Colloquia

Friday, April 15, 2005

3:30PM – 5:30PM

Cultural Influences and Biases in Intercultural Pragmatics

Organizer:

Andrea DeCapua, New York University

Pragmatic Socialization and Developing L2 Identity in Second, Foreign,

and Heritage Language Classroom Discourse

Organizers:

Diana Boxer, University of Florida

Joan Kelly Hall, Pennsylvania State University

Saturday, April 16, 2005

4:45PM – 6:00PM

Political Discourse and Intercultural Pragmatics

Beverly S. Hartford

Samuel G. Obeng

Indiana University

Description of Colloquium, Presentations, and List of Presenters

Cultural Influences and Biases in Intercultural Pragmatics

Organizer: Andrea DeCapua, New York University

Intercultural pragmatics is a rich area of research, attracting researchers from various disciplines and schools of thought. In particular the confluence of culture, cultural influences and cultural biases in intercultural pragmatics research has received scrutiny as researchers and practitioners become increasingly attentive to the inseparable role of language and culture. The nature and role of cultural influences and biases in intercultural pragmatics can be investigated from different perspectives, e.g., theoretical, empirical, or pedagogical. Differing international perspectives in research approaches to discourse and in pedagogical goals are also important areas. This symposium explores some of these differing approaches and goals with presenters who themselves represent different cultures and differing academic traditions.

Ebsworth & Ebsworth examine how misunderstandings on the pragmatic level between Puerto Ricans and North Americans reinforce cultural bias as interlocutors interpret differences through the lens of their own culture. The presenters argue that an understanding of these differences has the potential to reduce cultural bias and promote mutual understanding across cultures in contact.

  Félix-Brasdefer investigates the effects of explicit instruction on the development of learners’ pragmatic ability when refusing in an FL context, and discusses advantages and disadvantages of explicit instruction and effects on pragmatic development.

Meier addresses cultural bias in approaches and related activities for developing intercultural pragmatic competence. Cultural orientations and dimensions informing learning preferences are juxtaposed with a representative sampling of activity types from various sources, including ESL/EFL textbooks, teacher source books, and intercultural communication training materials.

Schmitt explores the effect of discourse structure on L2 listening comprehension and argues that familiarity with formal schemata of the target language is essential for successful comprehension.  

Puerto Rican/American Cross-Cultural Pragmatics as a Source of Bias

Miriam Eisenstein Ebsworth, New York University                  

Timothy John Ebsworth, College of New Rochelle

The Effects of Explicit Instruction in Developing Pragmatic Competence:

A Longitudinal Study of L2 Spanish Learners

César Félix-Brasdefer , Indiana University

Cultural Bias in Materials for Developing Intercultural Pragmatic Competence

Ardith Meier, University of Northern Iowa

The Effects of Discourse Organization on Listening Comprehension in L2

Elena Schmitt, Southern Connecticut State University

Pragmatic Socialization and Developing L2 Identity in Second, Foreign, and Heritage Language Classroom Discourse

Organizers:

Diana Boxer, University of Florida

Joan Kelly Hall, Pennsylvania State University

It is now widely agreed that second language socialization into L2 pragmatic norms is critical for the development of language identity. Whether the focus is on interlanguage pragmatics (ILP) or cross-cultural pragmatics (CCP) largely depends upon whether we are talking about second language, foreign language, or bilingual language development. This colloquium examines these varied contexts for pragmatic development, with a particular focus on how L2 novices are socialized within particular constellations of classroom discourse practices in the US .

This colloquium begins with an overview of current issues regarding language socialization and language identity for pragmatics and language learning (D.Boxer); we continue with five data-driven papers spanning ESL, FL, and heritage language contexts (M. Gelbman, R. Smouse, S. Barkley, M. Nakamura, and S. Cho) and a discussion of the major theoretical and pedagogical threads of the research (J. Kelly Hall).

