A01 cohe4573 01 se fm. Qxd

1 3 6
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
Finally, learners’ reflections on learning the pragmatics of requests thus far and their
preference as to how they wish to use English can be elicited though individual written 
samples (or alternatively, through class discussion). Teachers can give and explain the 
criteria of assessment for this reflection ahead of time. The assessment criteria may be 
prepared bilingually and can include the following:
1
awareness of linguistic variations in contexts (e.g., relative status, distance, and
imposition);
2
awareness of linguistic variations according to speaker’s and listener’s age, gender,
culture, regional/ethnic affiliation, and educational background;
3
awareness of (newly learned) linguistic details (e.g., grammar and word choice); and
4
awareness of speaker’s intention and listener’s interpretation.
E Learners’ analysis of the language–context relationship
Using the data that learners collected for themselves earlier (at stage C above), learners
individually analyze the relationship between contextual factors and the language used in
the request, guided by a few prompts (e.g., Comparing the dialogues you collected, analyze
how S [social status, age, gender], D [social/psychological distance], and I [the level of
imposition] influence the language used in the request. Explain how S, D, and I influence
pre-request strategies and post-request strategies.)
F Language-focused development and assessment
Instruction at this stage focuses on linguistic aspects of pragmatics. Learners go over a
range of request strategies (pre- and post-request supportive moves), such as those below
and examples for each category:
26
1
Checking on availability;
2
Getting a pre-commitment;
3
Giving a reason for the request;
4
Showing consideration for the hearer/Apologizing/Minimizing the imposition;
5
Sweetening;
26
For examples and more information of these categories, see Chapter 4, Blum-Kulka
et al. (1989), or the summary on the CARLA website, http://www.carla.umn.edu/
speechacts/requests/research.html (accessible December 10, 2009).

---

C L A S S O B S E R V A T I O N A N D T E A C H I N G D E M O N S T R A T I O N S
1 3 7
A sample assessment rubric (teacher circles appropriate evaluations on the right)
(a) Overall directness, politeness, and formality; tone 
(e.g., intonation, use of eye contact, gestures if applicable)
Very appropriate
Somewhat appropriate
Less appropriate
Inappropriate
(b) Choice and use of request strategies (e.g., offering a reason,
getting a pre-commitment, checking availability, promising to
compensate, showing consideration for the listener, expressing
apology/thanks)
Very appropriate
Somewhat appropriate
Less appropriate
Inappropriate
(c) Overall comprehensibility of the speaker’s intention 
(in terms of appropriateness, rather than accuracy) (e.g.,
pronunciation, word choice, grammar, sequencing)
Highly comprehensible
Somewhat comprehensible
Less comprehensible
Incomprehensible
6
Promising to pay back;
7
Expressing gratitude.
Learners’ pragmalinguistic control of these request strategies can be assessed through
a quiz.
G Learners’ self-revising, role-playing, and refining their request discourse
Learners receive their own responses in multi-turn DCTs which make use of four scenarios
(see stage B above) and revise them as an assignment. They are free to review the com-
petent speaker samples provided earlier, and are provided an explanation for a set of assess-
ment criteria at this stage (see below). In class, learners practice their written dialogues
orally in pairs, as well as a few other peer dialogues (scaffolded role-plays). Then they are
asked to record their best responses to the same prompts once again without looking at
any of the written dialogues (unscaffolded written role-plays). These written dialogues can
be assessed by the teacher, using a set of assessment criteria that have been provided to
learners earlier (see Chapter 15 for other examples of assessment rubrics):
H Learners’ self-evaluation of written-request discourse
While the teacher assesses learner language, learners can also conduct self-evaluation of
their own language production (from stage G above) with (bilingual) guiding prompts.
Through this self-assessment, learners’ pragmatic awareness (*1 below) and language 
production (*2 below) can both be assessed. Below are some sample prompts based on 
the scenario c) in the sample material below (see Chapter 15 for authentic example of 
this self-evaluation):
1
Given the context, how appropriate was Karla’s request in terms of overall directness,
formality, politeness, and the tone (e.g., intonation, gesture, eye contact)?

---