Abstract
This is an initial exploratory study of how study-abroad learners influence each other’s pragmatic development in naturalistic settings. It focuses on a cohort of 12 Australian learners of Indonesian during a short summer course and uses a multimethod approach, including a pretest/posttest instrument, diary entries, and regular interviews. Findings revealed a variety of influences on each other’s development. Learners noticed pragmatic features in talk produced by fellow learners that was addressed to native speakers of the target language. They also sometimes noticed features in talk by native speakers that was addressed to their fellow learners, or in talk between fellow learners. They reflected on the relevant features and often modified their knowledge about them. The learners also talked with each other about the pragmatics of the L2 in various ways, such as through explicit discussion, correction of each other’s performance, or the telling of personal anecdotes. That talk too prompted the learners to reflect on pragmatic features and modify their knowledge about them. The learners also planned complex pragmatic action together and performed it together, which can affect pragmatic development in myriad ways. To sum up, the study changes our perceptions of how learners learn pragmatics during study abroad by showing how time spent with fellow learners can stimulate that learning.
About the author
Tim Hassall is a Senior Lecturer at the Australian National University, where he teaches courses in Indonesian and translation. He holds a master’s degree in applied linguistics (TESOL) and a PhD degree in applied linguistics. His main research interests are interlanguage pragmatics and language acquisition during study abroad.
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments.
References
Allen, Heather. 2010. Interactive contact as linguistic affordance during short-term study abroad: Myth or reality? Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 19. 1–26.10.36366/frontiers.v19i1.271Search in Google Scholar
Bailey, Kathleen. 1983. Competitiveness and anxiety in adult second language learning: Looking at and through the diary studies. In Herbert Seliger & Michael Long (eds.), Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition, 67–103. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Search in Google Scholar
Barron, Anne. 2003. Acquisition in interlanguage pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.108Search in Google Scholar
Belz, Julie & Celeste Kinginger. 2003. Discourse options and the development of pragmatic competence by classroom learners of German: The case of address forms. Language Learning 53(4). 591–647.10.1046/j.1467-9922.2003.00238.xSearch in Google Scholar
Cohen, Andrew & Rachel Shively. 2007. Acquisition of requests and apologies in Spanish and French: Impact of study abroad and strategy-building intervention. Modern Language Journal 91(2). 189–212.10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00540.xSearch in Google Scholar
Dewey, Dan, R. Kirk Belnap & Rebecca Hillstrom. 2013. Social network development, language use, and language acquisition during study abroad: Arabic language learners’ perspectives. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 22. 84–110.10.36366/frontiers.v22i1.320Search in Google Scholar
DuFon, Margaret. 2000. The acquisition of linguistic politeness in Indonesian by sojourners in naturalistic interactions. Manoa, HI: University of Hawai’i dissertation [1999]. Dissertation Abstracts International–A, 60/11, 3985.Search in Google Scholar
Hassall, Tim. 2001. Do learners thank too much in Indonesian? Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 24(2). 97–112.10.1075/aral.24.2.07hasSearch in Google Scholar
Hassall, Tim. 2006. Learning to take leave in social conversations: A diary study. In Margaret DuFon & Eton Churchill (eds.), Language learners in study abroad contexts, 31–58. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781853598531-006Search in Google Scholar
Hassall, Tim. 2012. Pragmatic development in study-abroad contexts. In Carol Chapelle (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, vol. 8, 4516–4522. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0928Search in Google Scholar
Hassall, Tim. 2013. Pragmatic development during short-term study abroad: The case of address terms in Indonesian. Journal of Pragmatics 55. 1–17.10.1016/j.pragma.2013.05.003Search in Google Scholar
Hassall, Tim. 2015. Individual variation in L2 study abroad outcomes: A case study from Indonesian pragmatics. Multilingua 34(1). 33–59.10.1515/multi-2013-0050Search in Google Scholar
Iino, Masakazu. 2006. Norms of interaction in a Japanese homestay setting: Toward a two-way flow of cultural and linguistic resources. In Margaret DuFon & Eton Churchill (eds.), Language learners in study abroad contexts, 151–173. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781853598531-010Search in Google Scholar
Kasper, Gabriele & Ken Rose. 2002. Pragmatic development in a second language. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
Kinginger, Celeste. 2008. Language learning in study abroad: Case studies of Americans in France. Modern Language Journal 92(S1). 1–124.10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00821.xSearch in Google Scholar
Kinginger, Celeste. 2009. Language learning and study abroad: A critical reading of research. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.10.1057/9780230240766Search in Google Scholar
