints): competence in complaining.
1 . Would you respond differently in that Activity 5: Presenting L2 strategies for

scenario if it had happened in your complaining
culture? Limberg (2015) and Eslami-Rasekh (2005) both
recommend presenting students with specific
2 . How do you feel about the complaint, steps for completing speech acts, which provides
and how do the speakers in the given scaffolding and support for students who are
context feel? not sure how to perform them in their L2.The
steps are introduced in Part 1 of the worksheet
3 . Which expressions and strategies do in Table 7. Students then order phrases in English
you have in your L1 to complain to each to complete the speech act in Part 2 and practice
other? making a new complaint in Part 3.
Part 1. Imagine your neighbor is having a loud party, and it is getting late.You need to
sleep and wake up early tomorrow. How would you complain to your neighbor? In English,
there are four basic steps for complaining, as shown in this example:
Step 1. Greeting: “Hi, I’m your next-door neighbor.”
Step 2. Complaint: “It’s pretty loud.”
Step 3. Explanation: “I have to work tomorrow.”
Step 4. Request: “And I was wondering if you could, maybe, tone it down just a little and
not be quite so loud.”
Part 2. Now imagine that you want to complain to a server at a restaurant. Can you put
the following phrases in order to make a complaint?
“Can you take it back?” “I don’t think you have the right order for me.”
“Um, excuse me.” “I’m a vegetarian, but you brought me a hamburger.”
Step 1. Greeting:_____________________________________________________
Step 2. Complaint:____________________________________________________
Step 3. Explanation:___________________________________________________
Step 4. Request:______________________________________________________
Part 3. Now make your own complaint. Imagine that your classmate always comes late to
group meetings and is not helping at all with your group’s presentation. Complain to that
classmate.
Step 1. Greeting:_____________________________________________________
Step 2. Complaint:____________________________________________________
Step 3. Explanation: __________________________________________________
Step 4. Request:______________________________________________________
Table 7. Worksheet for completing the complaint speech act

Activity 6: Developing pragmalinguistics the grammar, vocabulary, and phrasal
through grammar and vocabulary instruction chunks students will need improves their
Pragmatic competence includes both pragmalinguistic competence and their overall
pragmalinguistic competence, or the pragmatic competence.
linguistic knowledge of forms and speaking
strategies for appropriate language use, and Students will feel more confident complaining
sociopragmatic competence, or the knowledge in their second language once they have the
of “social conditions governing language appropriate pragmalinguistic knowledge to
use” (Röver 2005, 4). Students might complete the speech act. Table 8 contains
make pragmatic mistakes simply because examples of useful language and a practice
they lack linguistic knowledge of how to exercise to help students learn the vocabulary
complete the speech act in their L2. In this and grammar they need to make socially
case, introducing, reviewing, and practicing appropriate complaints in English.
Step 1: Saying you have a Complaint

1 . Excuse me, but I’d like to make a complaint.
2 . I’m sorry to bother you, but I think there’s something wrong with … .
3 . I’m afraid I’ve got a bit of a problem.You see, … .
4 . I’m sorry to have to say this, but there’s a slight problem with … .
5 . Excuse me, but there appears/seems to be a problem with … .
(Adapted from: www.teach-this.com/images/resources/complaining-and-apologizing-
useful-language.pdf)
Step 2: Stating the Problem
Complaints can be statements reacting to a negative behavior, attitude, or habit. Examples:
1 . My students don’t turn in their homework on time.
2 . Children spend too much time playing video games.
Complaints can also be statements reacting to a condition. Examples:
1 . The office is too hot.
2 . This city has too much air pollution.
3 . Rent is too expensive in this neighborhood.
(Adapted from: www.teach-this.com/images/resources/complaints-apologies-and-
requests.pdf)
Step 3: Making a Request
Requests usually follow a complaint. Use “please,” “I would be grateful,” or “I would
appreciate it” to make a request more polite. Examples:
1 . Could/Can you please ... [turn in your homework at the beginning of class]?
2 . I would be grateful if you could/would ... [come to class on time].
3 . I would appreciate it if you could/would ... [clean up your room].
Must and/or insist make a request stronger:
1 . You must ... [turn in your homework at the beginning of class].
2 . I must insist that you ... [come to class on time].
(Adapted from: www.teach-this.com/images/resources/complaints-apologies-and-
requests.pdf)
Practice:
Make a complaint for the following situation:You’re eating at a restaurant, but the service
has been slow, the server brought the wrong order, and the silverware is dirty. Use the
vocabulary above to complain to the server and make a request.
Table 8. Useful language for the complaint speech act

