Four perspectives on L2 pragmatic development

By G. Kasper. 2001

333 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Language and Linguistics, Literature and Literary Theory

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/72b22f95882fe824360dfca1be25bd0def2a011c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Language and Linguistics

In Literature and Literary Theory

Citations in the corpus

Language Learning and Study Abroad: A Critical Reading of Research (2009, neutral): “its performance (Kasper 2001).”
Discourse Options and the Development of Pragmatic Competence by Classroom Learners of German: The Case of Address Forms (2003, background): “If this is the case, then some aspects of L2 pragmatic development may be fruitfully investigated within a genetic/historical research orientation ( Kasper, 2001 ).”
Introduction: The Potential of Peer Talk (2004, background): “As noted by Kasper (2001), evidence that native peers are successful language teachers fits well with Vygotskyan’s notion of the Zone of Proximal Development; the more competent native speakers can be considered the experts responding in zones of proximal development to the less competent learners.”
The Effectiveness of a Task-Based Instruction Program in Developing the English Language Speaking Skills of Secondary Stage Students. (2006, background): “Such tasks provide opportunities to practice the wide range of pragmatic and sociolinguistic abilities students need in interpersonal encounters outside the classroom (Kasper, 2001 and Ellis, 2003).”
Comprehending Implied Meaning in English as a Foreign Language (2005, background): “In interlanguage pragmatics, fluency refers to automatic control in using pragmatic knowledge in real time (Kasper, 2001).”
Learner Corpus Analysis and the Development of L2 Pragmatic Competence in Networked Inter-cultural Language Study: The Case of German Modal Particles (2005, background): “For some time, researchers have lamented the fact that the majority of reports on L2 pragmatics are comparative rather than acquisitional in scope (e.g., Kasper, 1996, 2001a; Kasper & Schmidt, 1996; see also Ortega & Iberri-Shea, 2005).”
Variation in the use of discourse markers by Chinese teaching assistants in the US (2009, background): “Drawing on Norton’s work, Kasper (2001) also suggests that, in terms of learning L2 pragmatics, learner subjectivity (i.e. learners’ social identities, their sense of themselves and their understanding of their relation to the world) may affect the amount of effort an L2 learner makes to understand…”
Impact of flipped classroom on EFL learners' appropriate use of refusal: achievement, participation, perception (2018, background): “The rationale behind choosing the intermediate level learners was that this level is considered as the optimal level for pragmatic instruction (Kasper, 2001).”