1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Pragmatics
  4. Volume 22, Issue 4
  5. Article
Volume 22, Issue 4
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238
PDF

Abstract

The demand for proficient non-native speakers (NNSs) of English has increased across professional fields in recent years. While speaking skills involve a complex array of factors and constraints, previous studies resorted to unexamined perceptions or intuitive impressions drawn from surface linguistic features. Particularly missing is close analytic descriptions of non-native discourse that is produced in spontaneous contexts. The present study investigates the process by which NNSs of English produce connected discourse as it unfolds in real-time. The ability to produce connected discourse is considered a hallmark of advanced speaking proficiency and this study therefore focuses on tracing the sequential organization of multiple utterances that NNSs produce in spontaneous speech. Following the principles of conversation analysis (CA), the present paper analyzes three sets of excerpts demonstrating the contingent choices that NNSs make in building connected discourse. The findings offer empirical resources for non-native professionals to identify the practicality and generality of connected discourse in real-time speech contexts.

© 2012 International Pragmatics Association
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/prag.22.4.03lee
2012-01-01
2024-12-04

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/prag.22.4.03lee
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. ACTFL
    (1999) ACTFL proficiency guidelines for speaking. New York: ACTFL.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Atkinson, J. , and J. Heritage
    (1984) Transcript notation. In M. Atkinson , and J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. New York: Cambridge, pp.ix-xvi.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bachman, L.
    (1990) Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bowles, H.
    (2006) Bridging the gap between conversation analysis and ESP: An applied study of the opening sequences of NS and NNS service telephone calls. English for Specific Purposes25: 332–357. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2005.03.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.03.003 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bowles, H. , and P. Seedhouse
    (2007) Interactional competence and the LSP classroom. In H. Bowles , and P. Seedhouse (eds.), Conversation analysis and language for specific purposes. New York: Peter Lang, pp.305–329.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Burns, A.
    (1998) Teaching speaking. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics18: 102–123. doi: 10.1017/S0267190500003500
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500003500 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bygate, M.
    (1998) Theoretical perspectives on speaking. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics18: 20–42. doi: 10.1017/S0267190500003469
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500003469 [Google Scholar]
  8. (2009) Teaching and testing speaking. In M. Long , and C. Doughty (eds.), The handbook of language teaching. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, pp.412–440. doi: 10.1002/9781444315783.ch23
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444315783.ch23 [Google Scholar]
  9. Byrnes, H.
    (2002) Toward academic-level foreign language abilities: Reconsidering foundational assumptions, expanding pedagogical options. In B. Leaver , and B. Shekhtman (eds.), Developing professional-level language proficiency. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp.34–58. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511606465.003
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606465.003 [Google Scholar]
  10. Canale, M. , and M. Swain
    (1980) Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics1: 1–47. doi: 10.1093/applin/1.1.1
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/1.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  11. Celce-Murcia, M. , Z. Dornyei , and S. Thurrell
    (1995) Communicative competence: A pedagogically motivated model with content specifications. Issues in Applied Linguistics6: 5–35.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Celce-Murcia, M. , and D. Larsen-Freeman
    (1999) The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher’s course. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Chew, K.-S.
    (2005) An investigation of the English language skills used by new entrants in banks in Hong Kong. English for Specific Purposes24: 423–435. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2005.02.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.02.004 [Google Scholar]
  14. Cook, V.
    (1999) Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly33: 185–209. doi: 10.2307/3587717
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3587717 [Google Scholar]
  15. Council of Europe
    (2001) Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Strasbourg: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Crookes, G.
    (1990) The utterances and other basic units for second language discourse analysis. Applied Linguistics11: 183–199. doi: 10.1093/applin/11.2.183
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.183 [Google Scholar]
  17. Davies, A.
    (2003) The native speaker: Myth and reality. Clevendon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. de Bot, K.
    (1992) A bilingual production model: Levelt’s “speaking” model adapted. Applied Linguistics13: 1–24. doi: 10.1093/applin/13.1.1
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/13.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  19. Ellis, R.
