Авторы

  • Люция Шамсутдинова
    Доктор философских наук в области педагогики (PhD), Узбекский государственный университет мировых языков

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-1415-vol6-iss5/S-pp27-31

Ключевые слова:

прагматическая компетенция речевые акты совет прагмалингвистический перенос социопрагматические нормы межкультурная прагматика

Аннотация

Совершенствование прагматической компетенции является одной из важнейших целей в обучении иностранным языкам, так как обеспечивает адекватное использование языковых средств в различных коммуникативных и социокультурных контекстах. В статье рассматривается значимость обучения речевым актам как способу развития прагматической компетенции. На основе теории речевых актов и межкультурной прагматики проводится контрастивный анализ речевого акта «совет» в английском и русском языках. Показаны различия в прагмалингвистических структурах и социопрагматических нормах, а также объясняется, как неправильный прагматический перенос может привести к коммуникативным неудачам. Делается вывод о необходимости обучения речевым актам с учетом как формы, так и функции, а также социокультурных норм носителей языка. Предлагаются рекомендации по методике преподавания для снижения прагматических ошибок.


background image

Жамият

ва

инновациялар

Общество

и

инновации

Society and innovations

Journal home page:

https://inscience.uz/index.php/socinov/index

Pragmatic competence and speech act instruction in
foreign language learning

Lyutsiya SHAMSUTDINOVA

1


Uzbek State World Languages University

ARTICLE INFO

ABSTRACT

Article history:

Received April 2025

Received in revised form

15 May 2025
Accepted 25 May 2025

Available online

15 June 2025

Improving pragmatic competence is one of the most

essential goals in foreign language instruction, as it ensures the

use of appropriate linguistic means in various communicative

and sociocultural contexts. This article explores the importance

of teaching speech acts as a means of developing pragmatic
competence. Based on the theory of speech acts and

intercultural pragmatics, the article focuses on the contrastive

analysis of the speech act of advising in English and Russian. It

examines the differences in pragmalinguistic structures and
sociopragmatic norms between the two languages, illustrating

how inappropriate pragmatic transfer can lead to

communication breakdowns. The study reveals that effective

teaching of speech acts, particularly advice, should integrate
both form and function, while accounting for sociocultural

norms of native speakers. Recommendations are given for

teaching strategies aimed at minimizing pragmatic failure in

learners of English as a foreign language.

2181-

1415/©

2025 in Science LLC.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-1415-vol6-iss5/S-pp27-31

This is an open access article under the Attribution 4.0 International

(CC BY 4.0) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.ru)

Keywords:

pragmatic competence,

speech acts,

advice,

pragmalinguistic transfer,

sociopragmatic norms,
intercultural pragmatics.

Chet tilini o‘rganishda pragmatik kompetensiya va nutq
aktlarini o‘qitish

ANNOTATSIYA

Kalit so‘zlar

:

pragmatik kompetensiya,
nutq aktlari,

maslahat,

pragmalingvistik transfer,

sotsiopragmatik me’yorlar,

madaniyatlararo pragmatika.

Pragmatik kompetensiyani rivojlantirish chet tilini

o‘qitishning eng muhim maqsadlaridan biridir, chunki

bu turli kommunikativ va ijtimoiy-madaniy kontekstlarda til

vositalaridan to‘g‘ri foydalanishni ta’minlaydi. Ushbu maqolada

pragmatik kompetensiyani shakllantirish vositasi sifatida nutq

aktlarini o‘rgatish muhimligi yoritiladi. Nutq aktlari nazariyasi

1

Doctor of Philosophy of Pedagogical Sciences, Uzbek State World Languages University. E-mail: Liya_r15@mail.ru


background image

Жамият

ва

инновациялар

Общество

и

инновации

Society and innovations

Special Issue

05 (2025) / ISSN 2181-1415

28

va madaniyatlararo pragmatika asosida ingliz va rus tillarida

“maslahat” nutq aktining kontrastiv tahlili amalga oshiriladi.
Tahlil davomida ikki til o‘r

tasidagi pragmalingvistik tuzilmalar

va sotsiopragmatik me’yorlar farqlari ko‘rsatilgan, noto‘g‘ri

pragmatik transfer qanday qilib muloqotdagi uzilishlarga olib

kelishi mumkinligi tushuntirilgan. Maqolada nutq aktlarini

o‘rgatishda nafaqat shakl va mazmun,

balki ona tilida

so‘zlashuvchilarning sotsiomadaniy me’yorlarini hisobga olish

kerakligi ta’kidlanadi. Ingliz tilini o‘rganuvchilarda pragmatik

xatolarni kamaytirish bo‘yicha tavsiyalar beriladi.

