1887
Volume 21, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0155-0640
  • E-ISSN: 1833-7139
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

The study reported in this paper examined turn-taking and sequence organisation in a sample of twenty-one interactions derived from the 1992 Victorian Certificate of Education Italian oral Common Assessment Task. The most common adjacency pair was found to be the question and answer, the assessor having the right to ask questions and the student to answer. Student initiated questions occurred in five environments and only when conditions were created for them to do so. The assessor’s role was to open and close sequences and sections and to initiate topics principally through the question. Two types of sequences were identified, question/answer and expanded sequences. It was found that there were two groups of assessors. Those who predominantly set up question/answer sequences, and those who set up post sequences.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/aral.21.2.07fil
1998-01-01
2019-12-11
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Atkinson, J. M.
    (1992) Displaying neutrality: formal aspects of informal court proceedings. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (eds.) Talk at work. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Atkinson, J. & P. Drew
    (1979) Order in court: The organisation of verbal interaction in judicial settings. London, Macmillan. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑349‑04057‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-04057-5 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bazzanella, C.
    (1990) Phatic connectives as interactional cues in contemporary spoken Italian. Journal of Pragmatics, 14:629–647.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Cafarella, C.
    (1997) Assessor accommodation in the VCE Italian oral test. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics20,1:21–41.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Cheepen, C.
    (1988) The predictability of informal conversation. London, Pinter.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Drew, P. and J. Heritage
    (1992) (eds.) Talk at work. Interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Elder, C.
    (1993) Report on the native-speaker presence in university lote courses. Melbourne, University of Melbourne.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Filipi, A.
    (1994) Interaction in an Italian oral test: The role of some expansion sequences. In R. Gardner (ed.) Spoken interaction studies in Australia. (Australian Review of Applied Linguistics Series S Number 7) Melbourne, ALAA.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Frankel, R.M.
    (1990) Talking in interviews: A dispreference for patient-initiated questions in physician-patient encounters. In G. Psathas . (ed.) Interaction competence. Washington, DC: University Press of America.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Gardner, R.
    (1994) On some apparently anomalous uses of mm in a corpus of Australian English: Mm as a prior turn completer. Unpublished manuscript. University of Melbourne.
  11. Giannone, S.
    (1996) Overlapping talk: Talk show interaction. Paper given atthe 1996 ALAA Conference, Sydney.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Greatbatch, D.
    (1988) A turn taking system for British news interviews. Language and Society17:401–430.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Heritage, J.
    (1984) A change of state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds) Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Heritage, J. and D. Greatbatch
    (1991) On the institutional character of institutional talk: the case of news interviews. In D. Boden and D. H. Zimmerman (eds) Talk and social structure. Cambridge, Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Jefferson, G.
    (1973) A case of precision timing in ordinary conversation: Overlapped tag positioned address terms in closing sequences. Semiotica, 9:47–96.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. (1984) Notes on a Systematic deployment of the acknowledgment tokens “yeah” and “mm hm”. Papers in Linguistics17:197–206. doi: 10.1080/08351818409389201
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351818409389201 [Google Scholar]
  17. Lazaraton, A.
    (1991) A conversation analysis of structure and interaction in the language interview. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation. UCLA.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. McHoul, A.W.
    (1978) The organisation of formal turns at talk in the classroom. Language in Society7:183–213.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Mehan, H.
    (1985) The structure of classroom discourse. In T. van Dijk (ed.) Handbook of discourse analysis. Vol.3Discourse and dialogue. London, Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Minini, G.
    (1985) The ontogenesis of telephone interaction. Rassegna Italiana di Linguistica Applicata17:187–197.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Ross, S.
    (1992) Accommodative questions in oral proficiency interviews. Language Testing9,2:173–186. doi: 10.1177/026553229200900205
    https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229200900205 [Google Scholar]
  22. Rubino, A.
    (1990) From guest to family friend: Fieldwork progress within the Italo-Australian context. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics13, 1:77–99.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Sacks, H.
    (1992) Lectures in conversationVol2. G. Jefferson (ed.) Oxford, Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Sacks, H. , E. Schegloff and G. Jefferson
    (1974) A simplest systematics for the organisation of turn-taking for conversation. Language50: 696–735.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Schegloff, E.
    (1968) Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist70:1075–1095. doi: 10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030
    https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030 [Google Scholar]
  26. (1982) Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of ‘uh huh’ and other things that come between sentences. In D. Tannen (ed.) Analysing discourse: Text and talk. Washington, Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. E. Schegloff , G. Jefferson and H. Sacks
    (1977) The preference for self-correction in the organisation of repair for conversation. Language53:361–382.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Sorjonen, M.J. & J. Heritage
    (1991) And-prefacing as a feature of question design. In L. Laitinen , P. Nuolijarvi , and M. Saari (eds) Leikkauspiste. Helsinki, Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. ten Have, P.
    (1991) Talk and institution: a reconsideration of the “asymmetry” of doctor-patient interaction.” In D. Boden and D.H. Zimmerman (eds) Talk and Social Structure. Cambridge, Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Testa, R.
    (1988) Interruptive strategies in English and Italian conversation: Smooth versus contrastive linguistic preferences. Multilingua7,3:285–312.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. van Lier, L.
    (1989) Reeling, writhing, drawling, stretching and fainting in coils: Oral proficiency interviews as conversation. TESOL Quarterly23:489–508. doi: 10.2307/3586922
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3586922 [Google Scholar]
  32. Victorian Board of Studies
    Victorian Board of Studies (1994) The LOTE Italian VCE study design. Victoria, Victorian Board of Studies.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Watson, D.R.
    (1990) Some features of the elicitation of confessions in murder interrogations. In G. Psathas (ed.) Interaction competence. Washington D.C., University Press of America.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Wesche, M. B.
    (1992) Performance testing for work-related second language assessment. In E. Shohamy and R. Walton (eds) Language assessment for feedback: Testing and other strategies. Washington, D.C., National Foreign Language Center Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/aral.21.2.07fil
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
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