Students will feel more confident complaining in their
second language once they have the appropriate
pragmalinguistic knowledge to complete the speech act.
Activity 7: Discourse Completion Tasks Activity 8: Analyzing and repairing pragmatic

Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs)—which errors
contain prompts to elicit different pragmatic Another activity that develops students’
responses—are often used to test learners’ pragmatic competence is having them
pragmatic knowledge; however, they are also analyze, explain, and repair examples of
useful as a class activity to develop students’ pragmatic errors, as in the example in Table
pragmatic competence (Eslami-Rasekh 10. Once they have rewritten the script,
2005), as in the following activity: students can act out the new, pragmatically
appropriate version for the class. Analyzing
1 . Divide students into small groups. and correcting pragmatic errors raises
Provide each group with several DCTs students’ pragmatic awareness and
like the one in Table 9 and have students competence. Afterwards, students can apply
work together to discuss and complete the same analysis and repair to their own
each task. conversations and experiences.
2 . Have students form new groups and Activity 9: Role play with discussion
compare and discuss their answers. Have Role plays are a great way for students to
each group choose their best rendition practice completing the speech act in a
and act it out for the class. variety of situations. In class, students can
practice using role-play cards like the ones
3 . As a class, discuss the appropriateness in Table 11 (available from www.teach-this.
of each rendition and any pragmatic com/images/resources/complaint-cards.
issues that arise. By comparing pdf) that specify the situation, complaint,
answers, discussing, and evaluating the and request. It is important to give students
appropriateness of the DCTs, students a variety of contexts and social settings,
become more aware of negative including situations that vary their social
pragmatic transfer they may be making status and that of their interlocutor (i.e.,
in their L2. the same status, a higher status, and a
Discourse Completion Task
Instructions: Your classmate always comes late to group meetings and is not helping at all
with your group’s presentation. Complain to that classmate and answer his question:
You: _____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
Classmate: Are you serious? I think I have done quite a lot. Do the other members of the
group agree with you?
You: _____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
Table 9. Discourse Completion Task

Instructions: Your friend goes to complain to his English teacher about his grade,
but the teacher gets upset with him. Look at what your friend said below. How would
you change his complaint so the teacher would not get upset? Why should he say
things differently?
Student: I want to talk about my grade.

Teacher: Okay, what seems to be the problem?
Student: It’s not fair. Everyone in the class got an A except me. It’s not fair.You gave me a
low grade. Is there something wrong with me? Why do you hate me?
Teacher: I’m not treating you unfairly.You don’t attend my class regularly, and you didn’t
do very well on the last test. That’s why your grade is so low.
Student: I have an American friend, and he always helps me. So I’m 100 percent sure
that my answers are correct. So don’t tell me they’re wrong or something, because
I’m sure.
Teacher: I’m sorry, but we went over the answers to the test in class. Your answers
were not correct. If you want, we can go over the answers again and I can explain them
for you.
Student: No, I don’t want to go over the test. I’m gonna go to the office and complain
about you. I will wait till tomorrow. If nothing changes, I’m gonna go to the office and
complain. I don’t want to do that, but … .
Table 10. Complaint script for analysis and revision
lower status). Pragmatics vary culturally make a pragmatically appropriate “good

depending on context and social status, so it version” and a pragmatically inappropriate
is not sufficient for students to practice just “bad version” for each situation. When
one scenario. students act out the bad version for the
class, their classmates should discuss the
After students have completed their role mistakes they made. After the students
plays individually, they can act them out for act out the good version, their classmates
the entire class. The teacher can then lead a discuss how the students repaired the
class discussion of the students’ word choice, mistakes in the bad version. This activity
complaint style, and reactions to their partner. will improve awareness of students’
pragmatic issues and ways they can
Activity 10: Good version/Bad version resolve them.
Teachers can expand on the traditional
role play by giving students a variety of Activity 11: Include a focus on apologizing
situations, like those on the role-play While this article has focused on
cards in Table 11, and asking them to complaining, it should be noted that the
Pragmatics vary culturally depending on context and

social status, so it is not sufficient for students
to practice just one scenario.

