Cover not available

Article published In: Register Studies
Vol. 5:1 (2023) ► pp.23–51

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

Investigating pragmatic failure in L2 English email writing among Japanese university EFL learners

A learner corpus approach

ORCiD logo with link | The University of Aizu
ORCiD logo with link | The University of Aizu
ORCiD logo with link | The University of Aizu
ORCiD logo with link | The University of Aizu
Published online: 18 October 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/rs.20016.nic
Abstract
English L2 email is an important mode of communication for Japanese university learners. However, learners often find it challenging to vary register in a pragmatically-appropriate manner when emailing. Identifying specific aspects of English email writing that learners find challenging can provide the basis for addressing learner needs. A corpus approach can help, systematically identifying instances of perceived divergence from register-specific norms in an email dataset. Few learner corpora, however, have focused on appropriate register variation in learner L2 English. This article describes the development, annotation, and analysis of a specialized corpus of Japanese university English L2 learners’ request-based email writing, annotated for perceived instances of pragmatic failure. Findings show high frequencies of perceived pragmatic failure across all aspects of English L2 email writing, with participants struggling to appropriately adapt their language to varying contexts. Implications for the language learning classroom are discussed.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Background
    • 1.2Pragmatics and the Language Classroom
  • 2.Methods
    • 2.1Tasks
    • 2.2Task Administration
    • 2.3Corpus Annotation
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Head Acts and Internal Modifying Strategies
    • 3.2The Email Body and External Modifying Strategies
    • 3.3Organization – Openings
    • 3.4Organization – Closings
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Conclusion
  • References
References (53)
References
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Vellenga, H. E. (2012). The effect of instruction on conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics. System, 40(1), 77–89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baron, N. (2010). Discourse structures in instant messaging: The case of utterance breaks. Language@internet, 71. [URL]
Biesenbach-Lucas, S. (2006). Making requests in email: Do cyber-consultations entail directness? Toward conventions in a new medium. Pragmatics and Language Learning, 111, 81–107.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(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
Bloch, J. (2002). Student/teacher interaction via email: the social context of Internet discourse. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11(2), 117–134. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolkan, S., & Holmgren, J. L. (2012). “You are such a great teacher and I hate to bother you but…”: Instructors’ perceptions of students and their use of email messages with varying politeness strategies. Communication Education, 61(3), 253–270. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bou-Franch, P. (2006). Solidarity and deference in Spanish computer-mediated communication: A discourse-pragmatic analysis of students’ emails to lecturers. In P. Bou-Franch (Ed.), Ways into discourse (pp. 61–79). Granada: Comares.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Campbell, J. L., Quincy, C., Osserman, J., & Pederson, O. (2013). Coding in-depth semistructured interviews: Problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and agreement. Sociological Methods & Research, 42(3), 294–320. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, C-F. E. (2006). The Development of e-mail literacy: from writing to peers to writing to authority figures. Language Learning and Technology, 10(2), 35–55.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Y. (2015). Developing Chinese EFL learners’ email literacy through requests to faculty. Journal of Pragmatics, 751, 131–149. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cho, T. (2010). Linguistic features of electronic mail in the workplace: A comparison with memoranda. Language@internet, 71. [URL]
Crystal, D. (2001). Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eckart de Castilho, R., Biemann, C., Gurevych, & Yimam, S. M. (2014). WebAnno: a flexible, web-based annotation tool for CLARIN. In Proceedings of the CLARIN Annual Conference (CAC). Soesterberg, Netherlands.
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
(2015). Teaching email politeness in the EFL/ESL classroom. ELT Journal, 69(4), 415–424. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). Variation in evaluations of the (im)politeness of emails from L2 learners and perceptions of the personality of their senders. Journal of Pragmatics, 1061, 1–19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Economidou-Kogetsidis, M., Soteriadou, L., & Taxitari, L. (2018). Developing pragmatic competence in an instructed setting: The effectiveness of pedagogical intervention in Greek EFL learners’ request production. L2 Journal, 10(3), 3–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fukushima, S. (2000). Requests and culture. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goy, E., Zeyrek, D., & Otcu, B. (2012). Developmental patterns in internal modification of requests: A quantitative study on Turkish learners of English. In M. Economidou-Kogetsidis & H. Woodfield (Eds.), Interlanguage request modification (pp. 51–86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. Th. (2011). Commentary. In K. Allan & J. Robinson (Eds.), Current methods in historical semantics (pp.184–195). Berlin/ New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halenko, N., & Jones, C. (2011). Teaching pragmatic awareness of spoken requests to Chinese EAP learners in the UK: Is explicit instruction effective? System, 39(2), 240–250. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hassall, T. (2012). Request modification by Australian learners of Indonesian. In M. Economidou-Kogetsidis & H. Woodfield (Eds.), Interlanguage request modification (pp. 203–242). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hendriks, B. (2010). An experimental study of native speaker perceptions of non-native request modification in e-mails in English. Intercultural Pragmatics, 7(2), 221–255. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hudson, T., Detmer, E., & Brown, J. D. (1995). Developing prototypic measures of cross-cultural pragmatics (technical report 7). Honolulu: University of Hawaii.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kallen, J., & Kirk, J. (2012). SPICE-Ireland: A user’s guide. Belfast: Clo Ollscoil na Banriona.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaneko, E., Park, M., Wilson, I., Heo, Y., Roy, D., Yasuta, T., Nicholas, A., & Blake, J. (2018). English curriculum innovation for computer science majors in the Japanese EFL context: From needs to tasks. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (pp. 84–89). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kankaanranta, A. (2006). “Hej Seppo, could you pls comment on this!” – internal email communication in lingua franca English in a multinational company. Business Communication Quarterly, 69(2), 216–225. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krulatz, A. (2012). Interlanguage pragmatics in Russian: The speech act of request in email. (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Utah).
Kubota, M. (1995). Teachability of conversational implicature to Japanese EFL learners. IRLT Bulletin, 91, 35–67.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lazarescu, R. C. (2013). “Can you upload as soon as you can please?” A study of university student requests by e-mail in English Medium Instruction. (Master’s thesis, Universidad Complutense Madrid).
Leech, G. (1992). Corpora and theories of linguistic performance. In J. Svarvik (Ed.), Directions in corpus linguistics (pp.105–122). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leech, G., & Weisser, M. (2003). Generic speech act annotation for task-oriented dialogues. In D. Archer, P. Rayson, A. Wilson, & A. Mcenery (Eds.), Proceedings of corpus linguistics (pp. 441–446). Lancaster University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lewin-Jones, J., & Mason, V. (2014). Understanding style, language and etiquette in email communication in higher education: A survey. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 19(1), 75–90. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liddicoat Anthony, J., & Crozet, C. (2001). Acquiring French interactional norms through instruction. In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 125–144). New York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
LoCastro, V. (1997). Pedagogical intervention and pragmatic competence. Applied Language Learning, 8(1),75–109.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Pragmatics for language educators. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maynard, C., & Leicher, S. (2007). Pragmatic annotation of an academic spoken corpus for pedagogical purposes. In E. Fitzpatrick (Ed.), Corpus linguistics beyond the word: Corpus research from phrase to discourse. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mey, J. L. (1993). Pragmatics: An introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Negueruela, E. (2008). Revolutionary pedagogies: Learning that leads (to) second language development. In J. P. Lantolf & M. Poehner (Eds.), Sociocultural theory and the teaching of second languages (pp. 189–227). London: Equinox Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nicholas, A. (2015). A concept-based approach to teaching speech acts in the EFL classroom. ELT Journal, 69(4), 383–394. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rosch, E. H. (1973). On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories. In T. E. Moore (Ed.), Cognitive development and acquisition of language (pp. 111–144). London: Academic Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Savic, M. (2018). Lecturer perceptions of im/politeness and in/appropriateness in student e-mail requests: A Norwegian perspective. Journal of Pragmatics, 1241, 52–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2007). Task difficulty in oral speech act production. Applied Linguistics, 28(1), 113–135. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taguchi, N., & Roever, C. (2017). Second language pragmatics. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tono, Y. (2003). Learner corpora: design, development and applications. In Proceedings of Corpus Linguistics 2003 (pp. 800–809). Lancaster University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thompson, G., & Hunston, S. (2006). System and corpus: Exploring connections. London: Equinox.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Compernolle, R. A. (2014). Sociocultural theory and L2 instructional pragmatics. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weisser, M. (2014). Speech act annotation. In K. Aijmer & C. Ruhlemann (Eds.), Corpus pragmatics: A handbook (pp. 84–113). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yoshimi, D. (2001). Explicit instruction and JFL learners’ use of interactional discourse markers. In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 223–244). New York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen
2025. Research methods in L2 pragmatics research: Introduction to the special issue. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics 4:3 ► pp. 100241 ff. DOI logo
Blake, John, Maxim Mozgovoy & Allan Nicholas
2025. Computerized Dynamic Assessment for Pragmatic Competence in Second Language Learners’ English Email Requests. In Methodologies and Intelligent Systems for Technology Enhanced Learning, Workshops - 14th International Conference [Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, 1308], ► pp. 17 ff. DOI logo
Granger, Sylviane
2024. From early to future learner corpus research. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 10:2 ► pp. 247 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

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 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