Discourse analysis term project

Collector:
Moein Rostamnia

Literature review for this topic:

<< How social interaction influences the development of second
language speech act in children >>

Professor:
DR. Shirkhani

Islamic Azad University,

Tehran West Branch
 Introduction

Speech acts are the basic units of communication, such as requests, apologies, compliments,

and greetings. They are influenced by the social and cultural norms of the speakers and the

listeners. Learning how to perform speech acts appropriately in a second language (L2) is a

challenging task for children, as they need to acquire not only the linguistic forms but also the

pragmatic rules and strategies of the L2. Social interaction plays a crucial role in this process, as

it provides children with opportunities to observe, practice, and receive feedback on their L2

speech acts. In this paper, we review the literature on how social interaction influences the

development of L2 speech acts in children, focusing on three main aspects: the input, the output,

and the feedback. We also discuss the implications of these findings for L2 teaching and

learning.

The input refers to the exposure to L2 speech acts that children receive from various sources,

such as caregivers, peers, teachers, and media. The quality and quantity of the input can affect

the acquisition of L2 speech acts, as well as the awareness of the sociolinguistic and pragmatic

variation that exists in different contexts and communities. The output refers to the production of

L2 speech acts that children generate in various situations, such as requesting, apologizing, or

complimenting. The output can reflect the level of development and competence of L2 speech

acts, as well as the strategies and resources that children use to communicate their intentions and

meanings. The feedback refers to the responses and reactions that children receive from their

interlocutors, such as confirmation, correction, or clarification. The feedback can provide

children with information and guidance on the appropriateness and effectiveness of their L2

speech acts, as well as the expectations and preferences of their communication partners.
 The literature on how social interaction influences the development of L2 speech acts in

children shows that these three aspects are interrelated and dynamic and that they can have

positive or negative effects depending on various factors, such as the age, motivation, and

personality of the learners, the type, frequency, and quality of the interaction, and the social and

cultural norms of the L2. We will present and analyze the main findings and challenges of this

research area, and we will suggest some directions and recommendations for future studies and

applications. We hope that this paper will contribute to a better understanding of the role of

social interaction in L2 speech act development, and to a more effective and enjoyable L2

learning experience for children.

Review of literature

The article by Holtgraves (1986) explores how language structure influences social

interaction. The author uses speech act theory to explain how speech acts can be performed

either directly or indirectly, and how this choice affects the perception of the speaker and the

listener. The author argues that indirect speech acts are often used to manage face concerns, that

is, to avoid threatening the self-image or the social image of the interactants. The author also

claims that the use of direct or indirect speech acts encodes social information, such as the status,

liking, and closeness of the interactants.

The author conducts two experiments to test these hypotheses. In the first experiment, the

author asks 216 undergraduate students to rate direct and indirect questions and replies in written

scenarios, varying the status of the interactants and the face threat of the requested information.

The results show that the appropriateness of replies, but not questions, depends on the face threat
of the information. The results also show that the status of the interactants affects the perceived

politeness of questions, but not replies.

In the second experiment, the author asks another group of 216 undergraduate students to rate

the interactants and their relationships in the same scenarios, based on the use of direct and

indirect replies. The author also asks the students to rate possible rejoinders to these replies. The

results show that the use of direct or indirect replies influences the inferences of status, liking,

and closeness of the interactants. The results also show that indirect replies are more likely to be

accepted than questioned when there is a clear reason for their use, such as face management.

The author concludes that the findings provide evidence that language structure affects social

interaction, and that indirect speech acts are not only a linguistic phenomenon, but also a social

one. The author suggests that future research should examine the effects of other factors, such as

gender, culture, and context, on the use and perception of direct and indirect speech acts.

The article by Boxer and Pickering (1995) examines the problems of presenting speech acts in

English language teaching (ELT) materials. The authors focus on the speech act of complaining

and its response of commiserating and compare the data from spontaneous speech with the data

from textbooks. The authors argue that textbooks often fail to reflect the natural and social

aspects of speech acts and suggest ways to improve the presentation of speech acts in ELT

materials.

