Journal of Pragmatics 37 (2005) 737741

Book review
Acquisition in Interlanguage Pragmatics: Learning How to Do Things with Words in
a Study Abroad Context
Anne Barron, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 2003, EUR/USD 115.00, xiv 398 pages,
hardback
Research on interlanguage pragmatics has predominantly focused on use rather than
development or acquisitional processes. The dearth of acquisitional studies on learner
pragmatics may be attributed to the shortage of theories that can be drawn on, as well as the
history of the field as it developed out of cross-cultural pragmatics (Kasper and Rose,
2002). In this context, Barrons book on second language (L2) learners development in
speech act realizations makes an important contribution to the field of interlanguage
pragmatics.
Barron reports on her PhD dissertation study, which employed a longitudinal design in
investigating the pragmatic development of 33 Irish learners of German in a study abroad
context. Learners realization of requests, offers and refusals of offers in production
questionnaires were compared in two ways: (1) with English data elicited from native
speakers (NatS) of Irish English and with German data from German NatS; and (2) at
different times, that is, at the beginning, middle and end of a 10-month study abroad period.
The focus of analysis is on the discourse structure of offer-refusal exchanges, the use of
pragmatic routines, and internal modification in speech act realization. A general trend of
approximating German NatSs speech act realization over time was observed and detailed
analyses of production data illuminate interesting findings on developmental features. The
use of self-report data also contributes to our understanding of learners metapragmatic
awareness and subjectivity in realization of various speech acts.
Chapter 1 (Introduction) lays out the rationale of the study by illustrating an example of
pragmatic failure which the author experienced in cross-cultural communication. Barron
designed the longitudinal study on development of pragmatic competence in a study abroad
context, on the assumption that such a contextas opposed to the foreign language
classroomwould provide learners with important opportunities for developing competence in overcoming difficulties that arise in cross-cultural communication. The research
questions introduced in this chapter address the issues of observed changes, transfer,
implications for the understanding of interlanguage pragmatic development, and stages of
acquisition. Theories on pragmatics and approaches to L2 learners pragmatic development
are reviewed in the following two chapters.
In Chapter 2 (A pragmatic approach), Barron presents her working definition of the
notion pragmatic competence and discusses theories of pragmatics that are utilized in
studies of interlanguage pragmatics: speech act theories, politeness theories, and discourse
perspectives on pragmatics. Her working definition of pragmatic competence is the
0378-2166/$ see front matter # 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2004.03.004

738

Book review

knowledge of the linguistic resources available in a given language for realizing particular
illocutions, knowledge of the sequential aspects of speech acts and finally, knowledge of
the appropriate contextual uses of the particular languages linguistic resources (p. 10).
As she explicitly states, speech act realization is the learning target in this study.
Recognizing the problems of L2 studies based on speaker-oriented speech act theories
and the face-saving view of politeness, Barron rationalizes her decision to employ
Edmondsons (1981) model of discourse as her analytical framework for examining the
sequential aspects of offer-refusal exchanges. Nevertheless, her analysis of realizations of
individual speech acts is based on speech act theories and the face-saving view of
politeness. It would have been helpful for the readers if she had clarified the analytical
solutions she adopted in order to address the difficulties with speaker-oriented approaches.
Chapter 3 (Acquisitional issues in learner pragmatics) provides an overview of
theoretical approaches to and concepts important for understanding L2 learning processes. Barron introduces theories which have been proposed for explaining the learning
of L2 forms and applied specifically to the explanations of interlanguage pragmatic
development. These theories point to the roles of first language (L1) knowledge, noticing,
output opportunities, and negotiation of meaning in meaning-oriented interactions. While
admitting the difficulty in identifying the source of particularity in interlanguage, Barron
discusses pragmatic transfer, overgeneralization and the role of external factors that
affect learners interlanguage as a product. The importance of input as one of the external
factors is also discussed in relation to the uniqueness of a study abroad context. Barron
also covers some critiques of using native speakers pragmatic norm as the target norm for
L2 learners, and reviews studies that address the relationship between grammatical
development and pragmatic development, and studies that address stages of pragmatic
development.
The review of theories and earlier studies on the acquisitional aspects of interlanguage
pragmatics is thorough and points to necessary considerations of important concepts. For
example, Barron rightly states that a study abroad context is a unique situation that
combines instructional contexts and contexts for natural language acquisition although
these two kinds of context are often viewed as dichotomous in second language research.
Because of their sojourner status and the time spent in language classrooms, learners
interaction with native speakers may be limited. She also points out that their motivation to
adopt native speaker norms should not to be presumed. However, readers may face
difficulty in reading Chapter 3 because the author does not discuss the issues in a way that
leads to the research questions presented in Chapter 1 and the design of the study laid out in
Chapter 4. The third chapter gave me the impression that the study falls into the category of
developmental interlanguage pragmatic research that is descriptive rather than motivated
or guided by any particular theoretical orientation (Kasper and Rose, 2002: 13). As such,
this longitudinal study of Irish learners of German in a year-abroad program may well be
called a focused description or pre-experimental study, in Larsen-Freeman and
Longs (1991) terms, rather than an experimental study, for reasons to be provided below.
In Chapter 4 (Experimental design) Barron describes the methodology in great detail,
as she provides the rationale for her methodological decisions including the discussion of
both the advantages and drawbacks of several data collection formats. The learners
pragmatic competence was measured by the use of discourse completion tasks and free

