Cover not available

Article published In: Applied Pragmatics
Vol. 1:1 (2019) ► pp.1–25

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

The effects of corrective feedback with and without revision on enhancing L2 pragmatic performance

 | Nanyang Technological University
 | Monash College, Australia
 | Vietnam National University
 | Vietnam National University
Published online: 20 May 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.00001.min
Abstract
This study investigated the efficacy of different feedback conditions in developing accurate and fluent production of L2 English email requests. Sixty-nine intermediate-level Vietnamese EFL university students were randomly assigned to one control and three experimental groups. All the four groups received three hours of explicit metapragmatic instruction on email requests, but only the experimental groups received written corrective feedback on their pragmatic production. One experimental group received feedback without opportunity for revision. Another experimental group received one cycle of feedback and revision, and the third group two cycles of feedback and revision. Results of a Discourse Completion Task (DCT) pre-test, immediate post-test, and delayed post-test indicated that the combination of instruction and feedback had a positive effect on the accuracy of learners’ pragmatic performance. However, no clear-cut evidence for the effect of revision on the fluency of learners’ pragmatic performance was found in the study. The findings highlight the effectiveness of corrective feedback and revision in consolidating emergent L2 pragmatic knowledge, but further research is needed to understand how much revision is sufficient to facilitate fluency development.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
  • 3.The study
    • 3.1Research questions
    • 3.2Participants
    • 3.3Treatment
    • 3.4Data collection
    • 3.5Data analysis
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Effects on learners’ pragmatic accuracy scores
      • 4.1.1Within-group comparisons
      • 4.1.2Between-group comparisons
    • 4.2Effects on learners’ speed fluency
      • 4.2.1Within-group comparisons
      • 4.2.2Between-group comparisons
    • 4.3Effects on learners’ repair fluency
      • 4.3.1Within-group comparisons
      • 4.3.2Between-group comparisons
    • 4.4Relationship between accuracy of pragmatic knowledge and fluency of pragmatic processing
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Note
  • References
References (40)
References
Abdel Latif, M. M. (2009). Toward a new process-based indicator for measuring writing fluency: Evidence from L2 writers’ think-aloud protocols. Canadian Modern Language Review, 65(4), 531–558. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alcón-Soler, E. (2005). Does instruction work for learning pragmatics in the EFL context? System, 33(3), 417–435. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anderson, J. R. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barron, J., & Celaya, M. (2010). Developing pragmatic fluency in an EFL context. In L. Roberts, M. Howard, M. Laoire, & D. Singleton (Eds.), EUROSLA yearbook (Vol. 101, pp. 38–61). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1993). Symbolic representation and attentional control. In G. Kasper & S. Blum–Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 43–57). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biesenbach-Lucas, S. (2007). Students writing e-mails to faculty: An examination of e-politeness among native and non-native speakers of English. Language Learning and Technology, 11(2), 59–81.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bygate, M. (1996). Effects of task repetition: Appraising the development of second language learners. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 136–147). Oxford: Heinemann.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks, second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 23–48). Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chenoweth, N. A., & Hayes, J. (2001). Fluency in writing. Generating text in L1 and L2. Written Communication, 18(1), 80–98. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (1997). Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(2), 195–221. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Economidou-Kogetsidis, M. (2011). “Please answer me as soon as possible”: Pragmatic failure in non-native speakers’ e-mail requests to faculty. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(13), 3193–3215. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2004). The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(1), 59–84. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gass, S., Mackey, A., Alvarez-Torres, M., & Fernández-Garcίa, M. (1999). The effects of task repetition on linguistic output. Language Learning, 491, 549–581. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ishihara, N. (2010). Assessing learners’ pragmatic ability in the classroom. In D. Tatsuki & N. Houck (Eds.), Pragmatics: Teaching speech acts (pp. 209–227). Alexandria, VA: TESOL Inc.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, M. D., Mercado, L., & Acevedo, A. (2012). The effect of planning sub-processes on L2 writing fluency, grammatical complexity, and lexical complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(3), 264–282. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kasper, G. (2001). Classroom research on interlanguage pragmatics. In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 33–60). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koike, D., & Pearson, L. (2005). The effect of instruction and feedback in the development of pragmatic competence. System, 33(3), 481–501. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Knoch, U. (2007). Diagnostic writing assessment: The development and validation of a rating scale. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, The University of Auckland, New Zealand.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leijten, M., & Van Waes, L. (2013). Keystroke logging in writing research: Using Inputlog to analyze and visualize writing processes. Written Communication, 30(3), 358–392. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, S. (2012). The effect of input-based practice on pragmatic development in L2 Chinese. Language Learning, 62(2), 403–438. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Amount of practice and pragmatic development of request-making in L2 Chinese. In N. Taguchi & J. Sykes (Eds.), Technology in interlanguage pragmatics research and teaching (pp. 43–70). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, S., & Taguchi, N. (2014). The effects of practice modality on pragmatic development in L2 Chinese. The Modern Language Journal, 98(3), 794–812. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 461, 1–40. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nipaspong, P., & Chinokul, S. (2010). The role of prompts and explicit feedback in raising EFL learners’ pragmatic awareness. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL, 51, 101–146.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019). Data collection methods in L2 pragmatics research: An overview. In N. Taguchi (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and pragmatics (pp. 195–211). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nguyen, T. T. M., Do, T. T. H., Nguyen, T. A., Pham, T. T. T. (2015). Teaching email requests in the academic context: A focus on the role of corrective feedback. Language Awareness, 24(2), 169–195. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nguyen, T. T. M., Do, T. T. H., Pham, T. T. T., & Nguyen, T. A. (2018). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 pragmatics: An eight month investigation. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 56(3), 345–375.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nguyen, T. T. M., Pham, T. H., & Pham, M. T. (2012). The relative effects of explicit and implicit form-focused instruction on the development of L2 pragmatic competence. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(4), 416–434. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Polio, C. G. (1997). Measures of linguistic accuracy in second language writing research. Language Learning, 47(1), 101–143. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saito, M., & Lyster, R. (2012). Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and fluency development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 341, 591–626. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 171, 38–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (2010). Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language learning. In W. M. Chan, S. Chi, K. N. Cin, J. Istanto, M. Nagami, J. W. Sew, T. Suthiwan, & I. Walker (Eds.), Proceedings of CLaSIC 2010 (pp. 721–737). Singapore: National University of Singapore, Centre for Language Studies.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2005). Comprehending implied meaning in English as a foreign language. The Modern Language Journal, 89(4), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). Cognition, language contact, and the development of pragmatic comprehension in a study-abroad context. Language Learning, 581, 33–71. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies were, are, and should be going. Language Teaching, 481, 1–50. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Takimoto, M. (2006). The effects of explicit feedback on the development of pragmatic proficiency. Language Teaching Research, 101, 393–417. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Assessing the effects of identical task repetition and task-type repetition on learners’ recognition and production of second language request downgraders. Intercultural Pragmatics, 91, 71–96. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Waes, L., & Leijten, M. (2015). Fluency in writing: A multidimensional perspective on writing fluency applied to L1 and L2. Computers and Composition, 381, 79–95. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (12)