The authors first review the literature on speech act theory and its application to ELT. They

explain that speech acts can be performed directly or indirectly and that the choice of how to

perform them depends on various factors, such as the relationship between the speakers, the
context of the situation, and the face needs of the interactants. The authors also point out that

speech acts are not isolated utterances, but part of a sequence of exchanges that involve different

strategies and functions.

The authors then present their analysis of the speech act of complaining and its response to

commiserating in seven ELT textbooks and a corpus of spontaneous speech. They identify

several problems in the textbooks, such as:

 The lack of authentic and varied examples of complaints and commiserations

 The oversimplification and overgeneralization of the rules and patterns of speech acts

 The omission of important information on the social strategies and functions of speech

acts

 The inconsistency and inaccuracy of the terminology and definitions of speech acts

The authors illustrate these problems with examples from the textbooks and the corpus and

show how they can lead to confusion and misunderstanding for the learners. The authors also

provide a sample lesson on complaining and commiserating based on spontaneous speech, and

demonstrate how it can better capture the natural and social aspects of speech acts.

The authors conclude that the presentation of speech acts in ELT materials needs to be

improved to reflect the complexity and variability of real language use. They suggest that ELT

materials should:

 Use more authentic and diverse sources of data for speech acts

 Provide more contextual and pragmatic information on speech acts

 Explain the underlying social strategies and functions of speech acts

 Use consistent and accurate terminology and definitions for speech acts
 The article by EKORO and GUNN (2021) reviews the main concepts and applications of

speech act theory and Gricean pragmatics, two influential approaches to the study of language

use and communication. The authors explain how speech acts and implicatures are used to

perform actions and convey meanings in different contexts and situations.

Speech act theory, developed by Austin and Searle, proposes that utterances are not only

expressions of propositions but also actions that have effects on the world and the interlocutors.

Speech acts can be classified into three levels: illocutionary acts (the act of saying something),

illocutionary acts (the intended meaning or force of what is said), and perlocutionary acts (the

actual effect or outcome of what is said). Speech acts can also be performed directly or

indirectly, depending on the degree of correspondence between the form and the function of the

utterance.

Gricean pragmatics, developed by Grice, focuses on the notion of implicature, which is the

implied meaning that goes beyond the literal meaning of an utterance. Implicatures are derived

from the cooperative principle, which states that speakers and listeners follow certain maxims or

rules of conversation, such as being truthful, relevant, clear, and informative. When a speaker

violates or flouts a maxim, the listener can infer an implicature that explains the speaker’s

intention or attitude.

The authors conclude that speech act theory and Gricean pragmatics are useful frameworks

for analyzing and understanding the complexities and nuances of language use and

communication. They suggest that future research should explore the interactions and

connections between speech acts and implicatures, as well as the effects of other variables, such

as gender, culture, and modality.

 The article by Martínez-Flor (2005) explores the speech act of suggesting, which is a type of

directive that aims to influence the hearer’s actions or opinions. The author reviews the existing

literature on suggestions from both cross-cultural and interlanguage pragmatics perspectives and

proposes a taxonomy of linguistic strategies for making suggestions in English. The author also

suggests how this taxonomy can be used to teach learners of English as a foreign language (EFL)

how to perform suggestions appropriately and effectively.

The author begins by defining the speech act of suggesting as a directive that expresses the

speaker’s intention to offer a possible course of action or opinion to the hearer, without imposing

any obligation or expectation. The author distinguishes suggestions from other types of

directives, such as requests, orders, or commands, by considering the degree of imposition, the

level of directness, and the social distance between the speaker and the hearer.

The author then reviews the previous studies on suggestions from two main fields: cross-

cultural pragmatics and interlanguage pragmatics. Cross-cultural pragmatics examines how

speakers of different languages and cultures perform speech acts, and how they perceive and

interpret them. Interlanguage pragmatics investigates how learners of a second or foreign

language acquire and use speech acts, and how they develop their pragmatic competence. The

author summarizes the main findings and limitations of these studies and identifies the gaps and

challenges in the research on suggestions.

