Eksik “öyle” Durumu: Açıklama Talepleri, Söylem Belirteçleri ve Sözlü Etkileşimde Uyum Sağlama

Söylem analizi üzerine kurulu bu çalışma, anlaşılmama sorununu çözmek için anadili İngilizce olan bir görüşmecinin açıklama taleplerini görüşme esnasındaki kullanımını araştırmaktadır. Çalışmada elde edilen veriler, Tayvan'da özel bir üniversitede İngilizce öğrenenler arasında yapılan görüşmelerden elde edilen verilerle karşılaştırılmıştır. Bulgular, öğrencilerin yanlış anlama sorununa açıklama taleplerini görmezden gelerek çözüm ürettiklerini göstermektedir. Bu durum, ikinci dilde iletişimde ve ikinci dil öğretiminde hedef dildeki söyleme katılma açısından kaybedilmiş bir fırsat olarak değerlendirilmektedir. Buna ek olarak, çalışmadan elde edilen veriler söylem belirteçlerinin ve epistemik statü göstergelerinin (Heritage, 2012), öznelerarasılığa ulaşmaya, konuşmacılar arasındaki uyumu belirlemeye, dil kullanımını ve katılımı ilerletmeye yardımcı olduğunu göstermektedir. Bu çalışma, anadili İngilizce olan kişiler arasındaki görüşmelerde açıklama taleplerinin formüle edilme biçiminin anlaşılmasının, İngilizce öğrenenlere sözlü etkileşim sırasında açıklama taleplerini nasıl müzakere edeceklerini öğretmek için ne şekilde kullanılabileceğini konuşma analitiği yönteminin bir sonucu olarak özgün kullanım örnekleri ile ikinci dil öğrenen verilerini karşılaştırılması ile irdelediği için çalışmadan elde edilen bulgular dil öğretiminde de konuşma analitiği yöntemine dayanan etkinlikler ve materyaller ile İngilizceyi yabancı dil olarak öğrenmekte olan öğrencilere belirli söylem kalıplarının öğretilmesinde yardımcı olabilir.

The Case of the Missing ‘so’: Clarification Requests, Discourse Markers and Achieving Alignment in Spoken Interaction

Drawing on Conversation Analysis, this paper investigates how an English native speaker interviewer utilizes clarification requests as a form of recipient design during an interview to resolve problems of non-understanding. This data is contrasted with interviews between English language learners at a private university in Taiwan. The findings reveal that learners resolve these problems of misunderstanding through ignoring requests for clarification. It is argued that this represents a lost opportunity to further participation in L2 discourse and hence a forsaken opportunity for L2 language learning. This data illustrates that discourse markers and displays of epistemic status (Heritage, 2012) aid in achieving intersubjectivity and displaying alignment between speakers, furthering language use and participation. This paper investigates how understanding the way in which clarification requests are formulated in interviews between native speakers of English can be utilized to teach EFL learners how to negotiate clarification requests during spoken interaction. This paper adopts the position that pedagogy can be informed by findings generated through Conversation Analytic methods when comparing examples of authentic usage and L2 learner data and that particular discourse patterns should be taught to EFL students through CA-informed classroom tasks and teaching materials related to clarification requests.

