L2 Pragmatic Assessment: A Literature Review of Techniques and Challenges

Authors

  • Yanbing Chen Texas A&M University

Keywords:

L2 pragmatics, Assessment, Assessment Techniques

Abstract

With the increasing recognition of pragmatics as a crucial component of language competence, assessing L2 learners’ pragmatic abilities has become an essential area of study in second language acquisition. This literature review examines empirical studies on L2 pragmatic assessment, emphasizing its significance in language learning and teaching. Pragmatics plays a crucial role in communication by conveying both locutionary and illocutionary meaning, enabling effective discourse completion. This review explores three key aspects of L2 pragmatic assessment: the necessity of assessing pragmatic competence, the techniques employed for evaluation, and the challenges encountered in assessment design and implementation. The discussion highlights various assessment tools, including discourse completion tests (DCTs), role-plays, and checklists, alongside their advantages and limitations. Additionally, concerns related to validity, reliability, and practicality in pragmatic assessment are addressed. The review underscores the need for continued research and methodological refinement to enhance the accuracy and applicability of pragmatic assessment in second language acquisition.

References

Altasan, A. M. B. (2016). The pragmalinguistic competence in requests: A comparison between one native and two non-native speakers of English. American Journal of Educational Research, 4(4), 353-359.

Ishihara, N. & Tarone, E. (2009). Subjectivity and pragmatic choice in L2 Japanese: Emulating and resisting pragmatic norms. In N. Taguchi (Ed.), Pragmatic Competence (pp. 101-128). Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110218558.101

Ogiermann, E. (2018). Discourse completion tasks. In A. Jucker, K. Schneider, & W. Bublitz (Eds.), Methods in Pragmatics (pp. 229 - 255). Mouton de Gruyter.

Volden, J., & Phillips, L. (2010b). Measuring pragmatic language in speakers with autism spectrum disorders: Comparing the children’s communication checklist—2 and the test of pragmatic language. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19(3), 204–212. https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2010/09-0011)

Taguchi, N. (2008). The role of learning environment in the development of pragmatic comprehension: A comparison of gains between EFL and ESL learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30(4), 423–452. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263108080716.

Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied linguistics, 4(2), 91-112.

Gesuato, S., & Castello, E. (2020). Assessing pragmatic aspects of L2 communication: Why, how and what for. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1515/lpp-2020-0001.

Ren, W. (2019). Assessing Chinese EFL learners’ interlanguage pragmatic development: The case of apology and refusal speech acts. Journal of Pragmatics, 142, 85-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.01.026

Brown, D. H., & Abeywickrama, P. (2019). Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices (2nd Edition) (2nd ed.). Pearson Education ESL.

Cohen, A. D. (2019). Considerations in assessing pragmatic appropriateness in spoken language. Language Teaching, 53(2), 183–202. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444819000156

Youn, S. J. (2014). Validity argument for assessing L2 pragmatics in interaction using mixed methods. Language Testing, 32(2), 199–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214557113

Timpe-Laughlin, V., & Choi, I. (2017). Exploring the validity of a second language intercultural pragmatics assessment tool. Language Assessment Quarterly, 14(1), 19-35. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2016.1256406

Eslami, Z. R., & Mirzaei, A. (2014). Speech act data collection in a non-Western context: Oral and written DCTs in the Persian language. International Journal of Language Testing, 4(1), 137-154.

Downloads

Published

2025-02-28

Issue

Section

Articles