Article published In: Applied Pragmatics
Vol. 4:1 (2022) ► pp.63–91
The multilingual turn in pragmatics
Is the use of hedges and attitude markers shared across languages in trilingual writing?
Published online: 9 February 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.20024.mar
https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.20024.mar
Abstract
In the Valencian Community in Spain, the coexistence of Spanish and Catalan as co-official languages and English as a foreign language, which is learned as a third language (L3), shapes a unique multilingual setting. This study examined the extent to which multilingual learners’ use of two interpersonal pragmatic markers (PMs), i.e., hedges (e.g., I believe) and attitude markers (e.g., fortunately), is related across languages and whether the relationship changes over time. Participants were 313 Spanish-Catalan bilingual high school learners of L3 English. They wrote three opinion essays over one academic year in the three languages of instruction: Spanish, Catalan, and English. Quantitative results revealed a trend towards stronger correlations over time in both PMs. At Time 3, correlations were statistically significant for all language pairs in hedges and for two language pairs in attitude markers (Spanish and Catalan, Spanish and English). Qualitative analyses of the learners’ essays lend support to these results and show transfer at the phrase and discourse-level.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Literature review
- 2.1The multilingual turn in SLA research
- 2.2Pragmatics and the multilingual turn
- 2.3Interpersonal pragmatic markers in multilingual writing
- 3.Research question
- 4.Method
- 4.1Participants and learning context
- 4.2Instruments
- 4.3Data collection procedure
- 4.4Data analysis procedures
- 5.Results
- 5.1Quantitative analysis: Frequency of interpersonal PMs across languages
- 5.2Qualitative analysis: Shared interpersonal PM resources between languages
- 6.Discussion
- 7.Limitations of the study and future directions
- 8.Pedagogical implications
- Acknowledgements
References
References (73)
Ädel, A. (2010). Just to give you kind of a map of where we are going: A taxonomy of metadiscourse in spoken and written academic English. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 9(2), 69–97.
Ädel, A., & Mauranen, A. (2010). Metadiscourse: Diverse and divided perspectives. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 9(2), 1–12.
Alcón-Soler, E. (2012). Teachability and bilingualism effects on third language learners’ pragmatic knowledge. Intercultural Pragmatics, 9(4), 511–541.
Alonso, R., Alonso, M., & Torrado, L. (2012). Hedging: An exploratory study of pragmatic transfer in nonnative English readers’ rhetorical preferences. Ibérica, 231, 47–64.
Ament, J., Barón, J., & Pérez-Vidal, C. (2018). A focus on the development of the use of interpersonal pragmatic markers and pragmatic awareness among EMI learners. In A. Sánchez-Hernández & A. Herraiz-Martínez (Eds.), Learning second language pragmatics beyond traditional contexts (pp. 111–146). Peter Lang.
Basturkmen, H., & Nguyen, T. T. M. (2017). Teaching pragmatics. In A. Barron, Y. Gu, & G. Steen (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of pragmatics (pp. 563–574). Routledge.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.
Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2011). Focus on multilingualism: A study of trilingual writing. Modern Language Journal, 95(3), 356–369.
(2013). Towards a plurilingual approach in English language teaching: Softening the boundaries between languages. TESOL Quarterly, 47(3), 591–599.
(Eds.). (2015a). Multilingual education: Between language learning and translanguaging. Cambridge University Press.
(2015b). Towards a holistic approach in the study of multilingual education. In J. Cenoz & D. Gorter (Eds.), Multilingual education: Between language learning and translanguaging (pp. 1–15). Cambridge University Press.
Conselleria d’Educació, Cultura i Esport (2016). Encuesta uso y conocimiento del valenciano 2015. Retrieved on 23 July 2020 at [URL]
Cook, V. (1991). The poverty-of-the-stimulus argument and multi-competence. Second Language Research, 7(2), 103–117.
Cook, V., & Wei, L. (Eds.). (2016). The Cambridge handbook of linguistic multi-competence. Cambridge University Press.
Crismore, A., Markkanen, R., & Steffensen, M. (1993). Metadiscourse in persuasive writing: A study of texts written by American and Finnish university students. Written Communication, 10(1), 39–71.
Dafouz-Milne, E. (2008). The pragmatic role of textual and interpersonal metadiscourse markers in the construction and attainment of persuasion: A cross-linguistic study of newspaper discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 40(1), 95–113.
De Angelis, G., & Jessner, U. (2012). Writing across languages in a bilingual context: A Dynamic Systems Theory approach. In R. M. Manchón (Ed.), L2 writing development: Multiple perspectives (pp. 47–68). Mouton.
Félix-Brasdefer, C. (2020). Pragmatic transfer. In K. P. Schneider & E. Ifantidou (Eds.), Developmental and clinical pragmatics (pp. 361–392). Mouton de Gruyter.
Forbes, K. (2020). Cross-linguistic transfer of writing strategies: Interactions between foreign language and first language classrooms. Multilingual Matters.
González-Lloret, M., & Ortega, L. (Eds.). (2014). Technology-mediated TBLT: Researching technology and tasks. John Benjamins.
Gray, B., & Biber, D. (2014). Stance markers. In K. Aijmer & C. Rühlemann (Eds.), Corpus pragmatics: A handbook (pp. 219–248). Cambridge University Press.
Herdina, P., & Jessner, U. (2002). A dynamic model of multilingualism: Changing the psycholinguistic perspective. Multilingual Matters.
Herraiz-Martínez, A., & Sánchez-Hernández, A. (2019). Pragmatic markers produced by multilingual speakers: Evidence from a CLIL context. English Language Teaching, 12(2), 68–76.
Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Pearson Education.
(2004). Disciplinary interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(2), 133–151.
(2010). Metadiscourse: Mapping interactions in academic writing. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 9(2), 125–143.
Jarvis, S. (2016). The scope of transfer research. In L. Yu & T. Odlin (Eds.), New perspectives on transfer in second language learning (pp. 17–47). Multilingual Matters.
Kellerman, E., & Sharwood Smith, M. (Eds.). (1986). Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition. Pergamon.
Kobayashi, H., & Rinnert, C. (2008). Task response and text construction across L1 and L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(1), 7–29.
(2012). Understanding L2 writing development from a multicompetence perspective: Dynamic repertoires of knowledge and text construction. In R. M. Manchón (Ed.), L2 writing development: Multiple perspectives (pp. 101–134). De Gruyter Mouton.
(2013a). L1/L2/L3 text construction by multicompetent writers. In C. Conlan (Ed.), Applied Linguistics Association of Australia Annual Conference 2012: Refereed proceedings (CD-Rom) (pp. 28–67). School of Education, Curtin University.
(2013b). L1/L2/L3 writing development: Longitudinal case study of a Japanese multicompetent writer. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(1), 4–33.
(2013c). Second language writing: Is it a separate entity? Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(4), 442–443.
Martín-Laguna, S. (2016). Exploring textual pragmatic markers in a multilingual classroom context. In F. Bianchi & S. Gesuato (Eds.), Pragmatic issues in specialized communicative contexts (pp. 195–216). Brill Rodopi.
(2018). Learning pragmatics in the multilingual classroom: Exploring multicompetence across types of pragmatic markers. In A. Sánchez-Hernández & A. Herraiz-Martínez (Eds.), Learning second language pragmatics beyond traditional contexts (pp. 205–223). Peter Lang.
(2019). Exploring case stories in the development of textual discourse-pragmatic markers in formal English language classrooms. In P. Salazar Campillo & V. Codina (Eds.), Investigating the learning of pragmatics across ages and contexts (pp. 40–53). Brill.
(2020). Tasks, pragmatics and multilingualism in the classroom: A portrait of adolescent writing in multiple languages. Multilingual Matters.