The author then presents the taxonomy of linguistic strategies for making suggestions in

English, based on two theoretical frameworks: speech act theory and politeness theory. Speech

act theory analyzes how language is used to perform actions and communicate intentions, while

politeness theory explains how language is used to maintain social relationships and face needs.

The author classifies the strategies into three main categories: direct, conventionally indirect, and
non-conventionally indirect. Each category is further divided into subcategories, depending on

the linguistic form and function of the strategy. The author provides examples and explanations

for each strategy and discusses the factors that influence the choice of strategy, such as the

context, the purpose, and the relationship between the speaker and the hearer.

The author concludes by proposing an example of a teaching approach that incorporates the

taxonomy of suggestions into the EFL classroom. The author suggests that teachers should raise

learners’ awareness of the speech act of suggesting, provide them with authentic input and output

activities, and give them feedback and assessment on their performance. The author also

emphasizes the importance of taking into account the learners’ needs, preferences, and goals, as

well as the cultural and pragmatic differences between their native and target languages.

The article by Faturrochman, Darmawan, and Hadi (2021) investigates how teachers use

speech acts when applying the scientific approach in the EFL classroom. The authors use the

theory of speech acts to analyze the teacher’s utterances and their effects on the student’s

learning process. The authors also compare the teacher’s speech acts with the principles of the

scientific approach, which is a method of teaching that emphasizes inquiry, observation, and

experimentation.

The authors conduct a qualitative study, using observation and interview as the data collection

methods. The participants are a teacher and 30 students from a bilingual Islamic school in

Sidorov, Indonesia. The authors observe the teacher’s utterances during four meetings of an

English class and record them using a video camera. The authors also interview the teacher to

gain more insights into her beliefs and practices.

 The authors transcribe and code the teacher’s utterances based on the speech act theory, which

distinguishes between three types of speech acts: elocutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary.

The elocutionary act refers to the literal meaning of the utterance, the illocutionary act refers to

the intention or purpose of the utterance, and the perlocutionary act refers to the effect or

outcome of the utterance. The authors also categorize the teacher’s speech acts into four types:

assertive, directive, commissive, and expressive. Assertive are speech acts that state facts or

opinions, directives are speech acts that request or command the hearer to do something,

commissive speech acts that commit the speaker to a future action, and expressive are speech

acts that express the speaker’s feelings or attitudes.

The authors find that the teacher mostly uses directives and assertive in her utterances and that

these speech acts have different effects on the students’ learning process. The directives are used

to guide, instruct, and motivate the students to participate in the scientific approach, while the

assertive are used to provide information, feedback, and evaluation to the students. The authors

also find that the teacher’s speech acts are not always consistent with the principles of the

scientific approach, which require the teacher to facilitate, not dominate, the learning process.

The authors suggest that the teacher should use more commissive and expressive to create a

more interactive and supportive learning environment.

The authors conclude that the teacher’s speech acts play a significant role in the EFL

classroom, especially when applying the scientific approach. The authors recommend that

teachers should be aware of the types and effects of their speech acts, and adjust them according

to the principles of the scientific approach and the needs of the students.
 The article by Zou and Zhu (2022) reviews the development and application of speech act

theory, which is a branch of linguistics that studies how language is used to perform actions and

communicate intentions. The authors survey the literature on speech act theory from both

domestic and international sources and identify the main achievements and challenges in the

field. The authors also suggest that speech act theory can be applied to the analysis of political

speech, which is an under-researched area.

The authors begin by introducing the origin and basic concepts of speech act theory, which

was proposed by Austin (1962) and Searle (1969). They explain that speech acts can be classified

into three levels: elocutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary. The elocutionary level refers to

the literal meaning of the utterance, the illocutionary level refers to the intended function or

purpose of the utterance, and the perlocutionary level refers to the actual effect or outcome of the

utterance. The authors also introduce the notion of felicity conditions, which are the criteria that

must be met for a speech act to be successful.

The authors then review the research on speech act theory from both domestic and

international perspectives. They highlight the contributions of scholars such as Grice (1975),

Leech (1983), Bach and Harnish (1979), and Brown and Levinson (1987), who have enriched

and refined the theory by incorporating the principles of cooperation, politeness, relevance, and

context. They also summarize the studies that have applied speech act theory to various fields,

such as literature, journalism, communication, and education. They note that speech act theory

has been widely used to analyze the linguistic features and pragmatic strategies of different types

of texts and genres.

The authors conclude that speech act theory is a valuable and dynamic theory that can provide

insights into the use and function of language.

 The article by Pesce (2023) examines how teaching small talk and speech acts can improve

the pragmatic skills of Hmong Americans, who are an ethnic minority group that immigrated to

the United States from Southeast Asia. The author reviews the history and characteristics of the

Hmong American community, identifies their specific linguistic and cultural challenges, and

proposes a unit plan for teaching them how to use small talk and speech acts effectively in

English.

The author begins by providing a brief overview of the Hmong American immigration and

settlement in the United States, which started in the 1970s as a result of the Vietnam War. The

author notes that the Hmong American community faces many difficulties, such as poverty,

discrimination, and lack of education. The author also describes some of the features and values

of the Hmong culture, such as collectivism, respect for elders, and oral tradition.

The author then discusses the sociocultural and pragmatic difficulties that Hmong learners

may have when learning English, especially in terms of using small talk and speech acts. Small

talk is the informal and casual conversation that occurs between people who are not very familiar

with each other, and it serves various functions, such as establishing rapport, showing interest,

and filling silence. Speech acts are the actions that are performed by using language, such as

greeting, requesting, apologizing, or complaining. The author explains that Hmong learners may

not understand the purpose and function of small talk and speech acts in English, and may use

them inappropriately or ineffectively. The author cites previous studies that suggest that Hmong

learners may have problems with vocabulary, grammar, politeness, and cultural norms when

using small talk and speech acts.

 The author then presents a unit plan for teaching small talk and speech acts to Hmong

learners, based on the principles of communicative language teaching and intercultural

pragmatics. The unit plan consists of four lessons, each focusing on a different topic and skill:

greetings and introductions, requests and offers, complaints and apologies, and invitations and

refusals. The author provides the objectives, materials, procedures, and assessments for each

lesson, and gives examples of activities and tasks that can be used to teach and practice small

talk and speech acts. The author emphasizes the importance of raising learners’ awareness of the

function and form of small talk and speech acts, providing them with authentic and meaningful

input and output, and giving them feedback and evaluation on their performance.

The author concludes that teaching small talk and speech acts can help Hmong learners

improve their pragmatic skills and communicate more effectively in English. The author suggests

that teachers should be aware of the linguistic and cultural differences between Hmong and

English, and adapt their teaching methods and materials to the needs and preferences of their

learners.

The article by Li and Negoita (2018) proposes a new approach to developing a brain-machine

interface (BMI) that can decode brain activity into speech. The authors argue that the current

approach, which focuses on decoding low-level units of language (e.g. phonemes or letters) from

brain regions related to articulation, is not sufficient to produce natural and fluent speech. The

authors suggest that a more effective approach would be to also decode high-level units of

language (e.g. speech acts or communicative intentions) from brain regions related to

pragmatics, and use them to constrain and guide the decoding of low-level units.
 The authors review the literature on brain-to-speech decoding and highlight the challenges

and limitations of the existing methods. They point out that the current methods rely on simple

and artificial stimuli, such as isolated words or sentences, and do not account for the complex

and dynamic nature of natural speech, which involves various linguistic and pragmatic factors,

such as context, relevance, and politeness. They also note that the current methods are not able to

generate speech that is coherent, meaningful, and appropriate for the intended audience and

purpose.