Прагматическая компетенция и обучение речевым

актам в изучении иностранного языка

АННОТАЦИЯ

Ключевые слова:

прагматическая

компетенция,

речевые акты,

совет,

прагмалингвистический

перенос,

социопрагматические

нормы,

межкультурная

прагматика

.

Совершенствование

прагматической

компетенции

является одной из важнейших целей в обучении

иностранным языкам, так как обеспечивает адекватное

использование

языковых

средств

в

различных

коммуникативных и социокультурных контекстах. В статье

рассматривается значимость обучения речевым актам как

способу развития прагматической компетенции. На основе

теории речевых актов и межкультурной прагматики

проводится контрастивный анализ речевого акта «совет» в

английском и русском языках. Показаны различия в

прагмалингвистических структурах и социопрагматических

нормах, а также объясняется, как неправильный

прагматический

перенос

может

привести

к

коммуникативным

неудачам.

Делается

вывод

о

необходимости обучения речевым актам с учетом как

формы, так и функции, а также социокультурных норм

носителей языка. Предлагаются рекомендации по методике

преподавания для снижения прагматических ошибок.

INTRODUCTION

Improving pragmatic competence is one of the most crucial tasks in foreign

language teaching. It enables learners to apply appropriate linguistic means in various

communicative and social contexts. It is essential to consider both the formal and

functional aspects of the target language to achieve communicative acceptability. We

fully support the hypothesis proposed by S.V.

Pavlova, which states that the teacher’s

task during a lesson should be directed at integrating the image of the “Other” into the

learner’s consciousness –

a person who speaks another language, in different situations,

and within a new sociocultural context, with different views on the appropriateness and

acceptability of speech acts [7,154]. Such an approach fosters intercultural awareness,

helping learners build not only linguistic accuracy but also cultural sensitivity. This

awareness significantly contributes to avoiding miscommunication and supports

learners in developing a holistic understanding of the target language. As a result, we

believe that this approach has a positive impact on the accurate perception of the target

language and contributes to the overall development of pragmatic competence.


background image

Жамият

ва

инновациялар

Общество

и

инновации

Society and innovations

Special Issue

05 (2025) / ISSN 2181-1415

29

LITERATURE REVIEW

Solving the problems raised by linguistic pragmatics opens new possibilities for

understanding the nature of the formation and functioning of language units in speech,
and therefore their adequate interpretation. Among the issues studied by pragmatics are
problems related to the speaker, the listener, the strategy and tactics of speech behavior;
forms of speech communication, relationships between communicators, speech
interpretation, and performative utterances are also examined [5,16]. In recent years,
increasing attention has been paid to the influence of sociocultural factors on language
structure and lexical usage. This reflects the understanding that language cannot be
separated from culture, just as form in language cannot be separated from meaning
[1,150]. Thus, we believe that the list of key factors in pragmatic studies should also
include the influence of sociocultural elements.

Mastering pragmatics allows foreign language users to navigate through various

business and personal communication situations (greetings, introductions, farewells,
receiving guests, phone conversations, etc.) and use appropriate linguistic norms, both
lexical and grammatical, in a pragmatically accurate, context-appropriate way. The ability
to consider all these variable factors and adapt to them constitutes pragmatic
competence [2,55]. Pragmatic competence helps both the speaker and the listener ensure
an adequate interpretation of speech acts by taking into account situational context,
sociocultural background, mentality, age, education level, and social status of the
speakers, as well as the appropriateness and effectiveness of speech conventions. This
competence is undoubtedly relevant in tod

ay’s context of intercultural dialogue [8,153].

However, in cases where this competence is underdeveloped, a speaker of a

foreign language may fail to achieve a communicative goal or may face several
communication failures [10,24]. Such failures, though seemingly minor, can undermine
mutual understanding and hinder social interaction, especially in multicultural settings
where communication norms differ significantly.

Ignoring the pragmatic aspect of communication often results in students learning

language structures without aligning them with specific communicative tasks in given
situations [7,2]. A. Trosborg argues that successful communication requires knowledge of
social norms, values, status characteristics, and communication registers. Pragmatic
compe

tence determines the correct interpretation of the interlocutor’s communicative

intention and attitude, especially when this interpretation is not clear from the literal
meaning of linguistic forms or nonverbal cues [3,57].

Students often subconsciously transfer pragmatic norms of their native language

and culture to the target language. Different linguistic and cultural backgrounds of
communicators can result in misunderstandings and pragmatic errors [2,55]. The
problem lies in the fact that what seems natural and normal to one party (the speaker)
may be perceived as inappropriate and abnormal by the other party (the listener). Such
violations often imply deviations from communicative expectations [7,3].

