Development of Socio-Pragmatic Competence via Facebook
Pragmatics can be defined as language use in a sociocultural context. Pragmatic competence includes knowledge of speech acts and speech functions, the ability to use language appropriately in specific contexts (Eslami-Rasekh, 2005) and the study of language from the point of view of users. Kasper and Rose (2003) further elaborated this definition by adding that pragmatics deals with the way speakers and writers achieve goals as social actors who respect social norms in order to attain interpersonal relationships with interlocutors. Despite the lack of clarity in defining this term, it has been recognized as an essential component of communicative competence (Bachman, 1990). Development of pragmatic and sociolinguistics rules of language use is a major aspect of language learning (Eslami-Rasekh, 2005). As Bradovi-Harlig & Dornyei (1998) pointed out, even advanced L2 learners have not developed appropriate pragmatic competence to avoid misunderstanding or conveying L2 messages that are considered too forceful, direct or impolite. More than a decade ago, Kramsch (1985) identified the fact that typical classroom-based language learning is composed of “institutionally asymmetric, non-negotiable, norm- referenced, and teacher-controlled discourse”. Similar observations have been postulated by Bradovi- Harlig (2001) who pointed out that textbooks are not reliable sources of pragmatic input for language learners as they usually provide a limited amount of information about conversational norms and may contain language samples that are not authentic. Vellenga (2004) made a similar claim following a pragmatic investigation of specific speech acts in ESL textbooks. Unfortunately, this trend has not particularly evolved, even though some foreign language textbooks attempt to discuss typical ambiguous socio-pragmatic situations, such as the use of appropriate form of address (i.e.: tu/vous in French) in order to reduce pragmatic errors or deficiencies that L2 learners often demonstrate. However, as Kasper and Rose (2003) explained the classroom setting is undeniably linked with an absence of social consequences in terms of appropriate pragmatic competence.
In the early stages of technological tool integration, Kinginger (1998) noted that electronic media can force certain dilemmas of authentic interaction into the classroom. This argument was later empirically supported in a telecollaborative study conducted by Belz and Kinginger (2002; 2003) in which they highlighted the potential of developing pragmatic competence as a result of personal relationship building. Subsequently, Thorne (2003), an expert in emerging tools for pedagogical implications, stated that learning outcomes in the area of pragmatics are substantially enhanced when language learners are embedded in a larger context of significant relationships, such as the various ones provided by Internet- mediated partnerships. These different attempts to integrate technology in language classes were fundamentally successful at establishing meaningful contact across cultures by interacting with individuals of different cultural backgrounds; which is one of the aims of mastering a second language (Dornyei & Csizer, 2005).
Despite the obvious opportunities that electronic tools offer, computer-mediated communication in the context of L2 pragmatic competence is an underexplored area of research. As postulated above, Facebook allows its users to carry out meaningful interaction synchronously or asynchronously with speakers of different languages and also to access an incredible amount of valuable and authentic information on a variety of topics. In other words, this SNC can be seen as an innovative tool to facilitate the development of socio-pragmatic awareness and competence in second language learners through meaningful intervention, and can promote cross-cultural understanding. Similarly to the telecollaboration project (Belz & Kinginger, 2002; 2003), the Facebook website is cost effective and presents L2 learners with opportunities for intercultural communication with authentic native speakers of comparable age. In line with Belz‟s (2007) tellecollaboration work, it is not an unreasonable to expect that learners involved in academic applications of SNCs like Facebook will ultimately develop relationships with native speakers who share similar interests and who will interact on a regular basis in the L2.
6
Various activities can be developed in the language classroom for pragmatic development. Kasper (1997) identified two types of activities. First, activities can focus on raising students‟ pragmatic awareness, or second, on tasks which provide opportunities for student to actually practice communication. Both can be accomplished via Facebook. Language learners can easily join groups who exclusively interact in the target language and observe written exchanges between the members on the wall or in the discussion forums. Through legitimate peripheral participation (Lave & Wenger, 1991), a learner can use observation as one of the best tools for understanding the practices of any given community. Furthermore, the same tasks will be an eye opening experience for many language learners who usually have had little exposure to language variation. Groups on Facebook are often associated with linguistic- geographical pride and also present basic images associated with the main concept introduced, such as flags or landmarks, powerful visual cues for certain types of learners. Consequently, language variation and other important linguistic and cultural issues can effortlessly be presented to L2 learners by consulting groups such as:
§ Oui, je parle Suisse et alors (see Figure 1) [Yes, I speak Swiss and so what]
§ Adieu, t‟es vaudois ou bien [Hi, are you from the canton Vaud or what]
§ Tu es un vrai marseillais quand… [You are a real inhabitant of Marseilles when…]
§ Seulement les vrais Quebecois [Only the real Quebecois]
§ Tu sais que tu viens de Mont-tremblant quand ... [You know that you are from Mont-Tremblant when…]
§ Pour l'union de la Belgique francophone à la France ! [For the union of the French speaking part of Belgium to France]
§ República Argentina [Argentine Republic]
§ Si Naciste en Colombia Debes Saber [If you were born in Colombia you should know…]
§ Yo hablo el mejor espanol del mundo, “Soy Rolo” [I speak the best Spanish in the World “I‟m a Rolo”]
§ Si pasas por esto…eres Boricua de cora [If this happens to you…You‟re Puerto Rican at Heart]
Figure 1. Oui, je parle Suisse et alors [Yes, I speak Swiss and so what]
The number of discussion forums and participants varies greatly. For example, many of the French Language Groups discuss linguistic characteristics associated with a certain geographical area. Usually the discussions are focused on the use of lexicon and the participants give the standard French equivalent as illustrated in the following example from the afore mentioned
Oui je parle Suisse et alors:
Chenoille: vaurien, canaille [scoundrel]
Cradzet: petit [small]
Encouble: entrave, obstacle, empêchement [a hindrance]
Gouille: flaque d'eau, petite mare [a puddle]
Natel: téléphone cellulaire portable [a cell phone]
Piorner: pleurnicher, larmoyer [to sob]
Poutzer: nettoyer, laver, astiquer, frotter [to clean]
Roille: pluie [the rain]
Ruper: manger gloutonnement [to eat a lot]
Trouille: peur [afraid]
This language variation is of particular interest for intermediate and advanced language learners as it illustrates the richness of the L2 and introduces them to more authentic and colloquial language. In fact,
Matthey (2003) pointed out that this variety of French differs at several levels from standard French which is typically associated with the Parisian region (Ayres-Benett, 2001). Differences in prosody, phonology, morpho-syntax have been identified in Swiss French, but the most common type of variations are lexically based. This Swiss group established a clear list of a few words and expressions that are further discussed by Swiss natives; therefore, students have the opportunity to encounter realistic and authentic language through discussion forums associated with the same Group. Scholars (Auger & Valdman, 1999; Auger, 2003) claimed that it was necessary for French learners to be introduced to different varieties aside from standard Parisian French to develop their receptive skills at an early stage of L2 acquisition. They argued that students should be made aware of the extra-hexagonal varieties of that language as early as possible so that they develop abilities to recognize certain local particularities and acknowledge the functional effectiveness of non-standard French.
In a similar vein, the language varieties exhibited by members of Groups from various Spanish-speaking countries exposes learners to linguistic varieties and colloquialisms that language departments and textbooks cannot match. Many higher education language programs recommend that their students spend time abroad; therefore, putting them in contact with authentic language and making them aware of variations is essential to ease the transition which is currently lacking in most curriculums. For instance, Spanish Language text books fail to address the use and application of the subject pronoun “vos” and the verb forms that accompany it, although it is used throughout Spanish-speaking America as an alternative to tú (familiar, singular, you), and alongside both tú and Ud. (formal, singular, you) in some countries. But, where textbooks fall short, Facebook can bridge the gap, helping students to gain insight on a culture prior to spending time abroad:
“viva argentina!!! ... y la forma "voceo" ... porque "Vos sos mi mejor amigasso, che!" [Long live Argentina!! … and the “vos” form… because “you are my best friend, (typical Argentine utterance)!], Not Everyone Who Speaks Spanish is a Mexican.
Information gathering through observations of naturally occurring speech acts in Facebook Groups is not only easily accessible, but also is attractive to students and beneficial for their pragmatic development. Awareness-raising activities provide language learners with the necessary analytical tools to be able to draw generalizations about pragmatic aspects inductively (from data to rules) such as apologizing, greeting, formulating requests among other illocutionary acts. Without such activities L2 learners may never realize and understand that languages treat speech acts differently. This initial experience with regional variation increases understanding of actual language use in context. In addition, accessing group discussions on Facebook can help language learners to comprehend how culture and language are interrelated as well as develop their awareness about the fact that certain speech acts are difficult to translate from their native language to the target one for cultural reasons.
These types of activities are theoretically grounded to the Sociocultural Theory that originated from the writings of Vygotsky and his colleagues. This approach to learning states that development processes happen through participation in cultural, linguistic, and historically formed settings (Lantolf & Thorne, 2006). In other words, in educational settings, peer group interaction and collaboration are necessary and in fact precede and shape learning. Lantolf and Thorne explain that: “language is the most pervasive and powerful cultural artifact that humans possess to mediate their connection to the world, to each other and to themselves (p. 205), but the quality of mediation required for learners to grow and gain adequate ability to function in an L2 autonomously vary. This theoretical framework to learning in general also stipulates that humans have the unique capacity to imitate the intentional activity of other interlocutors and by observing and/or participating in discussion forums, language learners could put this ability to practice.
To conclude, it is important to note that, as Elslami-Rasekh (2005) pointed out, practicing and using speech acts are the next steps for students who have developed the necessary pragmatic awareness of the differences that their L1 and L2 presents in certain illocutionary acts (exposure is insufficient for
9
acquiring pragmatic competence in an L2). In addition, learners cannot be coerced into making choices regarding language choice; however, the knowledge of L2 pragmatic systems empowers them not only in terms of becoming bilingual, but also to appreciate better how their own native language functions.