Analyzing and correcting pragmatic errors raises students’
pragmatic awareness and competence.
speech act of apologizing can be taught Activity 12: Include a variety of cultural
alongside complaining. Appropriate backgrounds
responses to complaints often include Pragmatics and culture are diverse and can
apologies, so the role-play and partner vary from region to region and even from
activities above will require students to person to person. Pragmatic competence
practice apologizing as well as complaining. necessitates the ability to communicate
As Limberg (2015, 276) notes, apologizing appropriately with speakers from different
requires learners “to take responsibility backgrounds in a variety of situations; thus,
for an offence, assess its severity in the it is important to include a range of variability
sociocultural context of the interaction, and within pragmatic lessons. As Limberg (2015)
restore social harmony in an adequate and notes, students need flexibility in their
acceptable manner.” language choices so they can adapt to a wide
range of communicative situations. Students
Thus, in the activities above, when students who are likely to interact with other non-
discuss and compare complaint strategies native speakers in the region should be given
in their L1 and English, they can also role-play situations and contexts that require
discuss and compare apology strategies. them to complain to other non-native
When students learn vocabulary and speakers in the activities. Students may need
grammar for complaints, they can also to adapt their language choices, depending
learn the vocabulary and grammar to make on the power relationship between speakers.
an appropriate apology. Finally, when Discussion activities should treat culture as a
students practice role plays, teachers can multifaceted concept rather than reducing the
raise their awareness of both the pragmatics target language or other culture to simplified
of complaining and apologizing in English rules. Negotiating communication
by discussing the appropriateness of the between speakers of different languages is
responses to the complaints. always complex, encompassing a diversity of
Situation Situation Situation Situation

Your next-door You are a teacher, You are at a You are a student,
neighbor is having a and your student restaurant, and the and you think you
loud party. always comes late to server brought the should have gotten
class. wrong order. a higher grade on
Complaint your last English
Music too loud Complaint Complaint presentation.
Late to class Ordered tea, not
Request coffee Complaint
Turn it down Request Low grade on
Arrive on time Request presentation
A cup of tea
Request
Explain why the grade
is so low
Table 11. Role-play cards

Students may need to adapt their language choices,
depending on the power relationship between speakers.
communication styles. It is essential to keep pragmatic competence, we can equip them to

this in mind as students explore the many communicate more effectively and confidently
alternatives and their individual justifications in English.
for each communicative context.
CONCLUSION REFERENCES
Aksoyalp,Y., and T. E. Toprak. 2015. Incorporating

In order to communicate effectively in
pragmatics in English language teaching: To what
English, students must develop pragmatic
extent do EFL course books address speech acts?
competence alongside other language skills International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English
and knowledge. Developing students’ Literature 4 (2): 125–133.
pragmatic competence in English is critical, Bardovi-Harlig, K., and Z. Dörnyei. 1998. Do language
as cultural differences can lead to negative learners recognize pragmatic violations? Pragmatic
pragmatic transfer, resulting in inappropriate versus grammatical awareness in instructed L2
behavior and speech, as shown in the video learning. TESOL Quarterly 32 (2): 233–259.
analysis of my own ESL students. Moreover, Diepenbroek, L., and T. Derwing. 2013. To what extent
students may suffer from both a lack of do popular ESL textbooks incorporate oral fluency
appropriate pragmatic input, especially for and pragmatic development? TESL Canada Journal 30
those studying in an EFL context (Röver (7): 1–20.
2005), and an insufficient focus on pragmatic Eslami-Rasekh, Z. 2005. Raising the pragmatic
awareness of language learners. ELT Journal 59 (3):
development in their language textbooks
199–208.
(Diepenbroek and Derwing 2013; Aksoyalp Limberg, H. 2015. Principles for pragmatics teaching:
and Toprak 2015). Pragmatic development Apologies in the EFL classroom. ELT Journal 69 (3):
should be a clear goal of any classroom 275–285.
that focuses on teaching language for Murphy, B., and J. Neu. 1996. My grade’s too low:
communication. The speech act set of complaining. In Speech acts
across cultures: Challenges to communication in a second
By highlighting the pragmatic issues of language, ed. S. M. Gass and J. Neu, 191–216.
one particular group of ESL students, Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
this article emphasizes the importance of Olshtain, E., and L. Weinbach. 1993. Interlanguage
incorporating pragmatics instruction into features of the speech act of complaining. In
the language classroom. Furthermore, Interlanguage pragmatics, ed. G. Kasper and
S. Blum-Kulka, 108–122. Oxford: Oxford
the article recommends explicit instruction
University Press.
that focuses on separate speech acts, activities Röver, C. 2005. Testing ESL pragmatics: Development and
that raise students’ pragmatic awareness validation of a web-based assessment battery. Frankfurt,
through discussion and comparison with Germany: Peter Lang.
the L1, and activities that allow students to
practice completing pragmatically appropriate
speech acts in English. While the activities Amanda Hilliard, a native of the United States,
in this article focus on the pragmatics of received her MA in TEFL/TESL from the University
complaining, they can be adapted to other of Birmingham, England, and is a distance PhD student
speech acts to develop students’ pragmatic in Applied Linguistics there. She has worked in South
awareness and competence in a variety of Korea, Tanzania, Hungary, Ecuador, and Vietnam.
situations. By giving students the knowledge Currently, she is an International Educator at Arizona
and tools they need to develop their State University’s Global Launch program.