Martín-Laguna, S., & Alcón-Soler, E. (2015). Do learners rely on metadiscourse markers? An exploratory study in English, Catalan and Spanish. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1731, 85–92.
(2018). Development of discourse-pragmatic markers in a multilingual classroom: A mixed method research approach. System, 751, 68–80.
Martínez-Flor, A., & Usó-Juan, E. (2020). Teaching L2 speech acts. In K. P. Schneider & E. Ifantidou (Eds.), Developmental and clinical pragmatics (pp. 269–300). Mouton de Gruyter.
Ortega, L. (2013). SLA for the 21st century: Disciplinary progress, transdisciplinary relevance, and the bi/multilingual turn. Language Learning, 63(1), 1–24.
(2014). Ways forward for a bi/multilingual turn in SLA. In S. May (Ed.), The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and bilingual education (pp. 32–53). Routledge.
Portolés, L. (2015). Multilingualism and very young learners: An analysis of pragmatic awareness and language attitudes. Mouton de Gruyter.
Portolés, L., & Martí, O. (2018). Teachers’ beliefs about multilingual pedagogies and the role of initial training. International Journal of Multilingualism, 17(2), 248–264.
Rinnert, C., Kobayashi, H., & Katayama, A. (2015). Argumentation text construction by Japanese as a foreign language writers: A dynamic view of transfer. Modern Language Journal, 99(2), 213–245.
Safont-Jordà, M. P. (2005). Third language learners: Pragmatic production and awareness. Multilingual Matters.
(2006). Language use and language attitudes in the Valencian Community. In D. Lasagabaster & Á. Huguet (Eds.) Multilingualism in European bilingual contexts: Language use and attitudes (pp. 90–113). Multilingual Matters.
(2011). Early requestive development in consecutive third language learning. International Journal of Multilingualism, 8(3), 256–276.
(2012). A longitudinal analysis of Catalan, Spanish and English request modifiers in early child language learning. In D. Gabrys-Barker (Ed.), Cross-linguistic influences in multilingual language acquisition (pp. 99–114). Springer.
(2013). Early stages of trilingual pragmatic development: A longitudinal study of requests in Catalan, Spanish and English. Journal of Pragmatics, 59(A), 68–80.
Sánchez-Hernández, A., & Alcón-Soler, E. (2021). Pragmatic instruction in English as an international language. In Z. Tajeddin & M. Alemi (Eds.), Pragmatics pedagogy in English as an international language (pp. 95–116). Routledge.
Taguchi, N. (2011). Teaching pragmatics: Trends and issues. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31(D), 289–310.
(2015). Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies were, are, and should be going. Language Teaching, 48(1), 1–50.
Taguchi, N., & Kim, Y. (Eds.). (2018). Task-based approaches to teaching and assessing pragmatics. John Benjamins.
Taguchi, N., & Sykes, J. M. (Eds.). (2013). Technology in interlanguage pragmatics research and teaching. John Benjamins.
Takahashi, S. (2010). Assessing learnability in second language pragmatics. In A. Trosborg (Ed.), Pragmatics across languages and cultures (pp. 391–421). De Gruyter Mouton.
Vande Kopple, W. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36(1), 82–93.
Velasco, P., & García, O. (2014). Translanguaging and the writing of bilingual learners. Bilingual Research Journal, 37(1), 6–23.
Weinreich, U. (1953). Languages in contact: Findings and problems (1st ed.). Linguistic Circle of New York.
Cited by (8)
Cited by eight other publications
Brown, Lucien & Soyeon Kim
Guzmán-Alcón, Irene
Yu, Qingling & Qingping Li
Arias-Hermoso, Roberto & Ainara Imaz Agirre
Portolés Falomir, Laura & Gema Gayete Domínguez
Goodman, Bridget, Assel Kambatyrova & Sulushash Kerimkulova
Martín-Laguna, Sofía
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 december 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.
