| The present study addresses a recently raised methodological issue in the field of interlanguage pragmatics, particularly in examining the relationship between grammatical and pragmatic competence. Bardovi-Harlig (1999) critiqued earlier studies for examining the development of a specific pragmatic feature with reference to a broad measure of grammatical knowledge, and strongly advocated a parallel analysis of the development of a specific grammatical category and its pragmatic function(s). In order to empirically validate this argument, the present study attempts to compare the “new” approach proposed by Bardovi-Harlig (1999) and the “old” approach taken by most studies thus far by focusing on epistemic modality.; To this end, three tests were administered to 60 Korean adult learners of English: (a) a general grammar test designed to measure a broad range of grammatical knowledge (i.e., general grammatical knowledge), (b) a specific grammar test designed to measure grammatical knowledge of epistemic modality (i.e., specific grammatical knowledge), and (c) a pragmatic test designed to measure the functions of epistemic markers (i.e., pragmatic knowledge). In addition, the participants were interviewed for 45 minutes each in order to examine their pragmatic ability to use epistemic markers for certain functions.; By using both quantitative analysis (i.e., regression and path analysis) and qualitative analysis (i.e., discourse analysis), the present study offers some interesting findings. First, the results suggest that L2 learners' general and specific grammatical knowledge differ in predicting (a) their pragmatic knowledge of epistemic markers, and (b) their pragmatic ability to use epistemic markers for certain functions. This then seems to empirically support the “new” approach proposed by Bardovi-Harlig (1999). Furthermore, the present study observed different results regarding the relationship between grammatical knowledge and pragmatic ability, depending on whether pragmatic ability was measured in terms of the frequency/range of epistemic markers used or in terms of specific functions of epistemic markers used. This suggests that the frequency/range of certain pragmatic devices may not adequately represent learners' pragmatic ability.; Addressing the methodological issue in the field of interlanguage pragmatics, this study hopes to offer some evidence for a more focused examination of the relationship between grammatical knowledge and pragmatic knowledge/ability. |