Raising sociocultural awareness
through contextual analysis: some
tools for teachers
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article/63/2/116/439994 by Bursa Uludag University user on 10 April 2021

Troy McConachy
Despite long-standing recognition of the importance of sociocultural context in

meaning making, criticisms have been levelled at communicative language
teaching (CLT) for failing to effectively address this at the level of classroom
practice. In fact, it has been argued that the way CLT presents content reveals
a fundamentally reductionist view of communication. This paper uses examples
of dialogues from the New Interchange series to briefly illustrate what can be
considered a typical shortcoming of many modern commercial English language
textbooks: the neglect of the place of sociocultural context in dialogues and
dialogue-related activities. This paper shows two ways in which this neglect is
manifested and then suggests some concrete ways that teachers can use the
SPEA KING model developed by Hymes (1972) to increase their awareness of
elements of sociocultural context and also develop analytical questions for learners.
Introduction Over 35 years have passed since Hymes (1972) coined the term
‘communicative competence’ in recognition of the inadequacy of the
Chomskyan notion of linguistic competence. Since this time, much
theorizing has taken place about the social nature of language, such as the
ways in which different social groups use language to manage and structure
their daily lives (Duranti 1997). A number of researchers have outlined
further models of communicative competence that have gone on to become
widely recognized by language teachers. The highly influential model
provided by Canale and Swain (1980), as well as the more recent model
provided by Bachman (1990), share one point; recognition of the fact that
being competent in a language, whether first or subsequent, means a lot
more than simply knowing how to form syntactically accurate sentences.
Despite such recognition, it has been suggested that modern teaching
methods, even those labelled as ‘communicative’, are still failing to
adequately address the sociocultural aspects of language and the
complexities of language in use (Corbett 2003).
Context in C LT The importance of context in linguistic communication has been

recognized for decades and it is now a truism that no linguistic utterance can
be definitively understood without referring to the social and
communicative context in which it was uttered (Goodwin and Duranti
116 E LT Journal Volume 63/2 April 2009; doi:10.1093/elt/ccn018

ª The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.
Advance Access publication May 23, 2008
1992). With the advent of CLT, this realization can be said to have
affected pedagogy to the extent that presenting input in a manner that is
‘authentic’, or based on ‘real-world situations’ became a priority. However,
it has been argued that the emphasis on ‘real-world situations’ and ‘doing
things with language’ in CLT has led to a reductionist view of
communication (Corbett op. cit.; Kraus 2003). It is reductionist in the sense
that in CLT communication is often seen as a process of bridging an
information gap, and communicative competence the ‘capacity to fit
appropriate language to specific transactions’ (Byram 1990: 18). To be sure,

the ability to ‘do’ things with language is important and deserves
pedagogical attention. It is a problem, however, when language functions
are presented without due attention to the sociocultural dimensions of
language in use. Learners need to be aware that the particular language
forms that speakers choose to ‘get things done’ reflect not only their
identities but also a broad range of sociocultural variables, such as their
relationship to the interlocutor, and wider social structures. Unless learners
are specifically made aware of aspects pertaining to the social nature of
language use, there is the danger that a learner will apply his or her native
interactional norms, which may be inappropriate (Liddicoat 2005).
Context in A transactional orientation to language is clearly evident when examining

