primarily focus on how NNSs comprehend and produce speech acts rather than SLA research which mainly focus on how NNSs acquire L2 knowledge.
37
1. Definition of Pragmatic Transfer
Pragmaticists have different perspectives on defining the scope of ‗pragmatics‘ in pragmatic transfer. According to Zegarac and Pennington,
pragmatic transfer refers to a situation in which learners transfer their L1 pragmatic knowledge when conversing in intercultural communication.
38
Cheng argues that pragmatic transfer refers to a condition in which learners use their L1
rules of speaking when speaking in L2.
39
Similar to Cheng, Ahmed states that pragmatic transfer occurs when language learners use the rules of speaking of L1
community while they interact or speak in L2.
40
The proposed definitions reflect that the scope of
‗pragmatics‘ in pragmatic transfer can be defined as pragmatic knowledge and rules of speaking of L1 culture.
But, there is no pragmaticist who explicitly clarifies further explanation on what type of rules of speaking or pragmatic knowledge which is specifically
studied under the term ‗pragmatic transfer‘. Kasper proposes that patterns of speech act realization are the scope of pragmatic in pragmatic transfer as what are
called ‗rules of speaking‘.
41
Kasper defines pragmatic transfer as an influence
37
Gabriele Kasper 1992, op.cit,. pp. 203-205.
38
Vladimir Zegarac and Martha C. Pennington, ―Pragmatic Transfer‖ in Spancer-Oatey, Helen., editor, Culturally Speaking: Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory New York:
Continuum, 2000, p. 143.
39
Stephanie Weijung Cheng 2005, op.cit., p. 22.
40
Ahmed Qadoury Abed, ―Pragmatic Transfer in Iraqi EFL Learners‘ Refusals,‖ International
Journal of English Linguistics, Vol 1, No. 2 Canadian Center of Science and Education, 2011 , p. 167.
41
Gabriele Kasper 1992, op.cit,. p. 206.
which is resulted from learners‘ applying their pragmatic knowledge on how to realize speech acts in languages and cultures which have been acquired other than
L2 when they comprehend, produce or learn L2 pragmatic information.
42
Any languages —other than L1—which has been acquired potentially
influence learners‘ performance in L2. As Odlin stated, transfer occurs as a result from the existence of the similarities and differences between languages having
been acquired and L2.
43
But, the evidences of pragmatic transfer are frequently investigated by only comparing communicative behavior of NSs of L1 and L2
with learners‘ interlanguage data. Zegarac and Pennington also argue that comparing communicative behavior of learners with the communicative behavior
of NSs of L1 and L2 is a method which supports the investigation of the occurrences of pragmatic transfer.
44
Observing into many interlanguage pragmatic studies, Kasper argues that many pragmaticists have made random claims on the evidences of pragmatic
transfer since they underlie their identification on informal estimation of the percentages of the use of particular category semantic formula, strategy, or
linguistic form occurs in L1, L2 and interlanguage data of the NNSs.
45
Hence, in preventing random claims, by adapting Selinker‘s definition of language transfer,
Kasper proposes that an ideal method in identifying evidence of pragmatic transfer is by seeking a statistically significant trend of NSs of learners‘ L1 toward
42
Ibid. p. 207.
43
Terence Odlin, Language Transfer, Cambridge: Cambridge Universtity Press, 1989, p. 27.
44
Vladimir Zegarac and Martha C. Pennington 2000, op.cit. p.144.
45
Gabriele Kasper 1992, op.cit. pp. 222-223.
one of the alternatives which is then paralleled by a significant trend of language learners toward the same alternative when they are in L2 context.
46
Kasper does not clearly define what is meant by the case of a statistically significant trend toward one of the alternative. But, applying her definition, with
Bergman, Kasper stated that evidence of pragmatic transfer is found where, more than half of NSs of Thai and Thai learners of English who respond to two contexts
student forgetting to return a book borrowed from professor; professor forgetting to grade a students paper similarly offered repair in their apologies.
47
If it is looked in detail, there is one alternative of offering repair in apologizing both
from student to professor and professor to student, regardless the assessment of social status of the interlocutors, which is significantly used by NSs of Thai since
it is reflected by, in two unequal-status situations, there are more than half of NSs who offer repair in their apologies. It is then followed by Thai learners of English.
In short, a statistically significant trend to one of these alternatives refers to a condition in which one alternative is significantly used by NSs or language
learners, reflected by, in every situation which structurally draws the alternative which is significantly chosen, a strategy is dominantly used by more than half of
NSs or language learners. It is supported by the fact that it is negative pragmatic transfer because, while more than half of NSs of American English offered repair
in their apologies in the context of student forgetting to return a book borrowed from professor, more than half of NSs of American English do not offer repair in
46
Ibid. p. 223.
47
Ibid. p. 212.
their apologies in the context of professor forgetting to grade a students paper.
48
It is clear that ‗a statistically significant trend toward one of the alternatives‘ is not
simply related to the used strategy, but it ties to the chosen alternative itself.
2. Types of Pragmatic Transfer
