Abstract
This article reports findings from an experimental study of adults (n = 103) learning the sociopragmatics of an artificial language, ‘Ravenese’. The main purpose of the study was to compare the effects of: (a) rule-based instruction; versus (b) conceptbased instruction. No statistical differences were found between the two instructional conditions on an appropriateness judgment task (pretest, immediate posttest, and delayed posttest). However, differences were observed in participants’ understanding of the meaning and significance of the target pragmatic forms as revealed through qualitative data. The data suggest that rule-based instruction reinforces previously acquired everyday knowledge, whereas concept-based instruction supports learners’ development of new ways of understanding language and social relationships. The discussion centers on implications for teaching pragmatics in second/foreign language classrooms.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