Book review

739

discourse completion tasks, and compared with the German NatS data and the Irish English
NatS data. The learner data was collected three times: prior to the year-abroad program,
after two months of stay in Germany, and after the program. The production questionnaires
were chosen as the main instruments because of their strength in eliciting the target speech
act consistently, their capacity for systematically varying a wide range of social variables,
and collecting speech act formulas and strategies. Although data using the same production
questionnaires was also collected twice from the control group, the control data was not
analyzed due to the high attrition rate. The main data from these production questionnaires
is supplemented with self-report data, which Barron calls metapragmatic data. Metapragmatic data was collected through pre- and post-year abroad questionnaires and
retrospective interviews about role-plays. The situational descriptions used in the production questionnaires were assessed by German NatS and Irish English NatS groups, with
regard to their realism and frequency as well as the examined context variables. The data
from the assessment questionnaire was used to validate the situational descriptions, rather
than relying on the researchers intuition. All of these methodological particulars contribute to the richness of the data collected in the study.
Barron calls the design of the study experimental possibly because she regards the
year-abroad program as a provision of experimental treatment. However, it does not satisfy
the criteria for an experimental study on interlanguage development: that is, (1) there
must be experimental and control groups . . ., and (2) subjects must be randomly assigned to
one of these groups (Larsen-Freeman and Long, 1991: 19). Because it employed a control
group, the design is a quasi-experimental one, lacking only the second criterion. However,
because the control data was not analyzed, this study should be categorized rather as a preexperimental one, which meets neither criterion. At the same time, due to its exploratory
nature, this study, which is not guided by a hypothesis or prediction, may better be
categorized as a focused description study.
The results of the data analysis are presented in Chapter 5 (A pragmatic analysis).
Barron divides the chapter into three sections, that is, (1) discourse structure, (2) pragmatic
routines, and (3) internal modifications in the realization of the target speech acts. In each
section, the frequency of a certain structure or form used by the learners in each situation is
compared with data from the German NatS and Irish English NatS, and compared among
the three data sets collected at different times. Such quantitative data based on the
production data is used to pursue the questions of observed change, transfer, and stages
of acquisition. Metapragmatic data is used to explain some transfer phenomena and to
discuss implications of the findings for the understanding of acquisition in interlanguage
pragmatics. The findings from the analysis presented in Chapter 5 are summarized in
Chapter 6, Conclusion, presented in the order of the research questions, prior to the
discussion of methodological limitations, practical implications of the research findings,
and suggestions for future research.
The issue of changes is presented based on detailed and very thorough analyses. While
learners development toward the German NatSs pattern, which is called the L2 norm,
was observed, the approximation was not complete but limited. With regard to internal
modification, while lexical and phrasal downgrading became syntactically more embedded
in gradual approximation to the German NatSs pattern, the use of more complex utterances
in request realizations exceeded the level of complexity in the NatS data.

