Metacognition, Metalanguage and Metapragmatics

Abstract

In this article, the author briefly reports John Flavell's analysis of metacognition. By attempting to integrate metalinguistic activities into this analysis, the author brings to light several interesting characteristics of the field of metalinguistics and its current state of research. Firstly, it appears that, unlike other meta‐abilities, the metalinguistic abilities are defined in terms of their objects. On this basis, metalinguistic activities are at least partially independent of other metacognitive activities. Secondly, it appears that the position of metapragmatics in relation to metalinguistics is in need of greater clarification. In particular, it seems necessary to draw a distinction between metapragmatic knowledge and metapragmatic experience. The fact that this distinction is not usually made contributes to the heterogeneity of this field of study and gives rise to fruitless controversy. Finally, the analysis reveals that the manipulation of writing mobilises aspects of metalinguistic knowledge which are not mobilised spontaneously through speech. The study of where this knowledge is positioned and of the cognitive burden its manipulation represents at various levels of reading and writing ability has yet to be developed.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 61 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.