The authors then present their novel approach, which is based on the theory of speech acts and

pragmatics. They explain that speech acts are the actions that are performed by using language,

such as greeting, requesting, apologizing, or complaining, and that pragmatics is the study of

how language is used in specific situations and contexts. They propose that by decoding speech

acts and pragmatics from brain activity, a BMI could generate speech that is not only accurate

but also natural and effective. They provide some examples of how speech acts and pragmatics

could be decoded from different brain regions, such as the prefrontal cortex, the temporal cortex,

and the amygdala.

The authors conclude that their approach could improve the quality and usability of brain-to-

speech decoding and that it could have various applications, such as assisting people with speech

impairments, enhancing human-computer interaction, and studying the neural basis of language

and communication.

The article by Li and Negoita (2018) proposes a new approach to developing a brain-machine

interface (BMI) that can decode brain activity into speech. The authors argue that the current
approach, which focuses on decoding low-level units of language (e.g. phonemes or letters) from

brain regions related to articulation, is not sufficient to produce natural and fluent speech. The

authors suggest that a more effective approach would be to also decode high-level units of

language (e.g. speech acts or communicative intentions) from brain regions related to

pragmatics, and use them to constrain and guide the decoding of low-level units.

The authors review the literature on brain-to-speech decoding and highlight the challenges

and limitations of the existing methods. They point out that the current methods rely on simple

and artificial stimuli, such as isolated words or sentences, and do not account for the complex

and dynamic nature of natural speech, which involves various linguistic and pragmatic factors,

such as context, relevance, and politeness. They also note that the current methods are not able to

generate speech that is coherent, meaningful, and appropriate for the intended audience and

purpose.

The authors then present their novel approach, which is based on the theory of speech acts and

pragmatics. They explain that speech acts are the actions that are performed by using language,

such as greeting, requesting, apologizing, or complaining, and that pragmatics is the study of

how language is used in specific situations and contexts. They propose that by decoding speech

acts and pragmatics from brain activity, a BMI could generate speech that is not only accurate

but also natural and effective. They provide some examples of how speech acts and pragmatics

could be decoded from different brain regions, such as the prefrontal cortex, the temporal cortex,

and the amygdala.

The authors conclude that their approach could improve the quality and usability of brain-to-

speech decoding and that it could have various applications, such as assisting people with speech
impairments, enhancing human-computer interaction, and studying the neural basis of language

and communication.

The article by Bisilki and Bisilki (2017) explores how Ghanaian graduate students use

evaluative speech acts in their reviews of academic articles. Evaluative speech acts are

expressions of praise or criticism that convey the speaker’s or writer’s attitude towards

something. The authors analyze the types, functions, and linguistic features of evaluative speech

acts in the reviews, and compare them with the academic discourse culture of other regions.

The authors collected 40 reviews written by graduate students at the University of Cape Coast

in Ghana, who were asked to review articles from their fields of study. The authors use Hyland’s

(2004) framework of evaluative language to code and categorize the evaluative speech acts in the

reviews. They also use a content analysis approach to identify the patterns and trends in the data.

The authors find that the reviews contain both positive and negative evaluative speech acts,

but the positive ones outnumber the negative ones. The authors also find that most of the

evaluative speech acts are directed at the text, rather than the author, of the article. The authors

explain that this may reflect the Ghanaian culture of respect and politeness, as well as the

students’ awareness of the academic norms and expectations.

The authors also examine the linguistic features and strategies that the students use to express

their evaluations. They find that the students use various modal verbs, adjectives, adverbs, and

nouns to convey different degrees of certainty, intensity, and emotion.

The authors conclude that the study reveals the complexity and diversity of evaluative speech

acts in the Ghanaian academic context. They suggest that the study can contribute to the
understanding of the academic discourse culture of Ghana and that it can also inform the

teaching and learning of academic writing skills for graduate students.

