A01 cohe4573 01 se fm. Qxd

1 1 2
T H E N U T S A N D B O L T S O F P R A G M A T I C S I N S T R U C T I O N
45
See Ishihara (2008c, in press b) for more details.
46
Garrett and Baquedano-López (2002).
47
Bayley and Schecter (2003).

---

L A N G U A G E - A C Q U I S I T I O N T H E O R Y A N D T E A C H I N G P R A G M A T I C S
1 1 3
with passing mention of a few others. We have also considered the social,
cultural, affective, and psychological aspects of pragmatic language learning
and use, drawing on identity, accommodation, and second language social-
ization theories. Now let us think about the role that theoretical understand-
ings could play in the teachers’ classroom practice.
Implications for teaching
Explicit and implicit instruction in pragmatics
As in the discussion above, the noticing hypothesis calls for conscious atten-
tion to pragmatics-related information in the L2 classroom, rather than
learners’ mere exposure to pragmatics-rich input. In the language classroom,
this would translate into explicit teaching of pragmatics. As discussed above,
an explicit approach with a provision of analysis of language and context
has been found to be generally more effective than implicit teaching in
experimental studies. The explicit teaching of pragmatics is in line with an
awareness-raising approach, which has been widely used in the current
teaching of L2 pragmatics.
Awareness-raising approach for teaching pragmatics
An awareness-raising approach is grounded in the noticing hypothesis and
is designed to facilitate learners’ noticing and understanding of the form–
context relationship. The following is a listing of possible classroom tasks
for receptive or productive skills development, or a combination of both.
We include instructional tasks that focus primarily on either the linguistic
dimensions or on the social and cultural dimensions.
Tasks with a mainly linguistic (pragmalinguistic) focus:
■
analyzing and practicing the use of vocabulary in the particular context;
■
identifying and practicing the use of relevant grammatical structures;
■
identifying and practicing the use of strategies for a speech act;
■
analyzing and practicing the use of discourse organization (e.g.,
discourse structure of an academic oral, and presentation);
48
■
analyzing and practicing the use of discourse markers and fillers (e.g.,
well, um, actually);
48
See Vellenga and Smith (2008), for a sample activity for teaching components of
academic discourse.

---

■
analyzing and practicing the use of epistemic stance markers (i.e., words
and phrases to show the speaker’s stance, such as: I think, maybe, seem,
suppose, tend to, of course);
49
■
noticing and practicing the use of tone (e.g., verbal and non-verbal cues
and nuances).
50
Tasks with a mainly social and cultural (sociopragmatic) focus:
■
analyzing language and context to identify the goal and intention of
the speaker, and assessing the speaker’s attainment of the goal and 
the listener’s interpretation (see Chapters 14 and 15 for more on this
assessment);
■
analyzing and practicing the use of directness/politeness/formality in
an interaction;
51
■
identifying and using multiple functions of a speech act;
■
identifying and using a range of cultural norms in the L2 culture; and
■
identifying and using possible cultural reasoning or ideologies behind
L2 pragmatic norms.
In reality, these two sets of dimensions focusing on language and culture
may actually be intertwined and not clear-cut. For example, in order to 
communicate effectively, learners need to know the meaning and linguistic
form associated with the expressions, I agree and I disagree (pragmalinguis-
tics). In addition, they need cultural knowledge about the appropriate 
contexts for using these expressions (sociopragmatics).
The above tasks could be used in conjunction with these classroom 
exercises:
■
collecting L2 data in the L2 community or the media, e.g., films, 
sit-coms (see Chapters 3 and 7 for data collection procedures, and
Chapter 13 for the use of films and sit-coms);