32.1473, Review: Applied Linguistics; Pragmatics: Martín-Laguna (2020)

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-32-1473. Tue Apr 27 2021. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 32.1473, Review: Applied Linguistics; Pragmatics: Martín-Laguna (2020)

Moderator: Malgorzata E. Cavar (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Student Moderator: Jeremy Coburn, Lauren Perkins
Managing Editor: Becca Morris
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Everett Green, Sarah Robinson, Nils Hjortnaes, Joshua Sims, Billy Dickson
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Jeremy Coburn <jecoburn at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 16:36:20
From: Maria Chiara Miduri [mariachiara.miduri at gmail.com]
Subject: Tasks, Pragmatics and Multilingualism in the Classroom

 
Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=36636759


Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/31/31-1508.html

AUTHOR: Sofía  Martín-Laguna
TITLE: Tasks, Pragmatics and Multilingualism in the Classroom
SUBTITLE: A Portrait of Adolescent Writing in Multiple Languages
SERIES TITLE: Second Language Acquisition
PUBLISHER: Multilingual Matters
YEAR: 2020

REVIEWER: Maria Chiara Miduri

SUMMARY

In the domain of language learning research, the traditional approach focusing
on the environment of learning concerning the context where languages are
learned needed, for a long time, a paradigm shift. The shift urged was about
an ecological perspective considering language learning as a dynamic,
non-linear adaptive, and context-dependent complex process rather than a
static, monolingual, and linear and well-controlled continuum. In this complex
system, relations between contexts, individuals, and time are the main lenses
through which we can observe and analyze Homo Loquen(te)s in its day-to-day
linguistic and communicative behavior. This work offers a real context study –
quite ethnographic in some respects – and accounts for what happens in the
real context of language learning with a focus on pragmatic learning in
multilingual (ML) contexts, dealing with a Multilingual Turn both on a
theoretical and empirical level.  The book presents a one-year longitudinal
study of ML pragmatic transfer in Catalan-Spanish bilingual adolescent
learners of English as an L3, in the multilinguistic Valencian Community, as
they are engaged in task-based activities in secondary school. The study
constitutes a major contribution for a field at the crossroad of different
disciplines, such as Second Language Acquisition, Intercultural Communication,
Linguistic Ethnography, and Sociolinguistics.

The book is divided into 7 chapters plus an additional section featuring
Appendices with the research material, a rich Bibliography, and a final Index
to retrieve all the cited authors and concepts throughout the book. 

In Chapter 1 a detailed Introduction to the study is provided. The
contribution of the research is set by defining the sociolinguistic context of
the empirical work presented, the definition of a Multilingual Pragmatic
Transfer (1.4.2), and by describing the main challenges in studying pragmatics
in the classroom: (1) interlanguage pragmatics (instruction vs. acquisition)
dynamics and crosslinguistic interaction, and (2) regional and minority
languages as linguistic resources. The study deals with a Catalan (L1),
Spanish (L2), and English (L3) multilingual context and pragmatic dynamics and
it represents an outstanding contribution to the field of pragmatic and
discourse research due to the specific linguistic context where the study has
been conducted.

In Chapter 2, pragmatics in an instructional context is explored both as a
theoretical realm and an empirical field of ongoing research, with particular
reference to classroom pragmatics. A strong overview of classroom research
(2.1) is given to set the frame of reference, by dividing the field into three
main paradigms about pragmatics (i. Context, ii. Learnability, iii.
Teachability) with a focus on a task-based approach to classroom pragmatics
(2.2) since this is the methodological tool chosen by Martín-Laguna to conduct
the research. The specificity of longitudinal studies in the classroom context
is provided as well, with special attention to multilingual classrooms. This
overview points out that few studies have focused on the efficacy of a
task-based approach in pragmatic learning, opening the way to show and prove
the relevance of this study in SLA from its specific point of view. An
informative table (2.3) on literature review compares “studies on pragmatic
development taking into account the context of learning” with a detailed list
of  (a) the target pragmatic aspects that have been investigated until now,
(b) the kind of methodology, instruments, and data that have been used and
collected to perform research, (c) the nature of participants forming the
sample for each study, and (d) the learning context and the length of the
study. This tool is useful because it shows how the research production in
this specific area is relatively new (2012-2015) and limited, giving the
opportunity to appreciate even more the contribution of this study as a part
of an ongoing process of exploration and explanation of pragmatic transfer
dynamics in the real-life context of language learning.