Cited by 12 other publications

Tian, Jianjing & Qingping Li
2026. Effects of corrective feedback timing on EFL beginners’ learning of request strategies. System 136 ► pp. 103878 ff. DOI logo
Kim, YouJin, Minkyung Kim & Sanghee Kang
2025. The effects of synchronous written corrective feedback on learning speech acts through technology-mediated collaborative writing. Language Awareness ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Alemi, Minoo & Neda Khanlarzadeh
2024. Input-Providing and Output-Pushing E-Feedback in L2 Pragmatics. In The Handbook of Cultural Linguistics [Springer Handbooks in Languages and Linguistics, ], ► pp. 849 ff. DOI logo
Nicholas, Allan & John Blake
2024. Profiling learner development with a computerized dynamic assessment of a Japanese learner's L2 email writing. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics 3:3 ► pp. 100164 ff. DOI logo
Nicholas, Allan, John Blake, Jeremy Perkins & Maxim Mozgovoy
2024. Evaluating the effectiveness of a computerised dynamic assessment of L2 English email requests. Computer Assisted Language Learning ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
KANIK, Mehmet, Gaelle Makougang YOUBİ, Tasong Tsofac SHARON & Mustafa KASAPOĞLU
2023. The (Non-)Teaching of Pragmatics in an EFL Context. Dil Eğitimi ve Araştırmaları Dergisi 9:1 ► pp. 43 ff. DOI logo
Morales Ruiz, Jenny
2023. Los reclamos por correo electrónico: efectos de la instrucción pragmática con enfoque por tareas en el español L2 Emails of complaints: the effects of task-based pragmatic instruction in L2 Spanish. Journal of Spanish Language Teaching 10:1 ► pp. 14 ff. DOI logo
Nguyen, Thi Thuy Minh & Thi Thanh Thuy Pham
2023. Skill acquisition based approach to teaching L2 pragmatics. In L2 Pragmatics in Action [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 58], ► pp. 243 ff. DOI logo
Cho, Hyejin, YouJin Kim & Seyoung Park
2022. Comparing students’ responses to synchronous written corrective feedback during individual and collaborative writing tasks. Language Awareness 31:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Reineke Matsudo, Bernhard, Basudeb Sain, Luca Carletti, Xue Zhang, Wenlong Gao, Costantino de Angelis, Lingling Huang & Thomas Zentgraf
2022. Efficient Frequency Conversion with Geometric Phase Control in Optical Metasurfaces. Advanced Science 9:12 DOI logo
Usó-Juan, Esther
2021. Long-term instructional effects on learners’ use of email request modifiers. In Email Pragmatics and Second Language Learners [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 328], ► pp. 71 ff. DOI logo
Usó-Juan, Esther
2022. Exploring the role of strategy instruction on learners’ ability to write authentic email requests to faculty. Language Teaching Research 26:2 ► pp. 213 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue