1887
Volume 1, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2589-109X
  • E-ISSN: 2589-1103
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study follows Ishida’s (2017) call for longitudinal studies that examine how learners in the early stages of their study abroad sojourn develop skills in responding to prior talk. Using multimodal Conversation Analysis (CA), the study compares three interactions across a six-week sojourn between a learner of Japanese and his host father. For longitudinal comparison, the study focuses on sequences in which the learner has initiated a question or comment, and the host father provides a non-minimal response. The study finds a diversification of resources and an expanded repertoire of possible actions for displaying recipiency, changing from primarily minimal response tokens that only weakly display his stance towards the prior talk early on, to the greater use of assessments and non-minimal expansions toward the end of the sojourn. The study provides evidence that short-term study abroad experiences for novice languages learners can afford opportunities for the development of interactional competencies.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ap.18015.bur
2019-11-12
2020-05-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Berger, E., & Pekarek Doehler, S.
    (2018) Tracking change over time in storytelling practices: A longitudinal study of second language talk-in-interaction. InS. Pekarek Doehler, J. Wagner, & E. González-Martínez (Eds.), Longitudinal studies on the organization of social interaction (pp.67–102). London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑57007‑9_3
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57007-9_3 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bolden, G.
    (2009) Beyond answering: Repeat-prefaced responses in conversation. Communication Monographs, 76(2), 121–143. 10.1080/03637750902828446
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750902828446 [Google Scholar]
  3. Burch, A. R.
    (2014) Pursuing information: A conversation analytic perspective on communication strategies. Language Learning, 64(3), 651–684. 10.1111/lang.12064
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12064 [Google Scholar]
  4. Clancy, P., Thompson, S., Suzuki, R., & Tao, H.
    (1996) The conversational use of reactive tokens in English, Japanese, and Mandarin. Journal of Pragmatics, 26, 355–387. 10.1016/0378‑2166(95)00036‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00036-4 [Google Scholar]
  5. Deppermann, A., Schmitt, R., & Mondada, L.
    (2010) Agenda and emergence: Contingent and planned activities in a meeting. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(6), 1700–1718. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.10.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.10.006 [Google Scholar]
  6. Dings, A.
    (2014) Interactional competence and the development of alignment activity. The Modern Language Journal, 98(3), 742–756. 10.1111/modl.12120
    https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12120 [Google Scholar]
  7. Drummond, K., & Hopper, R.
    (1993) Back channels revisited: Acknowledgment tokens and speakership incipiency. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26(2), 157–177. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi2602_3
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2602_3 [Google Scholar]
  8. Eskildsen, S. W. and Theodórsdóttir, G.
    (2017) Constructing L2 learning spaces: Ways to achieve learning inside and outside the classroom. Applied Linguistics, 38(2) 143–164.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Ford, C., & Thompson, S.
    (1996) Interaction units in conversation: Syntactic, intonational, and pragmatic resources for the management of turns. InE. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp.134–184). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620874.003
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874.003 [Google Scholar]
  10. Gardner, R.
    (2001) When listeners talk: Response tokens and recipient stance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.92
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.92 [Google Scholar]
  11. Goodwin, C.
    (1984) Notes on story structure and the organization of participation. InJ. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action (pp.225–246). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. (1986) Between and within: Alternative sequential treatments of continuers and assessments. Human Studies, 9, 205–217. 10.1007/BF00148127
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00148127 [Google Scholar]
  13. (2007) Participation, stance and affect in the organization of activities. Discourse & Society, 18, 53–73. 10.1177/0957926507069457
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926507069457 [Google Scholar]
  14. (2018) Co-operative action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Greer, T.
    (2017) L1 speaker turn design and emergent familiarity in opening sequences of second language Japanese interaction. InT. Greer, M. Ishida, & Y. Tateyama (Eds.), Interactional competence in Japanese as an additional language (pp.369–407). Honolulu, HI: National Foreign Language Resource Center.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Hall, J. K.
    (2018) From L2 interactional competence to L2 interactional repertoires: Reconceptualizing the objects of L2 learning. Classroom Discourse, 9(1), 25–39. 10.1080/19463014.2018.1433050
    https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2018.1433050 [Google Scholar]
  17. Hall, J. K., & Pekarek Doehler, S.
    (2011) L2 interactional competence and development. InJ. K. Hall, J. Hellermann, & S. Pekarek Doehler (Eds.), L2 interactional competence and development (pp.1–15). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781847694072‑003
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847694072-003 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hayano, K.
    (2013) Question design in conversation. InJ. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp.395–414). Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hayashi, M.
    (2003) Joint utterance construction in Japanese conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sidag.12
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.12 [Google Scholar]
  20. Heritage, J.
    (1984a) A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. InJ. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social actions: Studies in conversation analysis (pp.299–345). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. (1984b) Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. (2002) Oh-prefaced responses to assessments: A method of modifying agreement/ disagreement. InC. E. Ford, B. A. Fox, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), The language of turn and sequence (pp.196–224). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Ishida, M.
    (2011) Engaging in another person’s telling as a recipient in L2 Japanese: Development of interactional competence during one-year study-abroad. InG. Pallotti & J. Wagner (Eds.), L2 learning as social practice: Conversation-analytic perspectives (pp.45–85). Honolulu, HI: National Foreign Language Resource Center.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. (2017) Developing recipient competence during study abroad. InT. Greer, M. Ishida, & Y. Tateyama (Eds.), Interactional competence in Japanese as an additional language (pp.253–292). Honolulu, HI: National Foreign Language Resource Center.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Jefferson, G.
    (1984) On stepwise transition from talk about a trouble to inappropriately next-positioned matters. InJ. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversational analysis (pp.191–222). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. (2004) Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. InG. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp.13–31). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.125.02jef
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.125.02jef [Google Scholar]
  27. Kasper, G.
    (2006) Speech acts in interaction: Towards discursive pragmatics. InK. Bardovi-Harlig, J. C. Félix-Brasdefer, & A. S. Omar (Eds.), Pragmatics and language learning, 11 (pp.281–314). Honolulu, HI: National Foreign Language Resource Center.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Kasper, G., & Wagner, J.
    (2014) Conversation analysis in applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 34(2), 171–212. 10.1017/S0267190514000014
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190514000014 [Google Scholar]
  29. Koschmann, T.
    (2013) Conversation analysis and learning in interaction. InC. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp.1038–1043). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Lee, S.-H.
    (2013) Response design in conversation. InJ. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.) The handbook of conversation analysis (pp.415–432). Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Levinson, S.
    (2006) On the human ‘interaction engine’. InN. J. Enfield & S. Levinson (Eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition, and interaction (pp.39–69). Oxford: Berg.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Mondada, L.
    (2016) Challenges of multimodality: Language and the body in social interaction. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 20(3), 336–366. 10.1111/josl.1_12177
    https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.1_12177 [Google Scholar]
  33. Nishizaka, A.
    (2016) The use of demo-prefaced response displacement for being a listener to distressful experiences in Japanese interaction. Text & Talk, 36(6), 635–656. 10.1515/text‑2016‑0033
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2016-0033 [Google Scholar]
  34. Nguyen, H. T.
    (2012) Developing interactional competence: A conversation analytic study of patient consultations in pharmacy. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230319660
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230319660 [Google Scholar]
  35. (2018) A longitudinal perspective on turn design: From role-plays to workplace patient consultations. InS. Pekarek Doehler, J. Wagner, & E. González-Martínez (Eds.), Longitudinal studies on the organization of social interaction (pp.195–224). London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑57007‑9_7
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57007-9_7 [Google Scholar]
  36. Pekarek Doehler, S.
    (2018) Elaborations on L2 interactional competence: The development of L2 grammar-for-interaction. Classroom Discourse, 9(1), 3–24. 10.1080/19463014.2018.1437759
    https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2018.1437759 [Google Scholar]
  37. Pekarek Doehler, S., & Berger, E.
    (2016) L2 interactional competence as increased ability for context-sensitive conduct: A longitudinal study of story-openings. Applied Linguistics, 39(4), 555–578.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Pekarek Doehler, S., & Pochon-Berger, E.
    (2015) The development of L2 interactional competence: Evidence from turn-taking organization, sequence organization, repair organization and preference organization. InT. Cadierno & S. W. Eskildsen (Eds.), Usage-based perspectives on second language learning (pp.233–267). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Pomerantz, A.
    (1984) Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. InM. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp.57–101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Pomerantz, A., & Heritage, J.
    (2013) Preference. InJ. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.) The handbook of conversation analysis (pp.210–228). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Prior, M.
    (2018) Accomplishing “rapport” in qualitative research interviews: Empathic moments in interaction. Applied Linguistics Review, 9(4), 487–512. 10.1515/applirev‑2017‑0029
    https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2017-0029 [Google Scholar]
  42. Ruusuvuori, J., & Peräkylä, A.
    (2009) Facial and verbal expressions in assessing stories and topics. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42(4). 377–394. 10.1080/08351810903296499
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810903296499 [Google Scholar]
  43. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G.
    (1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696–735. 10.1353/lan.1974.0010
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010 [Google Scholar]
  44. Schegloff, E. A.
    (1968) Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist, 70(6), 1075–1095. 10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030
    https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030 [Google Scholar]
  45. (1982) Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of “uh huh” and other things that come between sentences. InD. Tannen (Ed.), Analyzing discourse: Text and talk (pp.71–93). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. (1993) Reflections on quantification in the study of conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26(1), 99–128. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi2601_5
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2601_5 [Google Scholar]
  47. (1998) Body torque. Social Research, 65(3), 535–596.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. (2007) Sequence organization in interaction I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511791208
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
  49. Stivers, T.
    (2008) Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(1), 31–57. 10.1080/08351810701691123
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810701691123 [Google Scholar]
  50. Taguchi, N.
    (2014) Development of interactional competence in Japanese as a second language: Use of incomplete sentences as interactional resources. The Modern Language Journal, 98(2), 518–535.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Talmy, S.
    (2009) Resisting ESL: Categories and sequence in a critically “motivated” analysis of classroom interaction. InH. T. Nguyen & G. Kasper (Eds.) Talk-in-interaction: Multilingual perspectives (pp.181–213). Honolulu, HI: National Foreign Language Resource Center.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Tanaka, H.
    (1999) Turn-taking in Japanese conversation: A study in grammar and interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. (2000) The particle ne as a turn-management device in Japanese conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 1135–1176. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00087‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00087-9 [Google Scholar]
  54. Theodórsdóttir, G.
    (2011) Second language interaction for business and learning. InJ. K. Hall, J. Hellermann, & S. Pekarek Doehler (Eds.), L2 interactional competence and development (pp.93–116). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781847694072‑006
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847694072-006 [Google Scholar]
  55. (2018) L2 teaching in the wild: A closer look at correction and explanation practices in everyday L2 interaction. The Modern Language Journal, 102, 30–45. 10.1111/modl.12457
    https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12457 [Google Scholar]
  56. Vance, T.
    (1987) An introduction to Japanese phonology. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Wagner, J.
    (2015) Designing for language learning in the wild: Creating social infrastructures for second language learning. InT. Cadierno & S. W. Eskildsen (Eds.), Usage-based perspectives on L2 learning (pp.75–104). Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Wagner, J., Pekarek Doehler, S., & González-Martinez, E.
    (2018) Longitudinal research on the organization of social interaction: Current developments and methodological challenges. InS. Pekarek Doehler, J. Wagner, & E. González-Martínez (Eds.), Longitudinal studies on the organization of social interaction (pp.3–35). London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑57007‑9_1
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57007-9_1 [Google Scholar]
  59. Yamamoto, M. & Yanagimachi, T.
    (2017) Co-construction of an L2 speaker’s interactional competence: Recipient responses in an interview activity. InT. Greer, M. Ishida, & Y. Tateyama (Eds.), Interactional competence in Japanese as an additional language (pp.115–140). Honolulu, HI: National Foreign Language Resource Center.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ap.18015.bur
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error