PDF

___

Doughty, C., & Pica, T. (1986). “Information gap” tasks: Do they facilitate second language acquisition? TESOL Quarterly, 20(2), 305-325.
Ellis, R. (2015) The study of second language acquisition, (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Foster, P. (1998). A classroom perspective on the negotiation of meaning. Applied linguistics, 19(1), 1-23.
Foster, P., & Ohta, A. S. (2005). Negotiation for meaning and peer assistance in second language classrooms. Applied linguistics, 26(3), 402-430.
González-Lloret, M. (2003). Designing task-based CALL to promote interaction: En busca de esmeraldas. Language Learning & Technology, 7(1), 86-104. Hall, J. K. (1995). (Re) creating our worlds with words: A sociohistorical perspective of face-to-face interaction. Applied linguistics, 16(2), 206-232.
Hall, J. K. (1999) Hall, J. K. (1999). A prosaics of interaction: The development of interactional competence in another language. In E. Hinkel (Ed.) Culture in second language teaching and Learning (pp. 137-151).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hellermann, J. (2008). Social actions for classroom language learning. Bristol, Blue Ridge Summit: Multilingual Matters.
Hellermann, J. (2011). Members’ methods, members’ competencies: Looking for evidence of language learning in longitudinal investigations of other-initiated repair. L2 interactional competence and development, pp. 147-172.
Heritage, J. (2012). The epistemic engine: Sequence organization and territories of knowledge. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 45(1), 30-52.
Jenks, C. J. (2009). When is it appropriate to talk? Managing overlapping talk in multi-participant voice-based chat rooms. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(1), 19-30.
Johns, T. F. (1991). Should you be persuaded Two samples of data-driven learning materials. ELR Journal, 4, 116. Johnson, M. (2000). Interaction in the oral proficiency interview: Problems of validity. Pragmatics, 10(2), 215-231.
Johnson, M. (2008). The art of non-conversation. New Haven: Yale University Press. Kärkkäinen, E. (2003). Epistemic stance in English conversation. A description of its interactional functions, with a focus on I think. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Kaur, J. (2010). Achieving mutual understanding in world Englishes. World Englishes, 29(2), 192-208.
Kramsch, C. (1986). From language proficiency to interactional competence. The Modern Language Journal, 70(4), 366-372. Kurtić, E., Brown, G. J., & Wells, B. (2013). Resources for turn competition in overlapping talk. Speech Communication, 55(5), 721-743.
Lantolf, J. P. (1999). Second culture acquisition. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Second language teaching and learning (pp. 28-47). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lantolf, J. P. (Ed.). (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning (Vol. 78, No. 4). Oxford: Oxford university press. Long,
M. H. (1980). Input, interaction, and second language acquisition. University of California Press, Los Angeles.
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie, & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468).
New York: Academic Press. Nakahama, Y., Tyler, A., & Van Lier, L. (2001).
Negotiation of meaning in conversational and information gap activities: A comparative discourse analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 35(3), 377-405.
Oliver, R. (2002). The patterns of negotiation for meaning in child interactions. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 97-111. Purver, M. (2006). Clarie: Handling clarification requests in a dialogue system. Research on Language and Computation, 4(2-3), 259-288.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1978). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking for conversation. In J. Schenkein (Ed) Studies in the organization of conversational interaction (pp. 7-55). Cambridge: Academic Press.
Schegloff, E. A., Koshik, I., Jacoby, S., & Olsher, D. (2002). 1. Conversation analysis and applied linguistics. Annual review of applied linguistics, 22, 3-31.
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Seedhouse, P. (2004). The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A conversation analysis perspective. New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell.
Sert, O. (2013). ‘Epistemic status check’ as an interactional phenomenon in instructed learning settings. Journal of Pragmatics, 45(1), 13-28. Smith, B. (2003). Computer–mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. The Modern Language Journal, 87(1), 38-57.
Smith, S. W. (1998). And people just you know like wow: Discourse markers as negotiating strategies. In A. H.
Jucker & Y. Ziv (Eds.), Discourse Markers. Description and Theory, (pp. 171-201). (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 57). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986).Relevance: communication and cognition. New Jersey: Blackwell. Ten Have, P. (2007). Doing conversation analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Van Lier, L. (2000). 11 From input to affordance: Social-interactive learning from an ecological perspective. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning: Recent Advances, (pp. 245-259). Oxford: OUP.
van Compernolle, R. A. (2011). Responding to questions and L2 learner interactional competence during language proficiency interviews: A microanalytic study with pedagogical implications. In J.K. Hall, J. Hellermann, & S. Pekarek Doehler (Eds.) L2 Interactional Competence and Development, (pp. 117-144). Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
Walsh, S. (2012). Conceptualising classroom interactional competence. Novitas-Royal, 6(1), 1-14.
Yang, S. (2011). Investigating discourse markers in pedagogical settings: A literature review. Annual Review of Education, Communication & Language Sciences, 8, 95-108.