    (2008) The study of second language acquisition. New York: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Foster, P. , and P. Skehan
    (1996) The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition18: 299–323. doi: 10.1017/S0272263100015047
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100015047 [Google Scholar]
  21. Foster, P. , A. Tonkyn , and G. Wiggleworth
    (2000) Measuring spoken language: A unit for all reasons. Applied Linguistics21: 354–375. doi: 10.1093/applin/21.3.354
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.3.354 [Google Scholar]
  22. Glenda, C. , and I. Ward
    (2002) Oral communication: The workplace needs and uses of business graduate employees. English for Specific Purposes21: 41–57. doi: 10.1016/S0889‑4906(00)00031‑4
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00031-4 [Google Scholar]
  23. He, A. , and R. Young
    (1998) Language proficiency interviews: A discourse approach. In R. Young , and W. He (eds.), Talking and testing: Discourse approaches to the assessment of oral proficiency. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp.1–24. doi: 10.1075/sibil.14
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sibil.14 [Google Scholar]
  24. Heritage, J.
    (1984) Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Hughes, R.
    (2002) Teaching and researching speaking. New York: Pearson.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Hyland, K.
    (2002) Specificity revisited: How far should we go now?English for Specific Purposes21: 385–395. doi: 10.1016/S0889‑4906(01)00028‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(01)00028-X [Google Scholar]
  27. Iwashita, N. , A. Brown , T. Mcnamara , and S. O’Hagan
    (2008) Assessing levels of second language speaking proficiency: How distinct?Applied Linguistics29: 24–49.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Jacoby, S. , and T. McNamara
    (1999) Locating competence. English for Specific Purposes18: 213–241. doi: 10.1016/S0889‑4906(97)00053‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00053-7 [Google Scholar]
  29. Jefferson, G.
    (1978) Sequential aspects of story telling in conversation. In J.N. Schenkein (ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction. New York: Academic Press, pp.213–248.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. (1985) An exercise in the transcription and analysis of laughter. In T. van Dijk (ed.), Handbook of discourse analysis: Discourse and dialogue. London: Academic Press, pp.25–34.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. (1990) List-construction as a task and resource. In G. Psathas (ed.), Interaction competence. Washington, D.C.: University Press of America, pp.63–92.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Kasper, G.
    (2009) Locating cognition in second language interaction and learning: Inside the skull or in public view?International Review of Applied Linguistics47: 11–36. doi: 10.1515/iral.2009.002
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/iral.2009.002 [Google Scholar]
  33. Khanji, R.
    (1996) Two perspectives in analyzing communication strategies. IRA34: 144–154.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Kim, K.-J.
    (2006) Writing apprehension and writing achievement of Korean EFL college students. English Teaching61: 135–154.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Koike, D. , and J. Liskin-Gasparro
    (1999) What is a Near-Native speaker? Perspectives of job seekers and search committees in Spanish. ADFL Bulletin30: 54–62.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Kormos, J.
    (2006) Speech production and second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Leaver, B. , and B. Shekhtman
    (2002) Principles and practices in teaching superior-level language skills: Not just more of the same. In B. Leaver , and B. Shekhtman (eds.), Developing professional-level language proficiency. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp.3–33. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511606465
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606465 [Google Scholar]
  38. Lee, Y.
    (2006a) Towards respecification of communicative competence: Condition of L2 instruction or its objective?Applied Linguistics27: 349–376. doi: 10.1093/applin/aml011
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml011 [Google Scholar]
  39. (2006b) Speaking proficiency of non-native English teachers. English Teaching61: 189–212.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. (2010) Using cultural categories in language classroom discourse. Discourse & Cognition17: 69–94.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Lerner, G.
    (1992) Assisted storytelling: Deploying shared knowledge as a practical matter. Qualitative Sociology15: 247–271. doi: 10.1007/BF00990328
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00990328 [Google Scholar]
  42. (1994) Responsive list construction: A conversational resource for accomplishing multifaceted social action. Journal of Language and Social Psychology13: 20–33. doi: 10.1177/0261927X94131002
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0261927X94131002 [Google Scholar]
  43. Levelt, W.
    (1989) Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Liu, D. , G. Ahn , K. Baek , and N. Han
    (2004) South Korean high school English teachers’ code switching: Questions and challenges in the drive for maximal use of English in teaching. TESOL Quarterly38: 605–638. doi: 10.2307/3588282
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3588282 [Google Scholar]
  45. Lynch, M.
    (2011) Commentary: On understanding understanding. Journal of Pragmatics43: 553–555. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.08.018
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.08.018 [Google Scholar]
