Assessment and L2 pragmatics

Abstract Pragmatic and interactional abilities are represented in major models of second language (L2) communicative competence ( Bachman & Palmer, 2010 ; Canale & Swain, 1980 ), which provide the framework for L2 assessment. However, pragmatics and interaction are only rarely tested in major operational tests. This is despite a significant amount of work in the testing of L2 pragmatics and interaction since the mid-1990s. This paper outlines current work on testing of L2 pragmatics, which broadly follows two traditions, one informed by speech act theory, politeness theory and philosophical pragmatics, and the other by conversation analysis and sociology. It also discusses reasons for the limited uptake of pragmatics assessment by large-scale tests, including low practicality, limited stakeholder test literacy, and broader challenges in testing pragmatics. It concludes by suggesting ways of overcoming these obstacles and thereby achieving better construct representation in L2 tests.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Applied Pragmatics
Published
2024-12-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.00022.roe
Citations
1
Primary Topic
EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.78
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessment and L2 pragmatics

Carsten Roever
1 citations
Applied Pragmatics
EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
2.78
article

Assessment and L2 pragmatics

Carsten Roever
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Pragmatic and interactional abilities are represented in major models of second language (L2) communicative competence ( Bachman & Palmer, 2010 ; Canale & Swain, 1980 ), which provide the framework for L2 assessment. However, pragmatics and interaction are only rarely tested in major operational tests. This is despite a significant amount of work in the testing of L2 pragmatics and interaction since the mid-1990s. This paper outlines current work on testing of L2 pragmatics, which broadly follows two traditions, one informed by speech act theory, politeness theory and philosophical pragmatics, and the other by conversation analysis and sociology. It also discusses reasons for the limited uptake of pragmatics assessment by large-scale tests, including low practicality, limited stakeholder test literacy, and broader challenges in testing pragmatics. It concludes by suggesting ways of overcoming these obstacles and thereby achieving better construct representation in L2 tests.

Applied PragmaticsVol. 6(2)
The University of Melbourne (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
2.78
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Assessment and L2 pragmatics — Carsten Roever · Applied Pragmatics (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS