Cover not available

Article published In: TASK
Vol. 1:2 (2021) ► pp.227–265

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

Effects of task complexity on L2 suggestions

An exploratory study on trade-offs between accuracy and complexity

ORCiD logo with link | Charles University, Czech Republic
ORCiD logo with link | University of Barcelona, Spain
Published online: 16 December 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/task.20007.mar
Abstract
This exploratory study aims at determining whether increased task complexity affects performance of second language (L2) pragmatics. 34 Spanish learners of English as a foreign language (EFL) undertook simple and complex interactive tasks targeting the speech act of suggesting. Although previous analyses of learner-learner interaction have demonstrated that increasing the cognitive load of a task may affect the number of speech acts in conversation, not enough evidence to support this premise was found. In addition, the assessment of suggestions as provided by native speakers of American English shows that increased task complexity along number of elements, social distance, and degree of imposition is likely to promote accuracy and complexity of pragmatic moves without making L2 learners trade off either accuracy or complexity. Pedagogical implications in the fields of L2 pragmatics and task-based language teaching (TBLT) are further discussed.
Article outline
  • Introduction
    • Task complexity and L2 oral production
    • L2 suggestions and task complexity
    • Research questions and hypotheses
  • Method
    • Participants
    • Tasks
    • Data collection procedure
    • Coding of suggestions
    • Assessment of suggestions
    • Interrater reliability
    • Statistical analyses
  • Results
    • Task difficulty
    • Impact of task complexity on the number of speech acts
    • Impact of task complexity on the accuracy and complexity of speech acts
      • Accuracy and complexity scores
      • Trade-offs between accuracy and complexity
      • Assessment criteria of raters
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (75)
References
Abolfathiasl, H., & Abdullah, A. N. (2013). Pragmatic strategies and linguistic structures in making ‘suggestions’: Towards comprehensive taxonomies. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 2(6), 236–241. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aminifard, Y., Safaei, E., & Askari, H. (2014). Speech act of suggestion across language proficiency and gender in Iranian context. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 3(5), 189–205. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aufa, F. (2014). The use of discourse completion task (DCT) as explicit instruction on Indonesian EFL learners’ production of suggestion acts. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature (IJSELL), 2(6), 1–10. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Banerjee, J., & Carrell, P. L. (1988). Tuck in your shirt, you squid: Suggestions in ESL. Language Learning, 38(3), 313–364. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baralt, M. (2013). The impact of cognitive complexity on feedback efficacy during online versus face-to-face interactive tasks. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 351, 689–725. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2012). Pragmatics in SLA. In S. M. Gass & A. Mackey. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 147–162). Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Development of L2 pragmatics. Language Learning, 631, 68–86. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B. S. (1993). Learning the rules of academic talk: A longitudinal study of pragmatic development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 151, 279–304. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness. Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chalak, A., & Abbasi, S. (2015). The effects of explicit and implicit pragmatic instruction on Iranian EFL learners’ production of suggestion speech act in the context of distance learning. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 2(4), 275–284.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
COE (2018). CEFR companion volume with new descriptors. Council of Europe.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Darweesh, A. D., & Al-Aadili, N. M. (2017). Investigating Iraqi EFL learners’ performance in utilizing the speech acts of advice and suggestion. International Journal of English Linguistic, 7(4), 179–190. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ekin, M. T. Y. (2013). Do current EFL coursebooks work for the development of L2 pragmatic competence? The case of suggestions. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 931, 1306–1310. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Farnia, M., Sohrabie, A., & Sattar, H. Q. (2014). A pragmatic analysis of speech act of suggestion among Iranian native speakers of Farsi. Journal of ELT and Applied Linguistics, 2(2), 47–61.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fernández-Guerra, A., & Martínez-Flor, A. (2006). Is teaching how to “suggest” a good “suggestion”? An empirical study based on EFL learners’ accuracy and appropriateness when making suggestions. Porta Linguarum, 51, 91–108. [URL]
