A01 cohe4573 01 se fm. Qxd

7 2
G R O U N D I N G I N T H E T E A C H I N G A N D L E A R N I N G O F L 2 P R A G M A T I C S
4 Indirect criticism through implicature
Example: Teachers A and B are discussing a student’s paper:
A: Have you finished with Mark’s term paper yet?
B: Yeah, I read it last night.
A: What did you think of it?
B: Well, I thought it was well typed (Implying that he did not like the
paper).
5 The POPE Q implicature
The name is based on the prototype, Is the Pope Catholic?
Example: Two roommates are discussing their plans for the summer:
Fran: My mother wants me to stay home for a while, so I can be there
when our relatives come to visit us at the beach.
Joan: Do you have a lot of relatives?
Fran: Are there flies in the summertime? (Implying that she has a lot of
relatives).
While conversational implicature is part of everyday interaction, under-
standing implied meaning requires cultural knowledge and its interpretation
can be difficult to L2 learners who have lived in the second-language
context for several years.
39
Studies show, however, that explicit classroom
instruction can accelerate the learning of conversational implicature.
40
A description of a suggested instructional procedure on conversational
implicature appears in Chapter 8.
Discussion
This chapter has given an introduction to the CARLA Speech Acts website,
where descriptions of speech acts are posted as a resource for teachers, 
curriculum writers, and learners alike. The website is meant to provide 
39
Bouton (1994a, 1994b); Kasper and Rose (2002).
40
Bouton (1994a, 1999); Kubota (1995).

---

D E S C R I B I N G S P E E C H A C T S : L I N K I N G R E S E A R C H A N D P E D A G O G Y
7 3
bare-bone details for six of the major speech acts appearing in the research
literature. The following activity will give you an opportunity to explore in
greater detail the speech act of your choice, using a larger database housed
on the CARLA website. Our view is that if teachers have an explicit know-
ledge of the “anatomy” of a given speech act, they would more effectively
share that information with learners. The activity at the end of this chapter
provides an opportunity to familiarize yourself with the research-based
information regarding speech acts in the language(s) taught.
Activity 4.1 Exploring research-based descriptions of
speech acts
Objectives
1
You will be able to identify descriptions of speech acts as derived from research in
cross-cultural and interlanguage pragmatics.
2
You will be able to gain more explicit awareness of the cross-cultural similarities
and differences regarding the pragmatic use of the target language you teach.
Suggested time:
40 minutes.
Materials:
■
computers with access to the internet;
■
alternatively, research articles on speech acts or other pragmatic features that you
wish to investigate.
Directions
1
Form groups according to the speech act(s) of your interest. Ideally your group
has speakers of different languages. Sit next to them in the computer lab.
2
Read the portion of this chapter that contains information about the speech act(s)
of your choice. This serves as an introduction to the CARLA website.
3
Then, go online and explore your speech act(s) listed in: http://www.carla.umn.
edu/speechacts/descriptions.html. Make sure to click on “research notes” links
for more detailed information.
4
Save the link or copy down the cultural and linguistic information that you think
will be beneficial to you and your colleagues. At some later point you may decide
to utilize this information to build pragmatics-focused tasks or a lesson plan.
5
Discuss in your small group what you have found out about the speech act(s) you
have studied, comparing descriptions across languages. Evaluate how credible the

---