  46. Makoni, S.B.
    (1996) Variation in unplanned discourse. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching34: 167–181. doi: 10.1515/iral.1996.34.3.167
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.1996.34.3.167 [Google Scholar]
  47. Markee, N. , and J. Stansell
    (2008) Using electronic publishing as a resource for increasing empirical and interpretive accountability in conversation analysis. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics27: 24–44.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. McCarthy, M. , and A. O’Keeffe
    (2004) Research in the teaching of speaking. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics24: 26–43. doi: 10.1017/S0267190504000029
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0267190504000029 [Google Scholar]
  49. McNamara, T. , K. Hill , and M. Lynette
    (2002) Discourse and assessment. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics22: 221–242. doi: 10.1017/S0267190502000120
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0267190502000120 [Google Scholar]
  50. Moerman, M. , and H. Sacks
    (1971/1988) On understanding in the analysis of natural conversation. In M. Moerman (ed.), Talking culture: Ethnography and conversation analysis. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, pp.180–186.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Morell, T.
    (2004) Interactive lecture discourse for university EFL students. English for Specific Purposes23: 325–338. doi: 10.1016/S0889‑4906(03)00029‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(03)00029-2 [Google Scholar]
  52. Nakatani, Y. , and C. Goh
    (2007) A review of oral communication strategies: Focus on interactionist and psycholinguistic perspectives. In A.. Cohen , and E. Macaro (eds.), Language learning strategies. New York: Oxford University Press. pp.207–227.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Nemtchinova, E.
    (2005) Host teachers’ evaluation of non-native-English-speaking teacher trainees - A perspective from the classroom. TESOL Quarterly39: 235–262. doi: 10.2307/3588310
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3588310 [Google Scholar]
  54. Nickerson, C.
    (2005) English as a lingua franca in international business contexts. English for Specific Purposes24: 367–380. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2005.02.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  55. Ochs, E.
    (1979) Planned and unplanned discourse. In T. Givón (ed.), Discourse and syntax. New York: Academic Press, pp.51–80.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Ortega, J.
    (1999) Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition21: 109–148. doi: 10.1017/S0272263199001047
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199001047 [Google Scholar]
  57. Planken, B.
    (2005) Managing rapport in lingual franca sales negotiations: A comparison of professional and aspiring negotiators. English for Specific Purposes24: 381–400. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2005.02.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.02.002 [Google Scholar]
  58. Prodromou, L.
    (2003) In search of the successful user of English. Modern English Teacher12: 5–14.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Rendle-Short, J.
    (2006) The academic presentation: Situated talk in action. New York: Ashgate.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Sacks, H.
    (1972) On the analyzability of stories by children. In J. Gumperz , and D. Hymes (eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc, pp.325–345.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. (1974) An analysis of the course of a joke’s telling in conversation. In R. Bauman , and J. Sherzer (eds.), Explorations in the ethnography of speaking. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp.337–353.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. (1978) Some technical considerations of a dirty joke. In J. Schenkein (ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction. New York: Academic Press, pp.249–269. doi: 10.1016/B978‑0‑12‑623550‑0.50017‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-623550-0.50017-3 [Google Scholar]
  63. (1984) Notes on methodology. In M. Atkinson , and J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.21–27.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. (1992) Lectures on conversation. Cambridge: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Sacks, H. , E. Schegloff , and G. Jefferson
    (1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language50: 693–735. doi: 10.2307/412243
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/412243 [Google Scholar]
  66. Schegloff, E.
    (1979) The relevance of repair to syntax-for-conversation. In T. Givón (ed.), Syntax and semantics: Discourse and syntax (Vol. 12). New York: Academic Press, pp.262–286.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. (1982) Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of ‘Uh huh’ and other things that come between sentences. In D. Tannen (ed.), Georgetown university roundtable on language linguistics: Analyzing discourse - Text and talk. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, pp.71–93.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. (1986) The routine as achievement. Human Studies9: 110–151. doi: 10.1007/BF00148124
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00148124 [Google Scholar]
  69. (1995) Discourse as an interactional achievement III: The omnirelevance of action. Research on Language and Social Interaction28: 185–211. doi: 10.1207/s15327973rlsi2803_2
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2803_2 [Google Scholar]
  70. (1996) Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In E. Ochs , and S. Thompson (eds.), Interaction and grammar. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, pp.52-133. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620874
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874 [Google Scholar]
  71. (1997) Practices and actions: Boundary cases of other-initiated repair. Discourse Processes23: 499–545. doi: 10.1080/01638539709545001
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01638539709545001 [Google Scholar]
  72. (2007) Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. New York: Cambridge. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511791208
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
  73. Schegloff, E. , and H. Sacks
    (1973) Opening up closings. Semiotica7: 289–327. doi: 10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289 [Google Scholar]
  74. Schegloff, E. , G. Jefferson , and H. Sacks
    (1977) The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language53: 363–382. doi: 10.2307/412915
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/412915 [Google Scholar]
  75. Schegloff, E. , I. Koshik , S. Jacoby , and D. Olsher
    (2002) Conversation analysis and applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics22: 3–31. doi: 10.1017/S0267190502000016
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0267190502000016 [Google Scholar]
