Being a Non-expert in L2 English: Constructing Egalitarianism in Group Preparation Work

Analyses are presented of interactional excerpts containing three methods through which Japanese university students preparing for a group presentation in a required English class take an epistemic stance of uncertainty towards their own displayed knowledge of their second language (L2) English. These three methods consist of 1) producing a candidate item as uncertain, 2) casting doubt on something just said by self, and 3) overtly claiming lack of knowledge. Epistemic stance can be understood as consisting of different dimensions, with a stance of uncertainty related specifically to the dimension of epistemic access. Analyses are also presented of how other students respond or do not respond to such a stance. Through this kind of stance-taking and responses and non-responses, the students do being non-experts in their L2 without making relevant possible asymmetries in expertise. That is, by doing being non-experts among non-experts, the students construct an epistemically symmetrical, egalitarian relationship within their group

PDF

___

Beach, W. A., & Metzger, T. R. (1997). Claiming insufficient knowledge. Human Communication Research, 23, 562-588.
Coulter, J. (1991). Cognition: Cognition in an ethnomethodological mode. In G. Button (Ed.), Ethnomethodology and the human sciences (pp. 176-195). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Edwards, D. (2000). Extreme case formulations: Softeners, investment, and doing nonliteral. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33, 347-373.
Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (2005). Discursive psychology, mental states and descriptions. In H. te Molder & J. Potter (Eds.), Conversation and cognition (pp. 241-259). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gardner, R. (2001). When listeners talk: Response tokens and listener stance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Glenn, P. (2003). Laughter in interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goodwin, C. (1987). Forgetfulness as an interactive resource. Social Psychological Quarterly, 50, 115-131.
Hayashi, M. (2003). Joint utterance construction in Japanese conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Helmer, H., Reineke, S., & Deppermann, A. (2016). A range of uses of negative epistemic constructions in German: ICH WEIß NICHT as a resource for dispreferred actions. Journal of Pragmatics, 106, 97-114.
Heritage, J. (2012). Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45, 1-29.
Hosoda, Y. (2006). Repair and relevance of differential language expertise in second language conversations. Applied Linguistics, 27, 25-50.
Jaffe, A. (2009). Introduction: The sociolinguistics of stance. In A. Jaffe (Ed.), Stance: Sociolinguistic perspectives (pp. 3-28). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jakonen, T., & Morton, T. (2015). Epistemic search sequences in peer interaction in a content-based language classroom. Applied Linguistics, 36, 73-94.
Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13-31). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kärkkäinen, E. (2006). Stance taking in conversation: From subjectivity to intersubjectivity. Text & Talk, 26, 699-731.
Kasper, G. (2004). Participant orientations in conversation-for-learning. Modern Language Journal, 88, 551-567.
Kotani, M. (2017). Initiating side-sequenced vocabulary lessons: Asymmetry of linguistic knowledge and opportunities for learning in conversation. Pragmatics and Society, 8, 254-280.
Kunitz, S. (2013). Group planning among L2 learners of Italian: A conversation analytic perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Kunitz, S. (2015). Scriptlines as emergent artifacts in collaborative group planning. Journal of Pragmatics, 76, 135-149.
Kunitz, S., & Marian, K. S. (2017). Tracking immanent language learning behavior over time in task-based classroom work. TESOL Quarterly, 51, 507-535.
Kurhila, S. (2004). Clients or language learners—being a second language speaker in institutional interaction. In R. Gardner & J. Wagner (Eds.), Second language conversations (pp. 58-72). London: Continuum.
Lindström, J., Maschler, Y., & Pekarek Doehler, S. (2016). A cross-linguistic perspective on grammar and negative epistemics in talk-in-interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 106, 72-79.
Lindwall, O., Lymer, G., & Ivarsson, J. (2016). Epistemic status and the recognizability of social actions. Discourse Studies, 18, 500-525.
Melander, H. (2012). Transformations of knowledge within a peer group. Knowing and learning in interaction. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1, 232-248.
Mondada, L. (2009). The embodied and negotiated production of assessments in instructed actions. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42, 329-361.
Mondada, L. (2011). The management of knowledge discrepancies and of epistemic changes in institutional interactions. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, & J. Steensig (Eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation (pp. 27-57). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mortensen, K. (2013). Writing aloud: Some interactional functions of the public display of emergent writing. Participatory innovation conference 2013, 119-126.
Nguyen, H. t., & Kasper, G. (Eds.) (2009). Talk-in-interaction: Multilingual perspectives. Honolulu: National Foreign Language Resource Center.
Pekarek Doehler, S. (2016). More than an epistemic hedge: French je sais pas ‘I don’t know’ as a resource for the sequential organization of turns and actions. Journal of Pragmatics, 106, 148-162.
Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57-101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pomerantz, A. (1986). Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimating claims. Human Studies, 9, 219-229.
Rampton, B. (1990). Displacing the “native speaker”: Expertise, affiliation and inheritance. ELT Journal, 44, 97-101.
Reichert, T., & Liebscher, G. (2012). Positioning the expert: Word searches, expertise, and learning opportunities in peer interaction. The Modern Language Journal, 96, 599-609.
Sacks, H. (1984). On doing “being ordinary.” In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 413-429). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, E. A. (1991). Reflections on talk and social structure. In D. Boden & D. H. Zimmerman (Eds.), Talk & social structure: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis (pp. 44-70). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Sert, O., & Jacknick, C. M. (2015). Student smiles and the negotiation of epistemics in L2 classrooms. Journal of Pragmatics, 77, 97-112.
Sert, O., & Walsh, S. (2013). The interactional management of claims of insufficient knowledge in English language classrooms. Language and Education, 27, 542-565.
Sidnell, J. (2005). Talk and practical epistemology: The social life of knowledge in a Caribbean community. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Stivers, T., Mondada, L., & Steensig, J. (2011). Knowledge, morality and affiliation in social interaction. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, & J. Steensig (Eds.), The morality of knowledge in converstion (pp. 3-24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tsui, B. M. (1991). The pragmatic functions of I don’t know. Text, 11, 607-622.
Weatherall, A. (2011). I don’t know as a prepositioned epistemic hedge. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 44, 317-337.