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. Fourth edition (11.0 update). Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gilabert, R. (2007a). Effects of manipulating task complexity on self-repairs during L2 oral production. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(3), 215–240. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007b). The simultaneous manipulation of task complexity along planning and +/− here-and-now: Effects on L2 oral production. In M. P. García Mayo. (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 44–68). Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gilabert, R., & Barón, J. (2013). The impact of increasing task complexity on L2 pragmatic moves. In K. McDonough & A. Mackey. (Eds.), Second language interaction in diverse contexts (pp. 45–70). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gilabert, R., Barón, J., & Llanes, À. (2009). Manipulating cognitive complexity across task types and its impact on learners’ interaction during oral performance. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 47(3–4), 367–395. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gu, T. (2014). A corpus-based study on the performance of the suggestion speech act by Chinese EFL learners. International Journal of English Linguistics, 4(1), 103–111. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Housen, A., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2012). Complexity, accuracy and fluency: Definitions, measurement and research. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder. (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency. Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 1–20). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ishikawa, T. (2008). The effects of task demands of intentional reasoning on L2 speech performance. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 5(1), 29–63.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). Examining the influence of intentional reasoning demands on learner perceptions of task difficulty and L2 monologic speech. In P. Robinson. (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 307–330). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackson, D. O., & Suethanapornkul, S. (2013). The cognition hypothesis: A synthesis and meta-analysis of research on second language task complexity. Language Learning, 631, 330–367. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, M. D. (2017). Cognitive task complexity and L2 written syntactic complexity, accuracy, lexical complexity, and fluency: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing, 371, 13–38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kasper, G., & Blum-Kulka, S. (1993). Interlanguage pragmatics: An introduction. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka. (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 3–17). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Y. (2009). The effects of task complexity on learner-learner interaction. System, 37(2), 254–268. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Y., & Payant, C. (2017). Impacts of task complexity on the development of L2 oral performance over time. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 55(2), 197–220. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koike, D. A. (1996). Transfer of pragmatic competence and suggestions in Spanish foreign language learning. In S. M. Gass & J. Neu. (Eds.), Speech acts across cultures (pp. 257–281). Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2007). Task complexity and measures of linguistic performance in L2 writing. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45(3), 261–284. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). Cognitive task complexity and written output in Italian and French as a foreign language. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(1), 48–60. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levkina, M., & Gilabert, R. (2012). The effects of cognitive task complexity on L2 oral production. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder. (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency. Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 171–197). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, J. (2011). Testing interlanguage pragmatics knowledge. In A. Trosborg. (Ed.), Pragmatics across language and cultures (pp. 467–488). Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, B., & Wang, D. (2012). Learning to make suggestions in a U.S. chemistry lab: A case study of a Chinese ITA. In G. Gorsuch. (Ed.), Working theories for teaching assistant development: Time-tested & robust theories, frameworks, & models for TA & ITA learning (pp. 655–671). New Forums Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Malicka, A., & Levkina, M. (2012). Measuring task complexity. Does EFL proficiency matter? In A. Shehadeh & C. A. Coombe. (Eds.), Task-based language teaching in foreign language contexts: Research and implementation (pp. 43–66). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martínez-Flor, A. (2004). The effect of instruction on the development of pragmatic competence in the English as a foreign language context: A study based on suggestions (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Department of English Studies, Universitat Jaume I.
Martínez-Flor, A. (2005). A theoretical review of the speech act of suggesting: Towards a taxonomy for its use in FLT. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 181, 167–187. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martínez-Flor, A., & Fukuya, Y. J. (2005). The effects of instruction on learners’ production of appropriate and accurate suggestions. System, 33(3), 463–480. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matsumura, S. (2003). Modelling the relationships among interlanguage pragmatic development, L2 proficiency, and exposure to L2. Applied Linguistics, 24(4), 465–491. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Michel, M. C. (2011). Effects of task complexity and interaction on L2 performance. In P. Robinson. (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 141–174). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). The use of conjunctions in cognitively simple versus complex oral L2 tasks. The Modern Language Journal, 97(1), 178–195. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). Complexity, accuracy and fluency in L2 production. In S. Loewen & M. Sato. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 50–68). Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Michel, M., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2007). The influence of complexity in monologic versus dialogic tasks in Dutch L2. IRAL, 451, 241–259. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nuevo, A. (2006). Task complexity and interaction: L2 learning opportunities and development (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Georgetown University.
