Affiliation:
1. University of Innsbruck , Innsbruck , Austria
Abstract
Abstract
Methods in Intercultural Pragmatics are inherently multifaceted and varied, given discipline’s breaching of numerous cross-disciplinary boundaries. In fact, research in Intercultural Pragmatics represents merely new ways of thinking about language and, thus, of researching interactants’ (non-)verbal behaviors: With core common ground and shared knowledge about conventionalized frames of the target language being limited, intercultural communication features a number of unique characteristics in comparison to L1 communication. This being said, the range of methods employed in data collection and analysis in Intercultural Pragmatics is not only wide, but highly heterogeneous at the same time. The present paper takes a scientometric approach to data collection methods and data types in Intercultural Pragmatics research. In order to provide an extensive diachronic survey of methods and approaches featuring in empirical studies published specifically by the journal Intercultural Pragmatics (edited by Istvan Kecskés), this study includes a self-compiled corpus of 358 papers in 17 volumes published since its launch in 2004 thru 2020. The aim is to carve out diachronic method preferences and emerging as well as declining trends in data collection methods and data types adhered to within this discipline. These are further discussed within the context of relevant state-of-the-art accounts that have specifically offered surveys of methods and methodologies pertaining to issues in data collection and data analysis in (Intercultural) Pragmatics in recent years.
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Communication,Language and Linguistics
Reference96 articles.
1. Abdoola, Fareeaa, Penelope S. Flack & Saira B. Karrim. 2017. Facilitating pragmatic skills through role-play in learners with language learning disability. South African Journal of Communication Disorders 64(1). 1–12. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajcd.v64i1.187.
2. Al-Surmi, Mansoor. 2012. Authenticity and TV shows: A multidimensional analysis perspective. Tesol Quarterly 46(4). 671–694. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.33.
3. Archer, Dawn & Peter Grundy (eds.). 2011. The pragmatics reader. Abingdon: Routledge.
4. Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen. 1999. Researching method. In Lawrence F. Bouton (ed.), Pragmatics and language learning, vol. 9, 237–267. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois Press.
5. Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen. 2010. Exploring the pragmatics of interlanguage pragmatics: Definition by design. In Anna Trosborg (ed.), Pragmatics across languages and cultures, 219–259. Berlin & New York: de Gruyter Mouton.
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献