Volume 3, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2589-109X
  • E-ISSN: 2589-1103
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



The aim of this paper is two-fold: firstly, to provide an overview of the methods used to elicit metapragmatic data in research with young language learners through a systematic review; and secondly, to present three data collection techniques designed and used in two research projects conducted by the authors, and examine their affordances for eliciting metapragmatic data. The systematic review revealed that data elicitation techniques employed in metapragmatics research with children closely reflected those widely employed in research with (young) adults (Culpeper, Mackey & Taguchi, 2018). Against this backdrop, the paper presents three elicitation techniques, developed based on the literature on the methodological considerations for conducting research with children (e.g. O’Kane, 2008Pinter, 2014Punch, 2002a2002b): the Emoticon task, the Ranking circle, and Readers Theatre. After describing the techniques and presenting the metapragmatic discussions elicited through them, the paper calls for the inclusion of innovative, participant-friendly methods in interlanguage pragmatics research focusing on children’s metapragmatic awareness.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Achiba, M.
    (2003) Learning to request in a second language: Child interlanguage pragmatics. Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781853596131
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853596131 [Google Scholar]
  2. Adams, C., Lockton, E., & Collins, A.
    (2018) Metapragmatic explicitation and social attribution in social communication disorder and developmental language disorder: A comparative study. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 61, 604–618. doi:  10.1044/2017_JSLHR‑L‑17‑0026
    https://doi.org/10.1044/2017_JSLHR-L-17-0026 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bernicot, J.
    (1991) French children’s conception of requests: The development of metapragmatic knowledge. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 14(3), 285–304. doi:  10.1177/016502549101400303
    https://doi.org/10.1177/016502549101400303 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bernicot, J., Laval, V., & Chaminaud, S.
    (2007) Nonliteral language forms in children: In what order are they acquired in pragmatics and metapragmatics?Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 2115–2132. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2007.05.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.05.009 [Google Scholar]
  5. Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G.
    (Eds.) (1989) Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bosco, F. M., Bucciarelli, M., & Bara, B. G.
    (2006) Recognition and repair of communicative failures: A developmental perspective. Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 1398–1429. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2005.06.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.06.011 [Google Scholar]
  7. Buson, L., & Billiez, J.
    (2013) Representations of stylistic variation in 9- to 11-year-olds: Cognitive processes and salience. Linguistics, 51(2), 325–354. doi:  10.1515/ling‑2013‑0013
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2013-0013 [Google Scholar]
  8. Caillies, S., Hody, A., & Calmus, A.
    (2012) Theory of mind and irony comprehension in children with cerebral palsy. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 33, 1380–1388. doi:  10.1016/j.ridd.2012.03.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2012.03.012 [Google Scholar]
  9. Chang, Y. F.
    (2016) Apologizing in Mandarin Chinese: A study on developmental patterns. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 42(1), 73–101. doi:  10.6241/concentric.ling.42.1.04
    https://doi.org/10.6241/concentric.ling.42.1.04 [Google Scholar]
  10. (2018) The effect of an interlocutor’s social status on the use of apology strategies: A cross-sectional study. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 44(1), 89–122. doi: 10.6241/concentric.ling.44.1.04
    https://doi.org/10.6241/concentric.ling.44.1.04 [Google Scholar]
  11. Collins, A., Lockton, E., & Adams, C.
    (2014) Metapragmatic explicitation ability in children with typical language development: Development and validation of a novel clinical assessment. Journal of Communication Disorders, 52, 31–43. doi:  10.1016/j.jcomdis.2014.07.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2014.07.001 [Google Scholar]
  12. Cowie, H., Huser, C., & Myers, C.
    (2014) The use of participatory methods in researching the experiences of children and young people. Croatian Journal of Education, 16(2), 51–66.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Culpeper, J., Mackey, A., & Taguchi, N.
    (2018) Second language pragmatics. From Theory to Research. Routledge. 10.4324/9781315692388
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315692388 [Google Scholar]
  14. Dittrich, W., Johansen, T., & Kulinskaya, E.
    (2011) Norms and situational rules of address in English and Norwegian speakers. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(15), 3807–3821. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2011.09.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.09.006 [Google Scholar]
  15. Drew, I.
    (2018) Reading in the second language classroom: Consideration of first language approaches in second language contexts. Acta Didactica Norge, 12(2), Art. 10. doi:  10.5617/adno.5570
    https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.5570 [Google Scholar]
  16. Drew, I., & Hasselgreen, A.
    (2008) Young language learner (YLL) research: An overview of some international and national approaches. Acta Didactica Norge, 2(1), Art. 5. doi:  10.5617/adno.1024
    https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.1024 [Google Scholar]
  17. Gu, P. Y., Hu, G., & Zhang, L. J.
    (2005) Investigating language learner strategies among lower primary school pupils in Singapore. Language and Education, 19(4), 281–303. doi:  10.1080/09500780508668682
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09500780508668682 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hasselgreen, A.
    (2005) The new læreplan proposal for English – reading between the lines. Språk og språkundervisning2(5), 7–10.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hsieh, S. C. Y., & Hsu, C. C. N.
    (2010) Idiom comprehension in Mandarin-speaking children. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 39, 505–522. doi:  10.1007/s10936‑009‑9145‑z
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-009-9145-z [Google Scholar]
  20. Ishihara, N.
    (2013) Is it rude language? Children learning pragmatics through visual narratives. TESL Canada Journal, 30(7), 135–149. doi:  10.18806/tesl.v30i7.1157
    https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v30i7.1157 [Google Scholar]
  21. James, A., Jenks, C., & Prout, A.
    (1998) Theorizing childhood. Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Lacroix, A., Aguert, M., Dardier, V., Stojanovik, V., & Laval, V.
