Interlanguage Pragmatics of EFL Advanced Learners: Insights from a Longitudinal Study into the Development of the Speech Act of Request in the Polish Context

  • Anna Szczepaniak-KozakEmail author
Part of the Second Language Learning and Teaching book series (SLLT)


In this paper the acquisition of pragmatic competence in English among advanced Polish learners of English is investigated. A sample of linguistic written data was collected in a discourse completion task of an open-response format in a longitudinal study on EFL acquisitional pragmatics. The responses provided, in this particular case requests, were studied mostly following Blum-Kulka et al. (1989), Rue and Qiao (2008), Takahashi (2001), and Bardovi-Harlig (2001). This means that internal and external mitigating devices were investigated together with strategies for expressing directness of requests. On this basis, conclusions about the interlanguage pragmatic competence of the participants are drawn. Also, selected aspects of L2 pragmatics which may require further instruction are mentioned.


Target Language Supportive Move Strong Hint Preparatory Question Linguistic Proficiency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1996). Pragmatics and language teaching: Bringing pragmatics and pedagogy together. In L. Bouton (Ed.), Pragmatics and language learning (pp. 21–39). Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois.Google Scholar
  2. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2001). Evaluating empirical evidence: Grounds for instruction in pragmatics? In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 13–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B. S. (1990). Congruence in native and nonnative conversations: Status balance in the academic advising session. Language Learning, 40, 467–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barron, A. (2003). Acquisition in interlanguage pragmatics. Learning how to do things with words in a study abroad context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blum-Kulka, S. (1983). Interpreting and performing speech acts in a second language: A cross-cultural study of Hebrew and English. In N. Wolfson & J. Elliott (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition (pp. 36–55). Cambridge: Newbury House.Google Scholar
  6. Blum-Kulka, S. (1987). Indirectness and politeness in requests: Same or different. Journal of Pragmatics, 11, 131–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (Eds.). (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  8. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cap, P. (2010). Mit aktu mowy jako kategorii organizacji analizy pragmatycznej [The myth of the speech act as an organizational category in pragmatic analysis]. In J. Nijakowska (Ed.), Interdyscyplinarne studia nad świadomością i przetwarzaniem językowym [Interdisciplinary studies on consciousness and language processing] (pp. 225–236). Kraków: Tertium.Google Scholar
  10. Economidou-Kogetsidis, M. (2009). Interlanguage request modification: The use of lexical/phrasal downgraders and mitigating supportive moves. Multilingua, 28, 79–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ellis, R. (1992). Learning to communicate in the classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 214–225.Google Scholar
  12. Ellis, R. (2003). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1989). Internal and external modification in interlanguage request realization. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 221–247). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  14. Ghavamnia, M., Tavakoli, M., & Rezazadeh, M. (2011). A comparative study of requests among L2 English, L1 Persian, and L1 English speakers. Revista Electrónica de Lingüística Aplicada, 10, 105–123.Google Scholar
  15. Herbert, R. K. (1991). The sociology of compliment work: The enthocontrastive study of Polish and English complements. Multilingua, 10, 381–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jodłowiec, M., & Urban, M. (2010). Kompetencja pragmatyczna a poziom zaawansowania w języku angielskim wśród Polaków uczących się języka angielskiego [Pragmatic competence and proficiency level in English in Polish learners of English]. In W. Chłopicki & M. Jodłowiec (Eds.), Słowo w dialogu międzykulturowym [The word in intercultural dialog] (pp. 311–322). Kraków: Tertium.Google Scholar
  17. Kalisz, R. (1993). Different cultures, different languages, and different speech acts revisited (pp. 107–118). XXVII: Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics.Google Scholar
  18. Kasper, G. (2001). Four perspectives on L2 pragmatic development. Applied Linguistics, 22, 502–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kasper, G. & Dahl, M. (1991). Research methods in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 215–247.Google Scholar