commercial English the way that language functions are presented in dialogues in many
language textbooks commercial language textbooks. In this section, I will illustrate what I see as
two major shortcomings. For this purpose, I will provide samples of
dialogues from the New Interchange series by Richards, Hull, and Proctor
(1998a,b). Although many textbooks contain similar problems, this series
was chosen simply due to its prevalence in the context where I work.
Sample 1:
James This has got to stop! Another Friday night without a date! What
can I do?
Mike What about looking through the personal ads in the newspaper?
James Actually, I’ve tried that. But the people you meet are always
different from what you expect.
Mike Well, why don’t you join a dating service? A friend of mine met his
wife that way.
James That’s not a bad idea.
Mike Also, it might be a good idea to check out singles’ night at the
bookstore.
James Yeah. If I don’t find a date, at least I might find a good book!
(Taken from New Interchange (1998b), Student’s Book 3: 57)
The first major shortcoming identifiable in this dialogue is the distinct lack
of explicit contextual information given to introduce the dialogue. In the
New Interchange series, there are dialogues (labelled ‘conversations’) like the
one above in each chapter in which a wide range of characters are discussing
various things. Despite the obvious potential for harnessing these various
identities to focus on the cultural aspects of language use, the dialogues do
Raising sociocultural awareness through contextual analysis 117

not come with an introduction containing explicit information as to the
identities of the speakers, their relationship to each other, or their location.
In the above dialogue, the pedagogical goal is clearly to show how
suggestions can be made: however, the absence of explicit contextual
information makes it seem as though the logic of suggestions and the
discourse that goes along with it will be plain and transparent for learners
everywhere.
The second major shortcoming of this dialogue is that on top of the lack of

explicit contextual information, there is also a lack of learning activities
based on the dialogue that could encourage learners to analyse the language
used in terms of sociocultural context. In New Interchange, some dialogues
are followed by a number of questions that learners can answer by listening
to a continuation of the conversation from the dialogue. Unfortunately, the
focus of these questions also reveals a reductionist orientation to the act of
comprehension. Sample 2 below shows another dialogue with questions.
Sample 2:
Chris So, what did you do this weekend Kate?
Kate Oh, Diane and I went for a drive in the country on Saturday.
Chris That sounds nice. Where did you go?
Kate We drove to the lake and had a picnic. We had a great time! How
about you? Did you do anything special?
Chris Not really? I just worked on my car all day.
Kate That old thing! Why don’t you just buy a new one?
Chris But then what would I do every weekend?
Listen to Kate talk about her activities on Sunday.
1 What did she do?
2 Where did she go?
(Taken from New Interchange (1998a), Student’s Book 1: 40)
The questions listed above are the type which require students to
comprehend information as part of a listening exercise based on the
dialogue in order to answer them. This is one skill which is certainly
important for language learners; however, again, the problem is that the act
of comprehending of meaning in context is reduced to that of ‘finding
information’. The above questions ignore the interpersonal dimension of
conversation and, in this particular conversation, the role that this type of
discourse (chatting about weekends) plays in social life. Over-exposing
learners to comprehension questions, where comprehension is understood
as the skill of finding information, will discourage learners from looking
deeper at the relationship between the speakers and other social contextual
factors as influencing language use. In consideration of this fact, and to
make up for the inadequacies of textbooks, it can be argued that it is
necessary for teachers to devise ways to ensure that learners come to see
communication as something that emerges from and is affected by the
118 Troy McConachy

relationships between people rather than simply the filling of an
information gap.
Turning the tide Teaching contextual aspects of language use is something that can present
difficulty for many language teachers, particularly those without
a heightened awareness of the communicative parameters of the target
language: aside from the typical aspects of language such as grammar and
lexis, it is not clear what should be taught (Barraja-Rohan 2000). What is
needed is for language teachers to increase their own awareness of the ways

in which context affects the choice of language forms and unfolding
interaction in a language sample such as a dialogue. Based on this
heightened awareness, teachers will be in a better position to design
comprehension questions that focus not only on the skill of locating
information but also on the skill of analysing language use in reflection of
sociocultural context. In order for teachers to be able to teach the importance
of sociocultural context, it may be helpful to have a model that can be used as
a reference point. I would like to suggest one in the next section.
A framework for ‘SPEAKING’ is a mnemonic which was developed by Hymes (1974) to