Kinginger, Celeste & Julie Belz. 2005. Social-cultural perspectives on pragmatic development in foreign language learning: Microgenetic case studies from telecollaboration and residence abroad. Intercultural Pragmatics 2(4). 369–421.10.1515/iprg.2005.2.4.369Search in Google Scholar
Kinginger, Celeste & Kathleen Farrell. 2004. Assessing development of meta-pragmatic awareness in study abroad. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 10. 19–42.10.36366/frontiers.v10i1.131Search in Google Scholar
Liddicoat, Anthony. 2006. Learning the culture of interpersonal relationships: Students’ understandings of personal address forms in French. Intercultural Pragmatics 3(1). 55–80.10.1515/IP.2006.003Search in Google Scholar
Liddicoat, Anthony. 2014. Pragmatics and intercultural mediation in intercultural language learning. Intercultural Pragmatics 11(2). 259–277.10.1515/ip-2014-0011Search in Google Scholar
Magnan, Sally & Michele Back. 2007. Social interaction and linguistic gain during study abroad. Foreign Language Annals 40(1). 43–61.10.1111/j.1944-9720.2007.tb02853.xSearch in Google Scholar
Marriott, Helen. 1995. The acquisition of politeness patterns by exchange students in Japan. In Barbara Freed (ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context, 197–224. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/sibil.9.13marSearch in Google Scholar
Martinsen, Rob, Wendy Baker, Dan Dewey, Jennifer Bown & Cary Johnson. 2010. Exploring diverse settings for language acquisition and use: Comparing study abroad, service learning abroad, and foreign language housing. Applied Language Learning 20. 45–69.Search in Google Scholar
Matsumura, Shoichi. 2003. Modelling the relationships among interlanguage pragmatic development, L2 proficiency, and exposure to L2. Applied Linguistics 24(4). 465–491.10.1093/applin/24.4.465Search in Google Scholar
Mendelson, Vija. 2004. “Hindsight is 20/20”: Student perceptions of language learning and the study abroad experience. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 10. 43–63.10.36366/frontiers.v10i1.132Search in Google Scholar
Ohta, Amy. 1995. Applying sociocultural theory to an analysis of learning discourse: Learner-learner collaborative interaction in the zone of proximal development. Issues in Applied Linguistics 6(2). 93–121.10.5070/L462005219Search in Google Scholar
Ortega, Lourdes. 2009. Understanding second language acquisition. London: Hodder Education.Search in Google Scholar
Schmidt, Richard. 1990. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11. 129–158.10.1093/applin/11.2.129Search in Google Scholar
Schmidt, Richard. 2001. Attention. In Peter Robinson (ed.), Cognition in language instruction, 3–33. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003Search in Google Scholar
Shively, Rachel. 2011. L2 pragmatic development in study abroad: A longitudinal study of Spanish service encounters. Journal of Pragmatics 43. 1818–1835.10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.030Search in Google Scholar
Siegal, Meryl. 1996. The role of learner subjectivity in second language sociolinguistic competency: Western women learning Japanese. Applied Linguistics 17(3). 356–382.10.1093/applin/17.3.356Search in Google Scholar
Swain, Merrill. 1985. Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Susan Gass & Carolyn Madden (eds.), Input in second language acquisition, 235–253. Cambridge: Newbury House.Search in Google Scholar
Taguchi, Naoko. 2015. “Contextually” speaking: A survey of pragmatic learning abroad, in class, and online. System 48. 3–20.10.1016/j.system.2014.09.001Search in Google Scholar
Appendix A
Transcription conventions
- […]
bracketed ellipses indicate material has been omitted
- ONLY
uppercase indicates the word was stressed by the speaker
- –
dash indicates an untimed pause (more dashes indicate longer pause)
- [the taxi driver]
square brackets enclose explanatory material
- (laughs)
rounded brackets enclose nonverbal phenomena
- today?
question mark indicates rising intonation
- o:h
colon indicates lengthened vowel
- anyone/
diagonal slash denotes abruptly cut-off word
Appendix B: Instructions to participants for diary entries (adapted from DuFon 2000)
What is a diary entry about? It is based on any ‘incident’, broadly speaking, which affects your knowledge or your perceptions about that language feature (e.g. about leave-taking, address terms, complaints) in some way. This incident might be e.g. a verbal exchange that you participate in, or one which you observe, or one which you see on TV. (That is by no means an exhaustive list of what a relevant ‘incident’ could be.)
How do you structure a diary entry? A good two-part structure is like this:
(i) start with a narrative of the incident itself. Include sufficient concrete scene-setting details for a reader to grasp it (when was it, where, who were the participants, etc.). This is a personal, subjective telling of the event: include any relevant emotions etc.
(ii) step back from the incident. Add more objective, distanced comments about it, e.g. about whether it provided you with insights about that feature/ raised questions about it/ changed your views on it in some respect / confirmed your ideas /left you confused/ made you consider changing your own behavior/ etc.
Length of entries: From my own experience of keeping diaries of the identical type, ½ – 1 single-spaced handwritten page is the typical length of a decent entry. (That’s not a hard and fast rule, but a sound guide.)
©2015 by De Gruyter Mouton