  76. Seedhouse, P.
    (2004) The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A Conversation Analysis perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Seedhouse, P. , and K. Richards
    (2007) Describing and analysing institutional varieties of interaction. In H. Bowles , and P. Seedhouse (eds.), Conversation analysis and language for specific purposes. New York: Peter Lang, pp.17–36.
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Seidlhofer, B.
    (2001) Closing a conceptual gap: The case for a description of English as a lingua franca. International Journal of Applied Linguistics11: 133–158. doi: 10.1111/1473‑4192.00011
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1473-4192.00011 [Google Scholar]
  79. Sharrock, W. , and B. Anderson
    (1982) Talking and teaching: Reflective comments on in-classroom activities. In G. Payne , and E.C. Cuff (eds.), Doing teaching: The practical management of classrooms. London: Batsford Academic and Educational, pp.170–183.
     [Google Scholar]
  80. Shimanoff, S. , and J. Brunak
    (1997) Repairs in planned and unplanned discourse. In E. Keenan , and T. Bennett (eds.), Discourse across time and space. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, pp.123–167.
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Skehan, P.
    (1998) A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  82. So-Mui, F. , and K. Mead
    (2000) An analysis of English in the workplace: The communication needs of textile and clothing merchandisers. English for Specific Purposes19: 351–368. doi: 10.1016/S0889‑4906(99)00011‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(99)00011-3 [Google Scholar]
  83. Spencer-Oatey, H.
    (2000) Rapport Management: A framework for analysis. In H. Spencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally speaking: Managing rapport through talk across cultures. New York: Cassel Academic, pp.11–46.
     [Google Scholar]
  84. St. John , M.J.
    (1996) Business is booming: Business English in the 1990s. English for Specific Purposes15: 3–18. doi: 10.1016/0889‑4906(95)00023‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(95)00023-2 [Google Scholar]
  85. Starks, D.
    (1994) Planned vs. unplanned discourse: Oral narrative vs. conversation in Woods Cree. Canadian Journal of Linguistics39: 297–320.
     [Google Scholar]
  86. Tesser, C.
    (1999) The non-native speaker and literary studies: Instruction, scholarship, and translation. ADFL Bulletin31: 20–25. doi: 10.1632/adfl.31.1.20
     https://doi.org/10.1632/adfl.31.1.20 [Google Scholar]
  87. Tyler, A.
    (1992) Discourse structure and the perception of incoherence in international teaching assistants’ spoken discourse. TESOL Quarterly26: 713–729. doi: 10.2307/3586870
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3586870 [Google Scholar]
  88. Wagner, J. , and R. Gardner
    (eds.) (2004) Second language conversations. New York: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  89. Wong, J.
    (2000a) Repetition in conversation: A look at “First and second sayings.”Research on Language and Social Interaction33: 407–424. doi: 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3304_03
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3304_03 [Google Scholar]
  90. (2000b) The token “Yeah” in non-native speaker English conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction33: 39–67. doi: 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3301_2
     https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3301_2 [Google Scholar]
  91. (2000c) Delayed next turn repair initiation in native/non-native speaker English conversation. Applied Linguistics21: 244–267. doi: 10.1093/applin/21.2.244
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.2.244 [Google Scholar]
  92. Wong, J. , and H. Waring
    (2010) Conversation analysis and second language pedagogy: A guide for ESL/EFL teachers. New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  93. Yuan, F. , and R. Ellis
    (2003) The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics24: 1–27. doi: 10.1093/applin/24.1.1
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.1.1 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/prag.22.4.03lee
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Connected discourse; Conversation analysis; Discourse; EFL; ESL; Non-native discourse; Non-native speaker; Speaking

Most Cited

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