A01 cohe4573 01 se fm. Qxd

2 5 4
F U R T H E R I S S U E S I N L E A R N I N G , T E A C H I N G , A N D A S S E S S M E N T
One way to structure the learning of pragmatics mediated by e-mail, blogs,
discussion forums, chat, or video-conferencing programs may be to give
learners metapragmatic tasks (i.e., tasks explicitly about pragmatics) such as
the following:
■
collecting samples of pragmatic language use from competent 
speakers of the target language by going through the record of the
interaction (e.g., the use of the discourse marker actually in online 
chat interaction);
■
observing authentic pragmatic language use in communication 
(e.g., openings and closings in e-mail messages, agreement and
disagreement in blogs, or video-conferencing, or humor employed 
by the conversation partner in voice chat);
■
interviewing competent speakers of the target language regarding their
use or perception of a speech act (e.g., occasions at which compliments
are given or avoided, the appropriateness of complimenting on the
given topic, and the choice of recipient for the compliment – whether
by e-mail, chat, or video-conferencing); and
■
exchanging analyses with others of pragmatics-focused observations 
or interviews (e.g., reporting on the examples of cynicism and the
implications, or exchanging analysis of how humor might be different
in L1 and L2 in educational discussion forums).
These tasks could also be pursued in face-to-face communication alone or 
in combination with computer-mediated technologies especially in the
second-language settings where learners generally have relatively frequent
access to other target-language speakers (see Chapter 7 for examples). It
should be noted that in CMC, there may be media-specific norms, and 
certain pragmatic uses may be different in face-to-face interactions.
22
Telecollaboration utilizing chat and video-conferencing programs, for
example, offers language learners real-time opportunities to interact with
other target language speakers for both educational and entertainment pur-
poses over the internet. Not only does it provide increased opportunities for
input, output, and interaction for language learning in extended meaning-
ful discourse, but it can also be an authentic vehicle for intercultural com-
munication.
23
Synchronous tools can be used in conjunction with
asynchronous technologies (such as e-mail) and can enable learners to
engage in extended dialogues with other target language speakers, such as
22
See for example, Zitzen and Stein (2004) for similarities and differences between
chat and oral language.
23
Belz (2007).

---

I N C O R P O R A T I N G T E C H N O L O G Y I N T O I N S T R U C T I O N
2 5 5
pragmatically competent speakers or learners of the same target language in
another culture. Language instruction utilizing telecollaborative tools often
involves engaging cross-cultural discussion about current topics and explicit
pragmatics instruction such as the following:
■
the use of formal and informal personal pronouns (e.g., T/V forms in
French and German
24
and T/S forms in Spanish
25
);
■
other terms of address (e.g., Jane, Ms Doe, Professor Doe, Dr Doe);
26
■
active listening and backchannelling;
27
and
■
use of discourse markers (e.g., oh and well ).
28
Because telecollaboration can offer authentic intercultural opportunities
and engaging interaction over an extended period of time, participants may
be better prepared if they have, ahead of time, some intercultural skills train-
ing or awareness-raising, for example, about cross-cultural perspective taking
or critical evaluation of one’s culture.
29
In another form of CMC, gaming and virtual interaction, learners assume
an imagined identity represented visually in the form of an avatar in 
electronic three-dimensional space, where they interact with other virtual
characters verbally and non-verbally (e.g., through hand gestures and body
language). Possible advantages in this electronic interaction include that
learners can participate individually at their own pace, enact multiple roles
and identities if they wish, and enjoy multimodal processing.
30
Due to the
lower risk of real-life consequences of their pragmatic language use in this
virtual environment, learners can practice and experiment L2 pragmatics
without running a high risk. Learners may enjoy such virtual interactions,