The article Developmental Pragmatics in Normal and Abnormal Children by Bara, Bosco, and

Bucciarelli (1999) reviews the current theories of developmental pragmatics, which is the study

of how children use language and communication in different contexts. The authors argue that a

theory of developmental pragmatics should account for both normal and abnormal development,

and examine the effects of brain damage on the emergence of pragmatic competence in children.

The authors focus on four types of pragmatic phenomena: direct speech acts, indirect speech

acts, irony, and deceit. Direct speech acts are utterances that directly express the speaker’s

intention, such as “Close the door”. Indirect speech acts are utterances that imply a different

intention than the literal meaning, such as “It’s cold in here” to request closing the door. Irony is

a form of indirect speech act that conveys the opposite of what is said, such as “What a nice day”

to express dissatisfaction with the weather. Deceit is another form of indirect speech act that

intentionally misleads the listener, such as “I have a headache” to avoid going to school.

The authors review the existing literature on how normal children acquire these pragmatic

skills, and how brain-injured children perform on these tasks. They find that there is no single

theory that can explain the development of pragmatic competence in normal children and that the

studies on abnormal children are scarce and inconsistent. They propose that the complexity of the

mental representations involved in the different pragmatic tasks can account for the differences

in the development of communicative competence observed in normal and abnormal children.

They suggest that a pragmatic theory should determine the normal developmental pattern within
which different pragmatic phenomena may find a precise role and that such a framework would

allow for a systematic study of abnormal pragmatic development.

The authors conclude that developmental pragmatics is a challenging and promising field of

research and that more empirical studies are needed to test the hypotheses and models proposed

by the different theories. They also emphasize the importance of considering the social and

emotional aspects of communication, as well as the cognitive ones, to understand the full

spectrum of pragmatic competence.

The article Social and Pragmatic Deficits in Autism: Cognitive or Affective? by Baron-Cohen

(1988) reviews the literature on the social and pragmatic impairments in autistic children, and

compares two different psychological theories that try to explain them: the Affective theory and

the Cognitive theory. The author argues that both theories have some merits, but also some

limitations, and suggests that they might be integrated in the future.

The Affective theory, proposed by Kanner (1943), suggests that autistic children have a

primary deficit in affective development, which leads to a lack of social interest, empathy, and

emotional expression. This theory is supported by some studies that show that autistic children

have difficulties in recognizing and producing emotional cues, such as facial expressions, tone of

voice, and gestures. However, this theory cannot account for the fact that autistic children also

have some intact social skills, such as imitation, joint attention, and turn-taking, and that they can

sometimes show appropriate affective responses in certain situations.

The Cognitive theory, proposed by Baron-Cohen, Leslie, and Frith (1985), suggests that

autistic children have a primary deficit in cognitive development, which leads to a lack of theory
of mind, or the ability to infer the mental states of others. This theory is supported by some

studies that show that autistic children fail to understand the intentions, beliefs, and desires of

others and that they have problems with tasks that require perspective-taking, such as false

belief, deception, and irony. However, this theory cannot account for the fact that autistic

children also have some difficulties in processing non-mentalistic information, such as spatial

relations, causality, and logic, and that they can sometimes pass some theory of mind tasks with

the help of scaffolding or training.

The author concludes that both theories have some validity, but also some gaps and that they

might be complementary rather than contradictory. He suggests that a pragmatic theory should

consider both the affective and the cognitive aspects of communication and that more empirical

studies are needed to test the hypotheses and models proposed by the different theories. He also

emphasizes the importance of taking into account the social and cultural context of

communication, as well as the individual differences among autistic children.

The article Speech Acts and Their Underlying Strategies by EFL Learners and Non-Learners:

A Systematic Literature Review by Sharqawi and Anthony (2019) reviews the literature on how

English as a foreign language (EFL) learners and non-learners use speech acts and their related

strategies in different contexts. Speech acts are utterances that perform a certain function, such as

requesting, apologizing, or refusing. Strategies are the ways that speakers choose to express their

speech acts, such as being polite, direct, or indirect. The authors aim to provide an overview of

the various speech acts and strategies that have been investigated and to identify the gaps and

challenges in the current research.