Nuevo, A. M., Adams, R., & Ross-Feldman, L. (2011). Task complexity, modified output, and L2 development in learner-learner interaction. In P. Robinson. (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 175–202). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pallotti, G. (2015). A simple view of linguistic complexity. Second Language Research, 31(1), 117–134. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pishghadam, R., & Sharafadini, M. (2011). Delving into speech act of suggestion: A case of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(16), 152–160.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878–912. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Révész, A. (2011). Task complexity, focus on L2 constructions, and individual differences: A classroom-based study. The Modern Language Journal, 95(s1), 162–181. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Révész, A., Michel, M., & Gilabert, R. (2016). Measuring cognitive task demands using dual task methodology, subjective self-ratings, and expert judgments: A validation study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(4), 703–737. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rintell, E. (1979). Getting your speech act together: The pragmatic ability of second language learners. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 171, 97–106.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (1995). Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning, 45(1), 99–140. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001a). Task complexity, cognitive resources and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287–318). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001b). Task complexity, task difficulty and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 27–57. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). The cognition hypothesis, task design, and adult task-based language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(2), 45–105.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for second language task design. IRAL – International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 43(1), 1–32. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). Criteria for classifying and sequencing pedagogic tasks. In M. P. García Mayo. (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 7–27). Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roever, C. (2006). Validation of a web-based test of ESL pragmalinguistics. Language Testing, 23(2), 229–256. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sample, E., & Michel, M. (2014). An exploratory study into trade-off effects of complexity, accuracy, and fluency on young learners’ oral task repetition. TESL Canada Journal, 31(8), 23–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sasayama, S. (2011). Cognition hypothesis and second language performance: Comparison of written and oral task performance. Second Language Studies, 29(2), 107–129.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sasayama, S., & Izumi, S. (2012). Effects of task complexity and pre-task planning on EFL learners’ oral production. In A. Shehadeh & C. A. Coombe. (Eds.), Task-based language teaching in foreign language contexts: Research and implementation (pp. 23–42). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Searle, J. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1976). A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society, 5(1), 1–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 38–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, and fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510–532. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2001). Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 183–205). Cambridge University Press. 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
(2011). Do proficiency and study-abroad experience affect speech act production? Analysis of appropriateness, accuracy, and fluency. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 491, 265–293. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). Development of speed and accuracy in pragmatic comprehension in English as a foreign language. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 313–338. 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
Takahashi, S. (2005). Pragmalinguistic awareness: Is it related to motivation and proficiency? Applied Linguistics 26(1), 90–120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Awareness and learning in second language pragmatics. Language, Culture, and Communication, 51, 53–76.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Youn, S. J. (2014). Measuring syntactic complexity in L2 pragmatic production- investigating relationships among pragmatics, grammar, and proficiency. System, 421, 270–287. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Róg, Tomasz
2025. Empirical Investigations into the Use of Tasks in L2 Pragmatics Instruction. In Task-based Language Teaching and Beyond: L2 Pragmatics Instruction for Young Learners [Second Language Learning and Teaching, ], ► pp. 143 ff. DOI logo
Mora-Plaza, Ingrid, Joan C. Mora, Mireia Ortega & Cristina Aliaga-Garcia
2024. Is L2 pronunciation affected by increased task complexity in pronunciation-unfocused speaking tasks?. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 46:4 ► pp. 1117 ff. DOI logo
Barón, Júlia
2023. A task-supported language approach to teaching L2 pragmatics. In L2 Pragmatics in Action [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 58], ► pp. 319 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 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.

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