    (2010) Idiom comprehension in French-speaking children and adolescents with Williams’ syndrome. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 31(2), 608–616. doi:  10.1016/j.ridd.2009.12.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2009.12.011 [Google Scholar]
  23. Laval, V.
    (2003) Idiom comprehension and metapragmatic knowledge in French children. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 723–739. doi:  10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00137‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00137-6 [Google Scholar]
  24. Lee, C.
    (2010) An exploratory study of the interlanguage pragmatic comprehension of young learners of English. Pragmatics, 20(3), 343–373. doi:  10.1075/prag.20.3.03lee
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20.3.03lee [Google Scholar]
  25. Lockton, E., Adams, C., & Collins, A.
    (2016) Do children with social communication disorder have explicit knowledge of pragmatic rules they break? A comparison of conversational pragmatic ability and metapragmatic awareness. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 51(5), 508–517. doi:  10.1111/1460‑6984.12227
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12227 [Google Scholar]
  26. McConachy, T.
    (2018) Developing intercultural perspectives on language use. Exploring pragmatics and culture in foreign language learning. Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. McConachy, T., & Liddicoat, A. J.
    (2016) Meta-pragmatic awareness and intercultural competence: The role of reflection and interpretation in intercultural mediation. InF. Dervin & Z. Gross (Eds.), Intercultural competence in education: Alternative approaches for different times (pp.13). Palgrave Macmillan. doi:  10.1057/978‑1‑137‑58733‑6_2
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-58733-6_2 [Google Scholar]
  28. McKay, A.
    (2006) Assessing young language learners. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. O’Kane, C.
    (2008) The development of participatory techniques. Facilitating children’s views about decisions which affect them. InP. Christensen & A. James (Eds.), Research with children. Perspectives and practices (2nd ed., pp.125–155). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Pinter, A.
    (2014) Child participant roles in applied linguistics research. Applied Linguistics, 35(2), 168–183. doi:  10.1093/applin/amt008
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt008 [Google Scholar]
  31. Pinter, A., & Zandian, S.
    (2014) ‘I don’t ever want to leave this room’: Benefits of researching ‘with’ children. ELT Journal, 68(1), 64–74. doi:  10.1093/elt/cct057
    https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cct057 [Google Scholar]
  32. Punch, S.
    (2002a) Interviewing strategies with young people: The ‘secret box’, stimulus material and task-based activities. Children and Society, 16, 45–56. doi:  10.1002/chi.685
    https://doi.org/10.1002/chi.685 [Google Scholar]
  33. (2002b) Research with children: The same or different from research with adults?Childhood, 9(3), 321–341. doi:  10.1177/0907568202009003005
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568202009003005 [Google Scholar]
  34. QSR International Pty Ltd
    QSR International Pty Ltd (2015) NVivo (Version 11). Retrieved on28 Junefromhttps://www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo-qualitative-data-analysis-software/home
  35. Rose, K.
    (2000) An exploratory cross-sectional study of interlanguage pragmatics development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(1), 27–67. doi:  10.1017/S0272263100001029
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100001029 [Google Scholar]
  36. (2009) Interlanguage pragmatic development in Hong Kong, phase 2. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(11), 2345–2364. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2009.04.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.04.002 [Google Scholar]
  37. Save the Children Norway
    Save the Children Norway (2008) A kit of tools for participatory research and evaluation with children, young people and adults. Retrieved on28 June 2021fromhttps://resourcecentre.savethechildren.net/sites/default/files/documents/kit-of-tools_1.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Savić, M., Economidou-Kogetsidis, M., & Myrset, A.
    (2021) Young Greek Cypriot and Norwegian EFL learners: Pragmalinguistic development in request production. Journal of Pragmatics, 180, 15–34. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2021.04.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.04.006 [Google Scholar]
  39. Savić, M. & Myrset, A.
    (forthcoming A). “But in England they’re certainly very polite, so you mustn’t forget that”: Young EFL learners making sense of pragmatic practices. InT. McConachy & A. J. Liddicoat Eds. Teaching and learning second language pragmatics for intercultural understanding. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Savić, M., & Myrset, A.
    (forthcoming B). “Hey, you, can I loan your yellow pencil?” Young Norwegian EFL learners’ metapragmatic appraisal of requests. InN. Halenko & J. Wang Eds. Pragmatics and English language learning. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Steiner, M.
    (1993) Learning from experience: World studies in the primary curriculum. Trentham.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Verschueren, J.
    (2000) Notes on the role of metapragmatic awareness in language use. Pragmatics, 10(4), 439–456. doi:  10.1075/prag.10.4.02ver
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.10.4.02ver [Google Scholar]
  43. Young, C., & Ortlieb, E.
    (2018) Implementing readers theater in secondary classrooms. Reading Psychology, 39(8), 879–897. doi:  10.1080/02702711.2018.1555364
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2018.1555364 [Google Scholar]
  44. Zhang, L., & Yan, R.
    (2012) Impact of immersion teaching on English sociopragmatic awareness of Chinese kindergarten children: A polite study. International Education, 41(2), 33–45.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): data elicitation techniques; EFL; metapragmatic awareness; young L2 learners
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error