 The authors searched for scholarly articles published from 2009 to 2018 that reported on

speech acts and strategies used by different participants, such as EFL learners, native speakers, or

non-learners. They used Google Scholar as their main source of data and selected the articles

based on keywords and relevance. They classified the articles according to the type of speech act,

the type of strategy, the type of population, and the type of method.

The authors found that the most frequently investigated speech acts were those that involved

disagreement or refusal, which are considered misreferred acts because they can cause face-

threatening situations. The most common strategies used under these speech acts were politeness

strategies and semantic strategies. Politeness strategies are the ways that speakers try to minimize

the negative impact of their speech acts, such as using hedges, mitigators, or apologies. Semantic

strategies are the ways that speakers use specific words or expressions to convey their speech

acts, such as modal verbs, adverbs, or formulae.

The authors also found that most of the studies focused on the production level of speech acts

and strategies, rather than the perception level or both. The production level refers to how

speakers produce their speech acts and strategies, while the perception level refers to how

listeners interpret them. The authors suggest that both levels are important to understand the

pragmatic competence of EFL learners and non-learners and that more studies should include

both levels in their analysis.

The authors concluded that the literature on speech acts and strategies is rich and diverse, but

also has some limitations and challenges. They point out that some factors, such as gender,

culture, and context, have been neglected or inconsistently addressed by the previous studies.

They also note that some speech acts, such as compliments, complaints, or suggestions, have

been under-researched or overlooked. They recommend that future studies should consider these
factors and speech acts, and use more rigorous and comprehensive methods to investigate the

pragmatic competence of EFL learners and non-learners.

The article Teaching Pragmatics: Trends and Issues by Taguchi (2011) reviews the literature

on how to teach pragmatic competence to second language (L2) learners. Pragmatic competence

is the ability to use and understand language appropriately in different social situations. The

author aims to provide an overview of the various instructional methods and classroom practices

that have been explored in the field of L2 pragmatics and to identify the challenges and

opportunities for future research and pedagogy.

The author divides the literature into two main domains: (a) experimental studies that test the

effectiveness of different instructional interventions for teaching pragmatics, and (b) descriptive

studies that examine the optimal instructional conditions and resources for promoting pragmatic

development. The author reviews the studies in each domain and summarizes their main findings

and implications.

In the domain of instructional interventions, the author reviews the studies that compare

explicit and implicit instruction, input processing instruction, and skill acquisition and practice.

Explicit instruction involves providing learners with metapragmatic information and feedback,

while implicit instruction involves exposing learners to authentic input and interaction. Input

processing instruction combines both explicit and implicit instruction by drawing learners’

attention to the pragmatic features of the input. Skill acquisition and practice involve providing

learners with opportunities to practice their pragmatic skills in meaningful and varied contexts.

In the domain of classroom practice and resources, the author reviews the studies that focus

on material development and teacher education, learner strategies and autonomous learning, and
incidental pragmatics learning. Material development and teacher education involve creating and

using appropriate and authentic materials and tasks for teaching pragmatics and training teachers

to be aware of and competent in pragmatics. Learner strategies and autonomous learning involve

helping learners to develop and use effective strategies for learning pragmatics, such as noticing,

inferring, reflecting, and self-monitoring, and encouraging learners to seek out and use additional

resources for pragmatic learning, such as online tools, corpora, and native speakers. Incidental

pragmatics learning involves exploring the potential of unplanned and spontaneous pragmatic

learning that occurs in the classroom, such as through teacher talk, peer interaction, and

corrective feedback.

The author finds that material development and teacher education are essential for ensuring

the quality and relevance of pragmatic instruction and that more research is needed to evaluate

the effectiveness and applicability of different materials and tasks. The author also finds that

learner strategies and autonomous learning are beneficial for enhancing learners’ pragmatic

competence and motivation and that more research is needed to investigate the factors that

influence learners’ strategy use and autonomy. The author further finds that incidental pragmatics

learning is a valuable source of pragmatic input and output and that more research is needed to

examine the nature and frequency of such learning opportunities in the classroom.