teacher reference represent his framework for the analysis of language in context. Each letter
of SPEAKING stands for an aspect of context which is thought to influence
the construction and interpretation of meaning. Due to its mnemonic
nature and relatively transparent components, I believe it can be useful to
language teachers in two main ways. Firstly, it provides a framework for
increasing teachers’ awareness of sociocultural factors of language use.
Secondly, the components can be used as a framework for generating
a range of questions for learners that encourage consideration of the role of
context in meaning making.
In Table 1 below I lay out the components of the SPEAKING framework
with a rationale statement to explain why these aspects of context are
important for language teachers and learners to think about. In Table 2
I also list questions for each component that could be used to assist
teachers to become aware of the socioculturally significant dimensions of
communication in a textbook dialogue or sample of natural language.
Developing In the next section, I show teachers can move from using the S P EA K I N G
questions for framework to identify relevant sociocultural factors in a dialogue to
learners generating a range of analytical questions to raise the sociocultural
awareness of learners.
In a given dialogue, there are likely to be many interactional features that
learners will benefit from examining, and an important first step is to
identify them according to the S P E A K I N G framework. For example, you
may notice an example of polite language, which you could look at from the
perspective of the ‘participants’ or ‘ends’. In other words, the use of polite
language may be a reflection of the relationship between the participants, or
it could be related to the ‘ends’: as in the case of high imposition requests.
Once the teacher has developed a perspective on a given utterance, they will
be better prepared to formulate questions to help their learners. Obviously it
can be challenging to attempt to simplify difficult concepts into questions
that can be understood by language learners and it will certainly take

table 1
Components of the
SPEAK ING framework
practice before a teacher improves his or her ability. As far as the wording of
questions is concerned, there are many possibilities that will depend on the
types of learners and the relevant pedagogical goal. Below I will outline four
different question types that, on the basis of experience, I consider to be
particularly useful and easy to apply.
1 Language-based questions
I use this term as these questions begin with some language from the
dialogue, based on which learners speculate on possible meanings and
interactional functions in context. For example, based on the use of the
discourse marker ‘I see’ in a dialogue, the following questions could be
formulated:
n What does ‘I see’ mean?
Or
n Why does person X say ‘I see’?
2 Function-based questions
I call these function-based questions as rather than quoting language
from the dialogue, these questions use metalanguage which describes
120 Troy McConachy

table 2
Questions to help
teacher analysis
the potential interactional or social function of an utterance in the

dialogue. The use of metalanguage encourages learners to look for forms
that might be used to accomplish particular functions. These questions
are useful for helping learners see language use in terms of interactional
and social functions first, and then focus on forms second. This can be
particularly useful when the teacher wants to prescribe an interpretation
of an utterance, or draw learners’ attention to an obvious interactional
norm. An example of a function-based question based on ‘I see’ might be
as follows:
n In the dialogue, where does speaker X show ‘understanding’?
Or
n Where does speaker X show ‘interest’?

3 Comparative questions
Comparative questions encourage learners to compare an aspect of
interaction or sociocultural relationship noticed in the dialogue/s they are
using with that of their native culture. The process of reflecting on aspects
of interaction in one’s native culture is argued to be an effective way to
help learners come to see the hidden interactional norms of their own
language, and to be able to objectively contrast these vis-à-vis the target
language (Liddicoat op. cit.). For example, in the case of a dialogue which
contains the speech act of apologizing, the following questions could be

asked:
n In your culture do people apologize like this?
n Does everyone apologize like this?
n What other ways are there to apologize in your culture?
n How do you feel about the style of apologies in this dialogue?
4 General speculative questions
General speculative questions are ‘Why do you think . . .?’ questions
which are versatile in that they can be formed in regards to any type of
question when the teacher would like to emphasize that the learners’ job
is to give their own interpretations, rather than search for a correct
answer.
Examples:
n How old do you think the speakers are?
n Why do you think the man refused the invitation?
Application In this section I will provide concrete examples of questions that I have
developed based on my understanding of SPEAKING that could be applied
when using one of the sample dialogues from New Interchange quoted
earlier. There is a certain amount of overlap among the questions; these are
simply examples to demonstrate the different ways that questions could be
formulated.
Dialogue
James This has got to stop! Another Friday night without a date! What
can I do?
Mike What about looking through the personal ads in the newspaper?
James Actually, I’ve tried that. But the people you meet are always
different from what you expect.
Mike Well, why don’t you join a dating service? A friend of mine met his
wife that way.
James That’s not a bad idea.
Mike Also, it might be a good idea to check out singles’ night at the
bookstore.
James Yeah. If I don’t find a date, at least I might find a good book!
122 Troy McConachy

Setting:
Where do you think James and Mike are having this conversation? Why?
Where do you think wouldn’t be a good place to have this conversation?
Why?
In James’ culture, do you think many people go on dates on Fridays?
Why?
When do people usually go on dates in your culture?

