Book of abstracts can be downloaded here.
Keynote speakers
Language Education and Metapragmatics
Milada Hirschová, Faculty of Education, Charles University Prague
Children starting their school education (most commonly at the age of six) already command their mother tongue at a level providing them with the grammar / language competence. It means that they are able to form and understand grammatical (i. e. correct) expressions. At school, they start both to learn “about” a language (they develop a language / metalinguistic awareness) and to develop and expand their competence in communication (pragmatic competence). Already before school age, children start to observe and reflect their own language use as well as the use of the others, i. e., what develops is their metapragmatic awareness. This area includes a general cognitive, social and cultural perspective on linguistic phenomena in relation to their usage in various forms of behaviour.
The paper will address the following topics:
-
Grammar competence, metalinguistic competence, pragmatic competence.
-
What is metapragmatic awareness?
-
Language ideology and the notion of in/appropriateness in language use.
-
Metalingual operations as a crucial constituent of language education.
-
Czech particle/discursive marker vlastně (“or / actually / rather”) and its effects in dialogues as an illustration of metapragmatic awareness.
References:
Caffi, C. (2016). Revisiting Metapragmatics: “What are we talking about?“ In K. Allan et al. (Eds.), Pragmemes and Theories of language Use (pp. 799-821). Springer International Publishing.
Hübler, A., & Bublitz, W. (2007). Introducing metapragmatics in use. In A. Hübler, & W. Bublitz (Eds.), Metapragmatics in Use (pp. 1-26). John Benjamins Publishing.
Jakobson, R. (1985). Metalanguage as a linguistic problem. Selected Writings 7. Mouton, pp. 113-121.
Silverstein, M. (1993). Metapragmatic discourse and metapragmatic function. In J. A. Lucy (Ed.), Reflexive Language. Reported Speech and Metapragmatics (pp. 33-58). Cambridge University Press.
Spolsky, B. (2004). Language Policy. Cambridge University Press.
From conceptual to implemented L1 curriculum – issues, problems, challenges (the case of Slovakia)
Ľudmila Liptáková, Faculty of Education, University of Prešov
The aim of the presentation is to critically evaluate the development of Slovak language teaching in the context of the changes that took place in Slovak society after 1989 (Štěpáník et al., 2019). We will focus mainly on the discrepancy between the underlying linguistic and pedagogical theory (conceptual curriculum) and the shape of the implemented Slovak language curriculum (cf. Rättyä et al., 2025). The causes and consequences of this discrepancy will be analysed. The possibilities of solving this problem and concrete measures brought by the new national curriculum for basic education of 2023 will be presented. At the same time, the main challenges in the successful implementation of the new Slovak L1 curriculum will be outlined. We will illustrate the desirable relationship between the conceptual and the implemented Slovak language curriculum through the relationship between current word-formation research and the development of students' word-formation knowledge for communicative purposes (Liptáková, 2019, 2022).
References
Liptáková, Ľ. (2019). What developmental linguistics can offer L1 education. An example of the relation between implicit and explicit word-formation knowledge in Slovak speaking children. Crossroads: a journal of English studies, 24(1), 12–25. DOI: 10.15290/CR.2019.24.1.02.
Liptáková, Ľ. (2022). Implicitné znalosti dieťaťa o slovotvornom hniezde [Child's implicit knowledge of word-formation nest]. In M. Ološtiak, Ľ. Liptáková, & K. Bednárová-Gibová (Eds.), Slovanská slovotvorba: synchrónia, inovácie, neologizácia (s. 411–428). Vydavateľstvo Prešovskej univerzity.
Rättyä, K., Fontich, X., Štěpáník, S., Costa, A. L., & Awramiuk, E. (2025). Teaching L1 in Five European Countries: Goals and Challenges. In A. Wileczek & M. Marczewska (Eds.), Native Language in the 21st Century (pp. 135–154). V&R unipress. https://doi.org/10.14220/9783737018012.135.
Štěpáník, S., Liptáková, Ľ., & Szymańska, M. (2019). Cesty ke komunikačně-funkčnímu pojetí v české, slovenské a polské didaktice mateřského jazyka [Pathways to the communication-functional concept in Czech, Slovak and Polish mother tongue didactics]. In S. Štěpáník (Ed.), Vztah jazyka a komunikace v česko-slovensko-polské didaktické reflexi (s. 23–71). Univerzita Karlova, Nakladatelství Karolinum.
Learning grammar by communication, for communication: how do children do it?
Filip Smolík, Institute of Psychology, Czech Academy of Sciences; Faculty of Arts, Charles University Prague
Children learn various aspects of grammar from the earliest steps of language acquisition. Young one-year olds show sensitivity to the correct co-ocurrence of function morphemes, and at least by two years, they use grammatical morphemes to interpret sentences and predict upcoming words. However, the theory of language learning does not has not reached consensus about the way children approach the task. One thing that is clear is that multiple processes and learning mechanisms are involved, and the role of error-based learning, prediction and expectation during language processing is increasingly viewed as a critical mechanism. The role of prediction provides a way to connect language acquisition with formal learning theory but also presents grammar acquisition as a process firmly rooted in the process of communicating meaning and understanding others. Traditional contrasts between the role of biologically rooted knowledge and learned mechanisms are reconciled in this way. At the same time, the insights in the process of grammatical acquisition may serve as cues for learning about grammar and pointing out its roles and mechanisms to students at various levels of the educational ladder. The talk will identify some of the implications of expectation-based learning for explicit language instructions.