740

Book review

With regard to the issue of transfer, as Barron indicated in Chapter 3, researchers need to
be careful not to equate proximity between the learner data and the L1 group data as the
direct manifestation of transfer. However, in Chapters 5 and 6, Barron seems to identify
pragmatic transfer based on the observed proximity in the frequency of a certain feature
between the learner data and the Irish English NatS data. Furthermore, she elaborates her
discussion of transfer by attributing the increase or decrease in transfer to the effect of
learners perception of transferability, increasing pragmatic ability, and the learners desire
to transfer. These explanations and Barrons claims of the support for particular
hypotheses and proposals introduced in Chapter 3 are, however, lacking specific evidence.
For example, Barron attributes the low frequency in the use of syntactic downgraders for
standard request situations to the learners assessment that Germans are more direct, based
on the data from the pre- and post-year abroad questionnaires. However, since this is the
learners generalized assessment based on a scaled-response questionnaire item, it does not
directly relate to the learners attempt to approximate the German NatS norm specifically
with regard to frequency in the use of syntactic downgraders and particularly in those
standard situations. The explanation thus appears to be arbitrary. Although metapragmatic
data collected through retrospective interviews is utilized effectively in arguing how
learners perceptions of German NatSs patterns in offer-refusal exchanges are related to
their production data, the use of metapragmatic data in explaining observed changes and
transfer phenomena appear to be arbitrary in most cases as seen in this example.
The findings of this study would have acquired more depth if there had been additional
analyses of the role-play data and control data, and information as to the variability among
the learners as well as among the NatS of each language. The role-play data that Barron
collected three times would have enabled her to discuss the relationship between pragmatic
knowledge and on-line production, and to adequately address Bialystoks (1993) twodimensional model. Analysis of data from the control group, which Barron collected twice
but decided not to include in her analysis, would also have made the present data more
accountable in terms of the effect of a study abroad context as opposed to a foreign
language context. In addition, analyses of variability within groups of participants, both
through qualitative analysis and through quantitative analysis by calculating standard
deviations or performing correlation analyses, could have mitigated the lack of homogeneity among the learners, which the author points out.
Despite several weaknesses as indicated above, this book makes important contributions
to the field of interlanguage pragmatics. It adds rich descriptions onto the small body of
research on interlanguage pragmatic development through the use of a longitudinal design.
Through a series of analyses based on quantitative data involving a relatively large number
of learners, Barron demonstrates various patterns of developmental changes which differ
according to target speech acts, situations, and features such as discourse structure,
pragmatic routines and internal modification. Another important contribution for the
direction of future L2 research with an acquisitional focus is the problematization of
appropriateness of the NatS norm, which she discusses in Chapter 3. The homogeneous
nature of NatS norms and the learners attempt to approximate the norms is often presumed
in cognitively and psycholinguistically oriented acquisitional research. However, there is a
danger in applying such analytical approaches to a study on acquisition in interlanguage
pragmatics. Taking into account that language learning is a form of social practice

Book review

741

(Kasper and Rose, 2002: 60), a researcher of second language learning should not neglect
the role of learners values and beliefs. Barron, by presenting metapragmatic data, suggests
the relationship between learners values and their adherence to, or deviation from the NatS
norm. All in all, this book is recommended for a range of readers because of its thorough
overview of theories, issues and existing research findings, as well as its detailed analyses
of the developmental changes demonstrated by the learners in a study abroad program.

References
Bialystok, Ellen, 1993. Symbolic representation and attentional control in pragmatic competence. In: Kasper,
G., Blum-Kulka, S. (Eds.), Interlanguage Pragmatics. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 4257.
Edmondson, Willis, 1981. Lets Talk and Talk About It: A Pedagogic Interactional Grammar of English. Urban
& Schwarzenberg, Mu nchen.
Kasper, Gabriele, Rose, Kenneth R., 2002. Pragmatic Development in a Second Language. Blackwell, Oxford.
Larsen-Freeman, Diane, Long, Michael H., 1991. An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research.
Longman, London.
Midori Ishida is a PhD candidate in the Department of Second Language Studies at the University of Hawaii at
Ma noa. Her main research areas include acquisition of modality expressions as a way of indexing stances,
interactional negotiation and its effect on second language development, and assessment of oral language
development as part of formative evaluation in the second and heritage language classroom. She has published
an article on the effect of recasts in the acquisition of aspect in Japanese in Language Learning 54: 2.

Midori Ishida
Second Language Studies, University of Hawaii at Manoa
1890 East-West Road, Moore Hall 570, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA
E-mail address: mfurukaw@hawaii.edu (M. Ishida)