Participants:
Do you think Mike and James are good friends? Why?
How old do you think they are? Why?
Do you think Mike is married or has a partner? Why?
Ends:
Why do you think James started this conversation?
Do you think Mike wants to help him? Why?
Act sequence:
How many different ‘suggestions’ did Mike make? What is their order?
How did James feel about each ‘suggestion’? Why do you think this?
Why did James say ‘actually’?
In the conversation, where does Mike show ‘agreement’?
Key:
How does James feel at the start of the conversation? Why do you think
this?
Instrumentalities:
Is the language in this conversation casual or polite? Show an example.
Norms of interaction:
How does Mike accept or reject the suggestions? Why do you think he
chose these forms?
Genre:
What sort of conversation is this?
Do people in your culture have this type of conversation often?
Tips for using the While I have listed quite a large number of questions for the previous
questions dialogue, it is unlikely that this many could actually be asked in one class.
The process of looking at language use from a sociocultural perspective is
something which many learners may not be familiar with. As a result, some
learners are likely to go through initial difficulties as they adjust to the
various processes of analysing, reflecting, and comparing. This is one thing

which needs to be taken into consideration when allocating time for
learning tasks.
Reacting to learners’ It is necessary to recognize that we cannot always expect knowledge about
interpretations sociocultural aspects of language use to be as explicable or quantifiable as
grammar and lexis. As the focus of these questions is interpretive, there is
necessarily a multiplicity of possible answers. While some questions may be
designed to lead learners to a particular interpretation of language, others
are simply speculative. In this case, the aim is not to elicit some kind of

predetermined ‘correct’ answer but rather to develop meta-awareness
concerning the fact that sociocultural context is important in language use.
In this case, the processes that learners go through, and the skills that are
developed when involved in analysing language use, can also be considered
important.
Possible criticisms It is possible that some will object to using dialogues at all to raise
sociocultural awareness due to the fact that dialogues do not always mirror
‘the way language is really used’ (Seedhouse 2004). Undoubtedly, some
dialogues are more natural than others. The process of constructing
dialogues based on what research tells us about how people communicate
needs to be ongoing. However, it does not seem logical to wait until perfect
dialogues are achieved before we finally turn our learners’ heads towards
context. It is important to work creatively with the educational resources we
have now to achieve a high quality of learning. In any case, dialogues, or
even samples of authentic data, should not be viewed as ‘perfect’ samples of
language use, due to the fact that any communication is inherently
ambiguous and variable (Scollon and Wong-Scollon 1995). Consequently,
learners should not simply approach language as a thing to be remembered,
but as a thing to be examined. Any language use in a dialogue is nothing
more than something that might be said in a particular situation. It is not
necessary to have perfect samples of communication as the imperfect
nature of communication can now become a topic of speculation and
discussion.
Conclusion In this paper I have argued that teachers may need to increase their own
awareness of the general importance of sociocultural context as
a determinant of language use. This is important so that teachers are no
longer limited to simply teaching the ‘cleaner’ aspects of syntax and lexicon.
As long as teachers and students only see dialogues in terms of how they
illustrate grammar usage, there is a waste of learning potential. The
SPEAKING framework is a useful device for making salient the myriad
sociocultural factors that influence language use in order to generate
sociocultural meta-awareness, as well as to highlight specific interactional
norms. It is hoped that this kind of meta-awareness will put learners in
a better position to anticipate and perceive potential differences in cross-
cultural communication and an increased flexibility to deal with them.
Final revised version received September 2007
124 Troy McConachy

References language teaching with an emphasis on culture,
Bachman, L. 1990. Fundamental Considerations in epistemology and ethical pedagogy’. Unpublished
Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Doctoral dissertation, University of Canberra.
Barraja-Rohan, A. 2000. ‘Teaching conversation and Liddicoat, A. J. 2005. ‘Teaching languages for
sociocultural norms with conversation analysis’ in intercultural communication’ in D. Cunningham
A. J. Liddicoat and C. Crozet (eds.). Teaching and A. Hatoss (eds.). An International Perspective on
Languages, Teaching Cultures. Melbourne, Australia: Language Policies, Practices and Proficiencies.
Language Australia. Belgrave, Australia: F I PLV.
Byram, M. 1990. ‘Teaching culture and language: Richards, J., J. Hull, and S. Proctor. 1998a. New