The author concludes that the literature on teaching pragmatics is rich and diverse, but also

faces some challenges and opportunities. The author points out that some issues, such as the role

of gender, culture, and context, have been underexplored or inconsistently addressed in the

previous studies. The author also notes that some pragmatic features, such as compliments,

complaints, or suggestions, have been under-researched or overlooked. The author recommends

that future studies should consider these issues and features, and use more rigorous and
comprehensive methods to investigate the pragmatic competence and development of L2

learners.

Conclusion

In this paper, we have reviewed the literature on the role of social interaction in the

development of second language (L2) speech acts in children. We have focused on three main

aspects of social interaction: the input, the output, and the feedback. We have shown that these

aspects are interrelated and dynamic and that they can have positive or negative effects on L2

speech act development depending on various factors, such as the characteristics of the learners,

the quality and quantity of the interaction, and the social and cultural norms of the L2. We have

also discussed the implications of these findings for L2 teaching and learning, and we have

suggested some directions and recommendations for future research and practice.

We hope that this paper has contributed to a better understanding of the importance of social

interaction in L2 speech act development, and to a more effective and enjoyable L2 learning

experience for children. We believe that social interaction is not only a means, but also a goal of

L2 communication, and that children can benefit from engaging in meaningful and authentic

interactions with their L2 interlocutors. We encourage L2 teachers, parents, and researchers to

foster and facilitate such interactions, and to explore the potential of social interaction for L2

speech act development and beyond.

 References

Holtgraves, T. (1986). Language structure in social interaction: Perceptions of direct and indirect

speech acts and interactants who use them. Journal of personality and social

psychology, 51(2), 305.

Boxer, D., & Pickering, L. (1995). Problems in the presentation of speech acts in ELT materials: The

case of complaints.

Ekoro, D. E., & Gunn, M. (2021). Speech act theory and Gricean pragmatics: A review. LWATI: A

journal of contemporary research, 18(4), 130-143.

Martínez Flor, A. (2005). A theoretical review of the speech act of suggesting: Towards a taxonomy

for its use in FLT. Revista alicantina de estudios ingleses, No. 18 (Nov. 2005); pp. 167-187.

Faturrochman, R. G., Darmawan, A. A., & Hadi, F. (2021). Teacher talks in scientific approach in

EFL classroom: A Speech Acts Perspective. SAGA: Journal of English Language Teaching

and Applied Linguistics, 2(1), 35-46.

Zou, L., & Yiye, Z. (2022). Review of Research on Development of Speech Act Theory and Its

Application. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 5(12), 127-135.

Pesce, L. (2023). Teaching Small Talk and Speech Acts to Improve Pragmatic Skills of Hmong

Americans.

Li, L., & Negoita, S. (2018). Brain-to-speech decoding will require linguistic and pragmatic

data. Journal of neural engineering, 15(6), 063001.

Bisilki, A. K., & Bisilki, I. (2017). Evaluative speech acts of Ghanaian graduate students: a case

study of the University of Cape Coast, Ghana. Contemporary Journal of African

Studies, 5(1), 87-112.

Roever, C. (2011). Testing of second language pragmatics: Past and future. Language testing, 28(4),

463-481.

Bara, B. G., Bosco, F. M., & Bucciarelli, M. (1999). Developmental pragmatics in normal and

abnormal children. Brain and language, 68(3), 507-528.

Baron-Cohen, S. (1988). Social and pragmatic deficits in autism: Cognitive or affective? Journal of

autism and developmental disorders, 18(3), 379-402.

Sharqawi, M. A., & Anthony, E. M. (2019). Speech acts and their underlying strategies by EFL

learners and Non-Learners: A systematic literature review. Amazonia Investiga, 8(20), 486-

502.

Taguchi, N. (2011). Teaching pragmatics: Trends and issues. Annual Review of Applied

Linguistics, 31, 289-310.