Today I’m Going to Talk About…” Academic Discourse Socialization of ESL

Learners in Giving Oral Presentations

Michael Gelbman, University of Florida

Talking to Learn and Learning to Talk: An Examination of Interaction Patterns in a Korean Heritage Language School

So-Eun Cho, The Pennsylvania State University

The Development and Use of Brazilian Portuguese Address Forms in the Foreign Language Classroom

Sharon Barkley, University of Florida

Socio-Linguistic Functions of Interactional Particle ‘ne’ and Its

Pragmatic Usage in Japanese Language Teaching

Mutsuo Nakamura, University of Florida

Conveying Requests in Xhosa as a Foreign Language

Mantoa Rose Smouse, University of Florida

Political Discourse and Intercultural Pragmatics

Beverly S. Hartford

Samuel G. Obeng

Indiana University

  This colloquium addresses the interplay of pragmatic strategies and political discourse used in English by World English speakers. With the advent of easy access to world-wide news through electronic media, as well as print and video, audiences for political discussions have expanded exponentially. Along with this expansion has come the growth of English as the primary lingua franca of such media. This allows interested parties who may not speak the local languages the opportunity to obtain information about political issues which is not filtered through the large international press organizations. Many countries publish both official and private on-line newspapers in English for just such a purpose. Moreover, vehicles such as chat rooms, which are also primarily conducted in English, allow the same audience to gain insights into unofficial thinking about political issues.

  In this presentation, we examine the political discourse pragmatics in two such English media. Hartford investigates the pragmatic strategies in the use of English in chat rooms used by Nepalis discussing the current political situation in Nepal , a topic which promotes a high level of face-risk. Nepal is in the midst of a Maoist insurgency, the 1992 constitution has been suspended, the political parties are without power, and Parliament has been dismissed. Although there is supposedly a free press, journalists have been imprisoned for anti-government reporting. This paper analyzes the politeness strategies selected in the use of referents to the current situation and to the people involved in the events. It also looks at the strategies selected when discussants address one-another. For example, the discussants use references to Nepal’s King which range from highly respectful to extremely derogatory, the latter being usages that would not be well tolerated in other, more official, public forums such as newspapers, and radio and TV broadcasts.. Political stances and affiliations are stated quite directly, and the use of indirection is infrequent.. Bald-on-record statements are common, as are rhetorical questions, and truth assertions (“It is true that…”). There is frequent use of categorical upgraders such as ‘always’, ‘never’, ‘everyone’, ‘completely’ etc. Moreover English ‘taboo’ words such as those describing body parts and bodily functions are employed as descriptive references to people and events. Writers also sometimes code-switch to Nepali lexical items, especially for very direct, derogatory references, such as name-callings, particularly when they are addressed to others. In addition, caste designations and names are used for accusatory statements, blaming the political woes on members of certain castes, so that the caste designations become name-callings themselves.

  Obeng discusses the use of vagueness, hyperbole, and other forms of implicit communicative features to manage various political speech acts. This paper takes a close look at the linguistic structure of the language of persuasion. Specifically, the paper examines the language employed by Ghanaian political actors writing in English in the management of intertextuality (Barthes, 1981; Bakhtin, 1969, 1981; Tarkka, 1993; Rojo & van Dijk, 1997), evidentiality, comparison and contrast (van Dijk, 1999). The paper demonstrates that in pursuing the above concerns, the political actors use specific political pronouns ( Wilson , 1990), verbs of ‘emotion’, Ghanaian metaphors of wide accessibility, and specific Ghanaian English nouns. On evidentiality, the paper argues that in emphasizing their political views or stance, political discourse participants draw on their knowledge of (and on the public’s knowledge of) specific expressions of public importance; thus, evidentiality becomes part of intertextuality. Specific syntactic and pragmatic particles are also used when comparing or contrasting their political party’s ‘good’ acts or the good behavior of their close associates with the bad, often, ‘evil’, acts of other political parties or their political opponents. Such expressions include adjectives of quality in both attributive and predicative positions, noun deverbatives (involving stroking) and noun phrase complements. It is concluded that an understanding of Ghanaian languages, Ghanaian political culture and history and the overall communicative patterns in Ghana are sine qua non for understanding the political discourses

  In summary, the colloquium shows that pragmatic strategies employed in political discourse conducted in English should be considered in the cultural context of the political scenes being discussed, and that the readers who are not familiar with those contexts may misinterpret or only partially understand the underlying meanings of much of the discourse.