This study investigated the efficacy of different feedback
conditions in developing accurate and fluent production of L2 English email
requests. Sixty-nine intermediate-level Vietnamese EFL university students were
randomly assigned to one control and three experimental groups. All the four
groups received three hours of explicit metapragmatic instruction on email
requests, but only the experimental groups received written corrective feedback
on their pragmatic production. One experimental group received feedback without
opportunity for revision. Another experimental group received one cycle of
feedback and revision, and the third group two cycles of feedback and revision.
Results of a Discourse Completion Task (DCT) pre-test, immediate post-test, and
delayed post-test indicated that the combination of instruction and feedback had
a positive effect on the accuracy of learners’ pragmatic performance. However,
no clear-cut evidence for the effect of revision on the fluency of learners’
pragmatic performance was found in the study. The findings highlight the
effectiveness of corrective feedback and revision in consolidating emergent L2
pragmatic knowledge, but further research is needed to understand how much
revision is sufficient to facilitate fluency development.
(2009) Toward a new process-based indicator for measuring writing
fluency: Evidence from L2 writers’ think-aloud protocols. Canadian Modern Language Review, 65(4), 531–558.
Alcón-Soler, E.
(2005) Does instruction work for learning pragmatics in the EFL
context?System, 33(3), 417–435.
Anderson, J. R.
(1993) Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Barron, J., & Celaya, M.
(2010) Developing pragmatic fluency in an EFL context. In L. Roberts, M. Howard, M. Laoire, & D. Singleton (Eds.), EUROSLA yearbook (Vol. 101, pp. 38–61). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bialystok, E.
(1993) Symbolic representation and attentional control. In G. Kasper & S. Blum–Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 43–57). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Biesenbach-Lucas, S.
(2007) Students writing e-mails to faculty: An examination of
e-politeness among native and non-native speakers of English. Language Learning and Technology, 11(2), 59–81.
Bygate, M.
(1996) Effects of task repetition: Appraising the development of second
language learners. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 136–147). Oxford: Heinemann.
Bygate, M.
(2001) Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral
language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks, second language learning, teaching and
testing (pp. 23–48). Harlow: Longman.
Chenoweth, N. A., & Hayes, J.
(2001) Fluency in writing. Generating text in L1 and L2. Written Communication, 18(1), 80–98.
DeKeyser, R. M.
(1997) Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language
morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(2), 195–221.
Economidou-Kogetsidis, M.
(2011) “Please answer me as soon as possible”: Pragmatic failure in
non-native speakers’ e-mail requests to faculty. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(13), 3193–3215.
Ellis, R., & Yuan, F.
(2004) The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in
second language narrative writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(1), 59–84.
Gass, S., Mackey, A., Alvarez-Torres, M., & Fernández-Garcίa, M.
(1999) The effects of task repetition on linguistic
output. Language Learning, 491, 549–581.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H.
(2007) The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
Ishihara, N.
(2010) Assessing learners’ pragmatic ability in the
classroom. In D. Tatsuki & N. Houck (Eds.), Pragmatics: Teaching speech acts (pp. 209–227). Alexandria, VA: TESOL Inc.
Johnson, M. D., Mercado, L., & Acevedo, A.
(2012) The effect of planning sub-processes on L2 writing fluency,
grammatical complexity, and lexical complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(3), 264–282.
Kasper, G.
(2001) Classroom research on interlanguage pragmatics. In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 33–60). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Koike, D., & Pearson, L.
(2005) The effect of instruction and feedback in the development of
pragmatic competence. System, 33(3), 481–501.
Knoch, U.
(2007) Diagnostic writing assessment: The development and validation of
a rating scale. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, The University of Auckland, New Zealand.
Leijten, M., & Van Waes, L.
(2013) Keystroke logging in writing research: Using Inputlog to analyze
and visualize writing processes. Written Communication, 30(3), 358–392.
Li, S.
(2012) The effect of input-based practice on pragmatic development in L2
Chinese. Language Learning, 62(2), 403–438.
(2019) Data collection methods in L2 pragmatics research: An
overview. In N. Taguchi (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and
pragmatics (pp. 195–211). New York, NY: Routledge.
Nguyen, T. T. M., Do, T. T. H., Nguyen, T. A., Pham, T. T. T.
(2015) Teaching email requests in the academic context: A focus on the
role of corrective feedback. Language Awareness, 24(2), 169–195.
Nguyen, T. T. M., Do, T. T. H., Pham, T. T. T., & Nguyen, T. A.
(2018) The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of
L2 pragmatics: An eight month investigation. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language
Teaching, 56(3), 345–375.
Nguyen, T. T. M., Pham, T. H., & Pham, M. T.
(2012) The relative effects of explicit and implicit form-focused
instruction on the development of L2 pragmatic competence. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(4), 416–434.
Polio, C. G.
(1997) Measures of linguistic accuracy in second language writing
research. Language Learning, 47(1), 101–143.
Saito, M., & Lyster, R.
(2012) Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and fluency
development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 341, 591–626.
Skehan, P.
(1996) A framework for the implementation of task-based
instruction. Applied Linguistics, 171, 38–62.
Schmidt, R.
(2010) Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language
learning. In W. M. Chan, S. Chi, K. N. Cin, J. Istanto, M. Nagami, J. W. Sew, T. Suthiwan, & I. Walker (Eds.), Proceedings of CLaSIC 2010 (pp. 721–737). Singapore: National University of Singapore, Centre for Language Studies.
Taguchi, N.
(2005) Comprehending implied meaning in English as a foreign
language. The Modern Language Journal, 89(4), 543–562.
Taguchi, N.
(2008) Cognition, language contact, and the development of pragmatic
comprehension in a study-abroad context. Language Learning, 581, 33–71.
Taguchi, N.
(2015) Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies
were, are, and should be going. Language Teaching, 481, 1–50.
Takimoto, M.
(2006) The effects of explicit feedback on the development of pragmatic
proficiency. Language Teaching Research, 101, 393–417.
Takimoto, M.
(2012) Assessing the effects of identical task repetition and task-type
repetition on learners’ recognition and production of second language
request downgraders. Intercultural Pragmatics, 91, 71–96.
Van Waes, L., & Leijten, M.
(2015) Fluency in writing: A multidimensional perspective on writing
fluency applied to L1 and L2. Computers and Composition, 381, 79–95.
Cited by
Cited by 7 other publications
Cho, Hyejin, YouJin Kim & Seyoung Park
2022. Comparing students’ responses to synchronous written corrective feedback during individual and collaborative writing tasks. Language Awareness 31:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
2023. The (Non-)Teaching of Pragmatics in an EFL Context. Dil Eğitimi ve Araştırmaları Dergisi 9:1 ► pp. 43 ff.
Morales Ruiz, Jenny
2023. Los reclamos por correo electrónico: efectos de la instrucción pragmática con enfoque por tareas en el español L2 Emails of complaints: the effects of task-based pragmatic instruction in L2 Spanish. Journal of Spanish Language Teaching 10:1 ► pp. 14 ff.
2022. Exploring the role of strategy instruction on learners’ ability to write authentic email requests to faculty. Language Teaching Research 26:2 ► pp. 213 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.