Chapter 3 deals with the epistemological review about the Multilingual Turn in
SLA. Starting from an analysis of the first 1940s and 1950s studies in the
field of multilingual pragmatic transfer being characterized by a monolingual
bias, Martín-Laguna asserts that the positive and multidirectional pragmatic
transfer in bilingualism has initiated new trends on the uniqueness of ML
learners. Because of  this unique ability, a holistic multilingual approach is
needed, and the Multilingual Turn is a natural consequence of this process. At
the very beginning of SLA studies on ML pragmatic transfer, a common tenet was
that L1 had a strong influence on the target language (TL). As in many
Linguistics research fields and subfields, the 1980s represented a turning
point to a process-oriented approach with a revaluation of bilingualism,
fostering the creation of a theoretic and empiric space for a systemic and
complex perspective. A more dynamic approach opened-up the path for the
holistic multilingual perspective in education, the study of pragmatic
transfer in L2 pragmatics in ML learners, the role of proficiency levels in MT
pragmatic transfer, and the dynamics and relations between L2 and L3 in
pragmatic transfer (e.g., the second language factor, 3.3.2).

The concluding paragraph of Chapter 3 presents the two research questions that
guided the study in order to fill the gaps in SLA and Interlinguistic
pragmatics (ILP): the first is related to the transfer of the pragmatic
ability to use pragmatic markers between languages in which ML learners
receive instructions, and it is the main change over time of this process; the
second deals with the correlation between proficiency level in L3 English and
ML pragmatic transfer. 

Chapter 4 deals with the Methodology and the peculiarity of doing classroom
research in multilingual contexts. The study’s methodological structure relies
upon two theoretical and empirical dimensions: (1) a cross-sectional analysis
and (2) a longitudinal study over one academic year. Six sections deepen the
empirical work presented. Firstly, a two-fold sample is presented: (1)
teachers and (2) learners. A fundamental observation about the nature of the
sample introduces the discussion: due to the naturalistic nature of the
instructional setting (e.g. the classroom) a flux of authentic changes
occurred over time. The initial sample was made of 792 participants, but
during the academic year (subdivided into T1, T2, and T3), different factors
(at least four main factors described in 4.1.1) led to high participants’
desertion, resulting in a final halved sample of 313 units (256 students and
56 teachers). A detailed description of participants’ L1 and L2 formal
backgrounds introduces the linguistic space of the study. A brief overview of
the researcher’s background clarifies the relevance of previous personal 
involvement in secondary school teaching and training activities in order to
minimize, among other sociological effects, the Hawthorne effect on the field.

The novelty of the study is the nature of the data collection: compared to the
majority of pragmatic markers studies, data were collected on the same
multilingual learners writing in three languages, exploring other pragmatic
dimensions and writing abilities in multilingual learners. 

The data collection tool design process (4.2.1) features a three-fold
rationale for the choice: (i) the role of the pilot study in defining the task
procedure and the choice of topics, (ii) the relation between the topic choice
and the ecological validity of the study (i.e., topic relevance to the
learners, learners’ suggestions, learners’ linguistic preferences, etc.),
(iii) the difference between tasks and exercises in the language classroom,
with specific insight into the manipulation of the task in order to meet
Ellis’ criteria for writing composition: the focus on meaning, the existence
of a gap of opinion about the topic, learners reliance on personal linguistic
or pragmatic resources, and the existence of a non-linguistic outcome. These
criteria would have allowed relative freedom to approach the topic and perform
the task.

Since pragmatic markers (PMs) as metadiscourse elements are the main pragmatic
focus of the study, a well-researched insight into this concept is given in
the middle of the chapter (4.4) as a turning point and provides as well the
rationale for the category selection and PM forms (4.4.2). The coding process
and database construction for the 2,817 essays as a sample are described in
4.4.3 with a graphic apparatus to get a direct view of the computational tools
and software used to collect, organize, classify, and later analyze data. A
final timetable for the data collection procedure (4.5) gives an overview of
the entire research process.

Chapter 5 and Chapter 6 discuss the results following the Development of
Pragmatic Transfer in Multilingual Learners. In this section, the analysis of
313 secondary-school ML learners in three languages in which they received
instruction (i.e. English, Catalan, and Spanish) is provided. Textual and
interpersonal PMs (pragmatic markers) are explored in written production by
analyzing the pragmatic ability to transfer PMs between languages. The main
focus is on the variable of time and the sensory variations of multilingual
pragmatic transfer over time; the study used a mixed-method approach: a
pragmatics-focused task to collect quantitative data and the use of learners’
diaries to obtain qualitative data. As a methodological corrective, the
researcher’s field notes have been taken into account as well. The learners’
metalinguistic awareness is explored through the analysis of their reflections
about their own PM production in English, Catalan, and Spanish over time. A
detailed presentation of the corpora is provided in the first section of
Chapter 5. The graphics used to provide infographics about the result at three
separate times enables the reader to  immediately understand the PM transfer
during the course of the academic year  (5.1). Twelve examples of the
qualitative data collection are presented in comparative-synoptic tables
(5.2), showing the shift of textual composition and production over time, by
the learner’s choice of specific hedges and logical connectives for cause and
reason, which constitute the basic logical structure of the discourse. After
the exploration and discussion of quali-quantitative data, Chapter 6 discusses
the effect of proficiency level on pragmatic transfer showing no major impact.
In order to do this, additional data sources are provided (e.g. a proficiency
test), and data were collected on a subsample of learners. The importance of
the mixed-method approach is well depicted in 6.3, where the detailed analysis
of textual and interpersonal PMs over time revealed divergences with the
overall cross-sectional results. Furthermore, the proficiency tests suggest –
on the one hand –  a strict correlation (the positive correlation hypothesis)
between the proficiency level of language x and the learner’s ability to
transfer textual pragmatic knowledge among languages. A pivotal concept
explaining this ability is the notion of “linguistic resource”. On the other
hand, the results dealing with interpersonal PMs show that L2
lower-proficiency learners manage in this type of pragmatic transfer better
due to the different modality of work that is requested. While textual
pragmatic transfer deals with the written form, interpersonal transfer is
related to oral production. This correlation is crucial to understand the
nature of data in multilingual contexts, and the complexity of pragmatic
learning in multilingual learners.