towards an integrated model’ in D. Buttjes and Interchange: English for International Communication
M. Byram (eds.). Mediating Languages and Cultures. (Student’s Book 1). Cambridge: Cambridge
Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. University Press.
Canale, M. and M. Swain. 1980. ‘Theoretical bases of Richards, J., J. Hull, and S. Proctor. 1998b. New
communicative approaches to second language Interchange: English for International Communication
teaching and testing’. Applied Linguistics 1/1: 1–47. (Student’s Book 3). Cambridge: Cambridge
Corbett, J. 2003. An Intercultural Approach to English University Press.
Language Teaching. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Scollon, R. and S. Wong-Scollon. 1995. Intercultural
Matters. Communication. Oxford: Blackwell.
Duranti, A. 1997. Linguistic Anthropology. Cambridge: Seedhouse, P. 2004. The Interactional Architecture of
Cambridge University Press. the Language Classroom: A Conversation Analysis
Goodwin, C. and A. Duranti. 1992. ‘Rethinking Perspective. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
context: an introduction’ in A. Duranti and
C. Goodwin (eds.). Rethinking Context: Language as The author
an Interactive Phenomenon. Cambridge: Cambridge Troy McConachy holds an MA (Applied Linguistics)
University Press. from the University of New England, Australia. He is
Hymes, D. 1972. ‘On communicative competence’ in currently conducting his doctoral research on
J. B. Pride and J. Holmes (eds.). Sociolinguistics. intercultural language teaching through the
Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books. Research Centre for Languages and Cultures at the
Hymes, D. 1974. Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An University of South Australia. He also lectures on
Ethnographic Approach. Philadelphia: University of English and intercultural communication at Rikkyo
Pennsylvania Press. University, Tokyo.
Kraus, H. 2003. ‘Creating histories and spaces of Email: mcconachyt@hotmail.com
meaningful use: towards a framework of foreign

Makale Birleştirme

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Makale Birleştirme

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JOSEPH SIEGEL

Pragmatic Activities for the

12 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 2 01 6 americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum

americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum 2016 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 13

As noted earlier, an SAS is a group of These formulaic groups of pragmatic

14 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 2 01 6 americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum

APOLOGY SCENARIO in Figure 1 could be used as checklists for this

americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum 2016 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 15

5 . Promising it won’t happen again: “It’ll never PRAGMATIC ACTIVITIES BASED ON

16 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 2 01 6 americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum

Table 2. Students’ request speech samples

build on the linguistic and strategic knowledge A range of interlocutors

After some controlled examples, students work in pairs

americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum 2016 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 17

18 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 2 01 6 americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum

americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum 2016 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 19

International Conference on Teaching and Learning English as an Additional Language,

Indirectness in Requests in Complaint Letters to the Higher

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +90-224-297-2264.

2.1. Research Questions

2.2. Informants and Data Collection Tool

3. Findings and discussion

3.1. Direct Strategies

Five direct strategies have been defined:

x Mood derivable (Clean up the kitchen.)

Table 2: Explicit performative

Table 3: Performative Verbs

Table 4: Hedged performative

Table 5: Locution derivable or obligation statement

Turkish learners used no locution derivable or obligation statements.

Table 6: Want statements

Table 7: Expectation statements (NNS only)

3.2. Conventionally indirect requests

There are 2 sub-strategies under the title of Conventionally Indirect Strategies:

Table 8: Suggestory formula

Table 9: Query preparatory

4. Conclusion and implications

Table 10: Total distribution of strategy types

Conventionally indirect strategies

Twelve Activities for

2 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 2 01 7 americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum

3 . A justification “I come to every class, and I study hard. I just didn’t

americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum 2017 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 3

Problem Example from Video

4 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 2 01 7 americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum

Discussion Questions for Complaining

americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum 2017 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 5

6 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 2 01 7 americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum

Cultural Group Notes Similarities to Differences from

Table 6. Chart for comparing complaining pragmatics among languages

americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum 2017 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 7

1 . Would you respond differently in that Activity 5: Presenting L2 strategies for

8 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 2 01 7 americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum

Step 1: Saying you have a Complaint

Table 8. Useful language for the complaint speech act

americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum 2017 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 9

Activity 7: Discourse Completion Tasks Activity 8: Analyzing and repairing pragmatic

Discourse Completion Task

Table 9. Discourse Completion Task

10 ENGLISH TEACHING FORUM 2 01 7 americanenglish.state.gov/english-teaching-forum

Student: I want to talk about my grade.

Table 10. Complaint script for analysis and revision

lower status). Pragmatics vary culturally make a pragmatically appropriate “good

Pragmatics vary culturally depending on context and