Using L2 interactional-pragmatic resources in CMC: A case of Japanese orthography and emoji

Abstract

Increasingly prevalent use of technologies such as instant messaging and online chat has transformed our traditional ways of learning and teaching pragmatics. This study presents an example of such transformation by demonstrating how computer-mediated communication (CMC) may be employed as a tool to provide second language (L2) learners opportunities to use interactional resources specific to the context of CMC, namely unique orthography and emoji. For the study, we introduced four university-level learners of Japanese to a language exchange messaging application and recorded their online text-based chat interactions with native Japanese speakers over a period of 12 weeks. We followed up the chat data with weekly stimulated verbal recalls (SVR) to investigate L2 learners’ intentions and perceptions surrounding their own and others’ use of unique orthography and emoji (48 SVR sessions total; average 30 minutes per session). Coding and thematic analysis of the chat data revealed learners’ agentive use of orthography and emoji as resources for communication. In addition, the SVR data revealed a variety of personal and interpersonal reasons behind their use, including learners’ concerns over self-presentation, interpersonal relationships, identity, and discourse management. The findings not only demonstrate how CMC can afford learners a unique environment for experimenting with a range of context-appropriate interactional resources to convey pragmatic meaning, but also shed light on the various, sometimes competing, considerations and complex processes underlying learners’ pragmatic choices in CMC.

Keywords

CMC emoji L2 pragmatics Japanese orthography

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Belz

(2007). The role of computer mediation in the instruction and development of L2 pragmatic competence. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 27, 45–75.

Belz

Kinginger

(2002). The cross-linguistic development of address form use in telecollaborative language learning: Two case studies. Canadian Modern Language Review, 59, 189–214.

Belz

Kinginger

(2003). Discourse options and the development of pragmatics competence by classroom learners of German: The case of address forms. Language Learning, 53, 591–647.

Belz

J.A.

Vyatkina

(2008). The pedagogical mediation of a developmental learner corpus for classroom-based language instruction. Language Learning and Technology, 12, 33–52.

Cunningham

D.J.

(2016). Request modification in synchronous computer-mediated communication: The role of focused instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 100, 1–24.

Cunningham

D.J.

(2019). L2 pragmatics learning in computer-mediated communication. In Taguchi

(Ed.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and pragmatics (pp. 372–386). Routledge.

Gass

Mackey

(2017). Stimulated recall methodology in applied linguistics and L2 research. 2nd edition. Routledge.

Gonzales

(2013). Development of politeness strategies in participatory online environments. In Taguchi

Sykes

(Eds.), Technology in interlanguage pragmatics research and teaching (pp. 101–120). John Benjamins.

González-Lloret

(2016). The construction of emotion in multilingual computer-mediated interaction. In Prior

M.T.

Kasper

(Eds.), Emotion in multilingual interaction (pp. 289–311). John Benjamins.

10.

González-Lloret

(2019). Technology and L2 pragmatics learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 39, 113–127.

11.

Gottlieb

(2010). Playing with language in E-Japan: Old win in new bottles. Japanese Studies, 30, 393–407.

12.

Gumperz

(1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge University Press.

13.

Ishihara

Takamiya

(2014). Pragmatic development through blogs: A longitudinal study of telecollaboration. In Shuai

Swanson

(Eds.), Engaging language learners through technology integration: Theory, applications, and outcomes (pp. 137–161). IGI Global.

14.

Ishihara

Tarone

(2009). Subjectivity and pragmatic choice in L2 Japanese: Emulating and resisting pragmatic norms. In Kakegawa

(Ed.), Pragmatic competence (pp. 101–128). Mouton de Gruyter.

15.

Kakegawa

(2009). Development of the use of Japanese sentence final particles through email correspondence. In Kakegawa

(Ed.), Pragmatic competence (pp. 301–334). Mouton de Gruyter.

16.

Kataoka

(2003). Emotion and youth identities in personal letter writing. In Androutsopoulos

Georgakopoulou

(Eds.), Discourse constructions of youth identities (pp. 121–149). John Benjamins.

17.

Lam

W.S.E.

(2000). L2 literacy and the design of the self: A case study of a teenager writing on the Internet. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 457–482.

18.

Lam

W.S.E.

(2004). Second language socialization in a bilingual chat room: Global and local considerations. Language Learning and Technology, 8, 44–65.

19.

Lave

Wenger

(1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.

20.

(2019). L2 Chinese learners’ pragmatic developmental patterns in data-driven instruction and computer-mediated communication (CMC): A case of Chinese sentence final particle ne. Applied Pragmatics, 1, 154–183.

21.

LoCastro

(2003). An introduction to pragmatics: Social action for language teachers. University of Michigan Press.

22.

Matsuda

P.K.

(2001). Voice in Japanese written discourse: Implications for second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 35–53.

23.

Maxwell

J.A.

(2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. 3rd edition. Sage.

24.

Miller

(2011). Subversive script and novel graphs in Japanese girls’ culture. Language and Communication, 31, 16–26.

25.

Miyake

(2007). How young Japanese express their emotions visually in mobile phone messages: A sociolinguistic analysis. Japanese Studies, 27, 53–72.

26.

Nishimura

(2003). Establishing a community of practice on the internet: Linguistic behavior in online Japanese communication. In Nowak

Yoquelet

(Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 337–348). University of California Press

27.

Nishimura

(2006). Linguistic innovations and interactional features of casual online communication in Japanese. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 9.

28.

Nishimura

(2015). Style, creativity and play. In Georgakopoulou

Spilioti

(Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language and digital communication (pp. 103–117). Routledge.

29.

Pasfield-Neofitou

(2007). Textual features of intercultural Internet chat between learners of Japanese and English. CALL-EJ Online, 9, 1–18.

30.

Sakai

(2013). The role of sentence closing as an emotional marker: A case of Japanese mobile phone e-mail. Discourse, Context and Media, 2, 149–155.

31.

Sauro

(2013). Computer-mediated communication and second language development. In Chapelle

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1–5). Wiley.

32.

Sykes

(2005). Synchronous CMC and pragmatic development: Effects of oral and written chat. CALICO Journal, 22, 399–431.

33.

Taguchi

Roever

(2017). Second language pragmatics. Oxford University Press.

34.

Taguchi

Sykes

(2013). Technology in interlanguage pragmatics research and teaching. John Benjamins.

35.

Tranter

(2008). Nonconventional script choice in Japan. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2008, 133–151.

36.

Tsai

M.H.

Kinginger

(2015). Giving and receiving advice in computer-mediated peer response activities. CALICO Journal, 32, 82–112.

37.

Vandergriff

(2013). Emotive communication online: A contextual analysis of computer-mediated communication (CMC) cues. Journal of Pragmatics, 51, 1–12.

38.

Vandergriff

(2014). A pragmatic investigation of emoticon use in nonnative/native speaker text chat. Language@ Internet, 11, article 4.

39.

Walther

J.B.

(1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3–43.

40.

Zhang

(2014). More than ‘hello’ and ‘bye-bye’: Opening and closing the online chats in Mandarin Chinese. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27, 528–544.