  20. Kasper, G., & Schmidt, R. (1996). Developmental issues in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 149–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B. (1989). Praising and complimenting. In W. Oleksy (Ed.), Contrastive pragmatics (pp. 73–100). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  22. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B. (2010). Introspekcja i intuicja w uczeniu się kategorii językowych [Introspection and intuition in learning linguistic categories]. In J. Nijakowska (Ed.), Interdyscyplinarne studia nad świadomością i przetwarzaniem językowym [Interdisciplinary studies on consciousness and language processing] (pp. 41–74). Kraków: Tertium.Google Scholar
  23. Liu, J. (2007). Development of a pragmatics test for Chinese EFL learners. Language Testing, 24, 391–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lubecka, A. (2000). Requests, invitations, apologies and compliments in American English and Polish. Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka.Google Scholar
  25. Marcjanik, M. (2009). Mówimy uprzejmie: Poradnik językowego savoir-vivre’u [We speak politely: A handbook of linguistic savoir-vivre]. Warszawa: PWN.Google Scholar
  26. Matsumura, S. (2003). Modelling the relationship among interlanguage pragmatic development, L2 proficiency, and exposure to L2. Applied Linguistics, 24, 465–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Niżegorodcew, A. (2010). W stronę interkulturowego modelu nauczania języka drugiego/obcego [Towards an intercultural model of teaching a second or foreign language]. In J. Nijakowska (Ed.), Interdyscyplinarne studia nad świadomością i przetwarzaniem językowym [Interdisciplinary studies on consciousness and language processing] (pp. 133–156). Kraków: Tertium.Google Scholar
  28. Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ogiermann, E. (2009a). Politeness and in-directness across cultures: A comparison of English, German, Polish and Russian requests. Journal of Politeness Research, 5, 189–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ogiermann, E. (2009b). On apologizing in negative and positive politeness cultures. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. O’Keeffe, A., Clancy, B., & Adolphs, S. (2011). Introducing pragmatics in use. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Rakowicz, A. (2009). Ambiguous invitations: The interlanguage pragmatics of Polish English language learners. Saarbrücken: VDM.Google Scholar
  33. Robinson, K., Schmidt, T., & Teti, D. M. (2005). Issues in the use of longitudinal and cross-sectional designs. In D. M. Teti (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in developmental psychology (pp. 3–20). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  34. Rose, K. R., & Kasper, G. (Eds.). (2001). Pragmatics in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Rue, Y.-J., & Qiao, G. Z. (2008). Request strategies: A comparative study in Mandarin Chinese and Korean. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schaie, W. K., & Caskie, G. L. (2005). Methodological issues in aging research. In D. M. Teti (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in developmental psychology (pp. 21–39). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  37. Schmidt, R. W. (1983). Interaction, acculturation and the acquisition of communicative competence. In N. Wolfson & E. Judd (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 137–174). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
  38. Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stewart, M. (2004). Politeness in Britain: ‘It’s only a suggestion …’. In L. Hickey & M. Stewart (Eds.), Politeness in Europe (pp. 116–129). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  40. Szczepaniak-Kozak, A. (2013). The relation between linguistic proficiency and pragmatic appropriacy: A study of Polish learners of English as a foreign language. In I. Headlandová Kalischová, & M. Nĕmec (Eds.), English as the lingua franca of the modern world: New challenges for academia (pp. 39–54). Brno: Masaryc University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Szczepaniak-Kozak, A. (2014). Interlanguage pragmatics: A study into the acquisition of pragmatic competence in English as a foreign language context. In S. Adamczak-Krysztofowicz, & A. Szczepaniak-Kozak (Eds.), Kultur-Kommunikation-Kreativität-Reflexivität. Aktuelle Beiträge zum universitären Fremdsprachenunterricht (pp. 56–77). Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  42. Takahashi, S. (2001). Input enhancement in developing pragmatic competence. In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 171–199). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Trosborg, A. (1987). Apology strategies in native/non-natives. Journal of Pragmatics, 11, 147–167.Google Scholar
  44. Usó-Juan, E., & Martínez-Flor, A. (2007). Teaching learners to appropriately mitigate requests. ELT Journal, 62, 349–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Walters, J. (1980). Grammar, meaning and sociocultural appropriateness in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 34, 337–345.Google Scholar
  46. Wierzbicka, A. (1985). Different cultures, different languages, different speech acts: Polish vs English. Journal of Pragmatics, 9, 145–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Adam Mickiewicz UniversityPoznańPoland

Personalised recommendations