It is well known that transfer occurs at all linguistic levels: phonological, semantic,

syntactic, and pragmatic. In the case of pragmatic failures, the consequences may be
socially significant, as they can negatively influence the perception of the speaker.
The speaker may be seen as impolite, ill-mannered, uncooperative, dishonest, or
insincere [7,3]. As is known, speech act theory forms the core of pragmatics, and the
speech act is rightly regarded as the fundamental minimal unit of communication [9,25].


background image

Жамият

ва

инновациялар

Общество

и

инновации

Society and innovations

Special Issue

05 (2025) / ISSN 2181-1415

30

A speech act is a basic unit of communication, with each one performing a particular
communicative function, such as greeting, requesting, apologizing, saying goodbye, etc.
Speech acts appear as a specific set of speech options or strategies employed by the
speaker to perform a communicative function.

Teaching these sets of strategies can be a practical tool for educators aiming to

introduce elements of pragmatics into the classroom. When presented as models, these

strategies help students not only understand the linguistic forms but also the underlying

cultural values. Instruction in these speech act strategies can be effectively used by

teachers who seek to enhance pragmatic awareness during lessons [1,55].

RESEARCH METHOD

When using different speech acts, learners often encounter two types of pragmatic

transfer

sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic. Sociopragmatic transfer results from the

inability to assess the situation correctly and refers to misconceptions about social

norms. Sociopragmatic errors arise from misunderstandings of which communicative

actions are mandatory, acceptable, or appropriate in a given cultural context.

Pragmalinguistic transfer involves errors that stem from the inability to correctly identify

or express the intended meaning and relates to incorrect assumptions about the language

[7,4]. Let us consider, for example, how the speech act of “advice” is expressed in English

and Russian from a pragmalinguistic perspective. When offering advice, English speakers

tend to use modal and interrogative constructions, while imperative sentences are used

less frequently. In contrast, Russian speakers tend to prefer imperative constructions,

with modals used less often and interrogatives almost never appearing.

Furthermore, English modal constructions typically convey the meaning of

suggestion

(e.g., you should, you ought to)

, while Russian constructions often imply

obligation

(e.g., ты должен, тебе надо)

. As a result, the phrase

“You probably need to go

and see

the dentist”

in English differs significantly in grammatical structure from its

Russian equivalent

“Ты обязательно должен пойти к врачу”.

English informants tend

to soften their influence on the addressee using modal expressions

(e.g., I think you

should go to the dentist)

, while Russian informants, on the contrary, tend to intensify it

(ты обязательно должен, тебе срочно надо)

[6,258].

Sociopragmatics studies interactive speech activity in different social contexts and

situations, including the participation of representatives from various social groups and

communities [4,3]. Therefore, sociopragmatic errors stem from incorrect assumptions

about which communicative actions are necessary or appropriate in a particular culture

[8,154]. For example, in the case of the speech act of giving advice, English communication

culture perceives unsolicited advice less favorably than Russian culture. In English-

speaking countries, advice is rarely given unless explicitly requested, as it is often viewed

as an invasion of privacy. Native speakers explain this preference by a desire not to seem

rude, overconfident, or impolite. Hence, learners must be taught to conform to the

communicative norms of English culture to achieve communicative success. This includes

not only knowing what to say but understanding when and how to say it. In contrast,

Russian speakers generally view advice as a helpful gesture rather than an intrusion. It is

often offered with good intentions and readily accepted by the listener [6,254].

ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

As a result of the analysis, we can suggest that differences in the linguistic

strategies for expressing advice in English and Russian involve various grammar

structures, which in turn affect lexical choice. Failure to observe these strategies often


background image

Жамият

ва

инновациялар

Общество

и

инновации

Society and innovations

Special Issue

05 (2025) / ISSN 2181-1415

31

leads to a communicative gap between interlocutors. It is important to note that not only

grammatical and lexical structures but also sociopragmatic norms often serve as sources

of communicative failure. Thus, understanding and teaching these differences is crucial

for developing cross-cultural communication competence. It helps learners recognize

potential pitfalls and fosters respectful and effective communication. The aforementioned

discussion confirms that pragmatic difficulties are mainly associated with the incorrect

transfer of pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic norms from the native language to the

target language. These deviations are observed in speech, and speech is reflected in

speech acts.

CONCLUSION

Thus, based on the analysis presented above, we can conclude that teaching speech

acts should be an essential component of foreign language instruction. It is not enough to
teach only grammar and vocabulary; educators must ensure that students are also
familiar with the cultural and pragmatic rules of communication. This approach not only
helps avoid misunderstandings but also fosters genuine and effective intercultural
communication.


REFERENCES

1.

C. de Aquino (2011).

Pragmatic competence: How can it be developed in the

foreign language classroom?

BELT

Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal, 2(2),

140

153.

2.

Davydova V.V. Pragmaticheskaya kompetentsiya v obuchenii inoyazychnomu

obshcheniyu. Izvestiya VGPU. 2020. S. 54

58.

3.

Davydova Yu.G. Formirovanie lingvopragmaticheskoy kompetentsii studentov

vuzov na prakticheskikh zanyatiyakh po inostrannomu yazyku. Pedagogika. Voprosy
teorii i praktiki. 2021. Tom 6. Vypusk 1. S. 55

61.

4.

Formanovskaya N.I. Rechevoe obshchenie: Kommunikativno-pragmaticheskiy

podkhod.

M.: Rus. yaz., 2002. S. 4

11.

5.

Karaziya N.A. Metodika pragmalingvisticheskogo issledovaniya: osnovnye

podkhody i kategorii. Vestnik KRAUNTS. Gumanitarnye nauki. 2006. Istochnik
obrashcheniya: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/metodika-pragmalingvisticheskogo-
issledovaniya-osnovnye-podhody-i-kategorii (Data obrashcheniya: 27.02.2022).

6.

Kenzhebalina G.N. Lingvopragmatika: uchebnoe posobie.

Pavlodar: Kereku,

2012. S. 127.

7.

Larina T.V. Kategoriya vezhlivosti i stil' kommunikatsii. Sravnenie angliyskikh i

russkikh lingvokul'turnykh traditsiy.

M.: Rukopisnye pamyatniki Drevney Rusi, 2009. S. 177.

8.

Ovchinikova M.V., Kolotova N.I. Formirovanie pragmaticheskoy kompetentsii

inostrannykh studentov na urokakh RKI kak uslovie uspeshnogo kommunikativnogo
vzaimodeystviya. Uchenye zapiski. Elektronnyy nauchnyy zhurnal Kurskogo

gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2017. №2(42).

9.

Pavlova S.V. Ispol'zovanie dialogovoy kontseptsii Bakhtina dlya formirovaniya

inoyazychnoy pragmaticheskoy kompetentsii. Uchenye zapiski. Elektronnyy nauchnyy
zhurnal Kurskogo gosudarstve

nnogo universiteta. 2006. №2. S. 153–

157.

10.

Shustova S.V., Tsarenko N.M. Diskursivnye markery kak sredstvo

formirovaniya pragmalingvisticheskoy kompetentsii. Nauchnyy rezultat. Voprosy

teoreticheskoy i prikladnoy lingvistiki. T. 4. 2018. №2. S. 22–

29.

Библиографические ссылки

C. de Aquino (2011). Pragmatic competence: How can it be developed in the foreign language classroom? BELT – Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal, 2(2), 140–153.

Davydova V.V. Pragmaticheskaya kompetentsiya v obuchenii inoyazychnomu obshcheniyu. Izvestiya VGPU. 2020. S. 54–58.

Davydova Yu.G. Formirovanie lingvopragmaticheskoy kompetentsii studentov vuzov na prakticheskikh zanyatiyakh po inostrannomu yazyku. Pedagogika. Voprosy teorii i praktiki. 2021. Tom 6. Vypusk 1. S. 55–61.

Formanovskaya N.I. Rechevoe obshchenie: Kommunikativno-pragmaticheskiy podkhod. – M.: Rus. yaz., 2002. S. 4–11.

Karaziya N.A. Metodika pragmalingvisticheskogo issledovaniya: osnovnye podkhody i kategorii. Vestnik KRAUNTS. Gumanitarnye nauki. 2006.

Kenzhebalina G.N. Lingvopragmatika: uchebnoe posobie. – Pavlodar: Kereku, 2012. S. 127.

Larina T.V. Kategoriya vezhlivosti i stil' kommunikatsii. Sravnenie angliyskikh i russkikh lingvokul'turnykh traditsiy. – M.: Rukopisnye pamyatniki Drevney Rusi, 2009. S. 177.

Ovchinikova M.V., Kolotova N.I. Formirovanie pragmaticheskoy kompetentsii inostrannykh studentov na urokakh RKI kak uslovie uspeshnogo kommunikativnogo vzaimodeystviya. Uchenye zapiski. Elektronnyy nauchnyy zhurnal Kurskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2017. №2(42).

Pavlova S.V. Ispol'zovanie dialogovoy kontseptsii Bakhtina dlya formirovaniya inoyazychnoy pragmaticheskoy kompetentsii. Uchenye zapiski. Elektronnyy nauchnyy zhurnal Kurskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2006. №2. S. 153–157.

Shustova S.V., Tsarenko N.M. Diskursivnye markery kak sredstvo formirovaniya pragmalingvisticheskoy kompetentsii. Nauchnyy rezultat. Voprosy teoreticheskoy i prikladnoy lingvistiki. T. 4. 2018. №2. S. 22–29.