A summary of the main findings is presented in Chapter 7. In the Conclusions,
we get the answer to the research questions declared in the third section of
the book. In particular, from the cross-sectional analysis of data, we
discover that there is a clear evolution towards transfer over time, while
through the mixed-method approach, we understand that the process of pragmatic
learning in an ML context is non-linear and complex, especially between
English and Spanish at T3 of the year-long study. Of particular interest are
the pedagogical implications of research findings (7.3) – that suggest ways to
improve language learning in the ML classroom  –  and the awareness of the
study limitations (7.2) which set the possibility for further research in the
field. What is presented as an affirmation in light of previous studies about
PM transfer behavior in ML learners, we can transform into three linked
questions: (a) How does an ML learner actually transfer pragmatic markers in
trilingual production? (b) Which are his favorite markers to use in all three
languages? and (c) Why do learners tend to use the same textual and
interpersonal PM strategies across languages? From a more
linguistic-anthropological perspective, it should be useful to think about an
economic principle behind the choice to use the same textual form from an
original linguistic repertoire or multicompetence. 

Chapter 8 contains six Appendices giving the reader all the prompts and
questionnaires used to collect data on the field. English, Catalan, and
Spanish writing tasks are provided (Appendix 1-3) as well as the questions
used for guided learners’ diaries (Appendix 4). Of particular interest is
Appendix 5, presenting a  rich comparative list of targeted pragmatic marker
forms in English, Catalan, and Spanish. 

EVALUATION

The book is well-researched but sometimes redundant and too technical. It
would have been useful to add a list of acronyms used throughout the book, for
example. . While promptly defined as soon as they are introduced in any
paragraph, they are very numerous and the reader would benefit from a clear
cognitive map of the theoretical structure of the study from the beginning,
with special reference to Intercultural Communication. The huge amount of
specialized language pertaining to Language Acquisition , and the specificity
of the study, call for a quick reference to all the frameworks taken into
account – and not just the lonely comparative table listed and concerning only
2012-2015 studies –  especially because of the huge literature review spanning
from the 1940s to 2010s. Furthermore, the book is an account of a one-year
study in a classroom context, but the sociolinguistic dimension of the
day-to-day activity life in the classroom has no space in the monograph. While
the study accounts precisely for the adolescent learner, it does not explain
the subjective learning context; neither is the relevance of linguistic
interaction among peers discussed. Some of the limitations – or challenges –
recognized in the study by Martín-Laguna can be considered the starting point
for an understanding of the sociolinguistic and sociocultural experience of
learners under study. 

To conclude, the book is a good addition to the field of study, but its
connection to pedagogy suggests the need for further work featuring a more
practical guide, based on this study’s findings.  Such a guide would aid
teachers in real-life class situations across languages, especially those
working in higher multicultural (at least L4, L5, L6) contexts. The
pedagogical implications of the findings are not very clear for a teacher
wanting to improve his pragmatic transfer teaching in class. Due to the nature
of the study, many chapters are too wordy. The best sections are those
featuring tables, graphics, and diagrams which interpret data and data
analysis, but the plain enumeration of items and the Pearson correlations
numbers in the text, make the reading experience boring,, too much elaborated,
and hard to follow, for readers without advanced linguistic training. Thus,
readers who would benefit from this book are scholars and research-minded
educators.


ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Maria Chiara Miduri, Ph.D., is a linguistic and cognitive anthropologist,
independent researcher and teacher. Her main research interests lie at the
intersection between Second Language Acquisition, Cognitive Grammar,
Ethnopragmatics, Semantics and Ethnosemantics, and Grammar modelling.<br />She
is engaged in the scientific community service in the field of Linguistics and
as an educator.





------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***************************    LINGUIST List Support    ***************************
 The 2020 Fund Drive is under way! Please visit https://funddrive.linguistlist.org
  to find out how to donate and check how your university, country or discipline
     ranks in the fund drive challenges. Or go directly to the donation site:
                   https://crowdfunding.iu.edu/the-linguist-list

                        Let's make this a short fund drive!
                Please feel free to share the link to our campaign:
                    https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-32-1473	
----------------------------------------------------------