1887
Volume 34, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study explores the interactional meaning of an invitation to bid in Korean elementary school EFL classroom interaction by adopting a conversation analytic perspective. The study argues that participants use invitations to bid to indicate that a question elicits knowledge worthy of public demonstration. The analysis of thirteen video-recorded EFL lessons revealed that teachers use invitations to bid, fulfilling instructional agenda or demands whether they are set up at the beginning of an activity or arise midway. Students similarly invite themselves to bid, showing their understanding of the meaning that the practice carries. While teachers overwhelmingly accept students’ self-invitations, they may reject them in light of the details of instructional here and now. It is argued that deciding which student population should reply is a matter of negotiation although teachers have the final say, oriented to consequences of turn allocation on the work of teaching in progress.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/prag.22001.par
2023-05-10
2024-06-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Beach, Wayne A.
    1993 “Transitional Regularities for ‘Casual’ “Okay” Usages.” Journal of Pragmatics19 (4): 325–352. 10.1016/0378‑2166(93)90092‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(93)90092-4 [Google Scholar]
  2. Brown, H. Douglas
    2014Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Craven, Alexandra, and Jonathan Potter
    2010 “Directives: Entitlement and Contingency in Action.” Discourse Studies12 (4): 419–442. 10.1177/1461445610370126
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445610370126 [Google Scholar]
  4. Drew, Paul
    1981 “Adults’ Corrections of Children’s Mistakes: A Response to Wells and Montgomery.” InAdult-Child Conversation: Studies in Structure and Process, ed. byPeter French, and Margaret MacLure, 244–267. London: Croom Helm.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Gardner, Rod
    2019 “Classroom Interaction Research: The State of the Art.” Research on Language and Social Interaction52 (3): 212–226. 10.1080/08351813.2019.1631037
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2019.1631037 [Google Scholar]
  6. Hansen, David T.
    1993 “From Role to Person: The Moral Layeredness of Classroom Teaching.” American Educational Research Journal30 (4): 651–674. 10.3102/00028312030004651
    https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312030004651 [Google Scholar]
  7. Heritage, John
    1984 “A Change-of-State Token and Aspects of its Sequential Placement.” InStructures of Social Actioned. byJ. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 299–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Heritage, John, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
    2009 “Constituting and Maintaining Activities across Sequences: And-prefacing as a Feature of Question Design.” Language in Society23 (1): 1–29. 10.1017/S0047404500017656
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500017656 [Google Scholar]
  9. Lemke, Jay L.
    1990Talking Science: Language, Learning and Values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Lerner, Gene
    2002 “Turn-sharing: The Choral Co-production of Talk-in-Interaction.” InThe Language of Turn and Sequence, ed. byCelia E. Ford, Barbara A. Fox, and Sandra A. Thompson, 225–257. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Margutti, Piera
    2006 ““Are You Human Beings?”: Order and Knowledge Construction through Questioning in Primary Classroom Interaction.” Linguistics and Education17 (4): 313–346. 10.1016/j.linged.2006.12.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2006.12.002 [Google Scholar]
  12. 2010 “On Designedly Incomplete Utterances: What Counts as Learning for Teachers and Students in Primary Classroom Interaction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction43 (4): 315–345. 10.1080/08351813.2010.497629
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2010.497629 [Google Scholar]
  13. McHoul, Alexander
    1978 “The Organization of Turns at Formal Talk in the Classroom.” Language in Society7 (2): 183–213. 10.1017/S0047404500005522
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500005522 [Google Scholar]
  14. Mehan, Hugh
    1979Learning Lessons: Social Organization in the Classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 10.4159/harvard.9780674420106
    https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674420106 [Google Scholar]
  15. McCollum, Pamela
    1989 “Turn-Allocation in Lessons with North American and Puerto Rican Students: A Comparative Study.” Anthropology & Education Quarterly20 (2): 133–156. 10.1525/aeq.1989.20.2.05x0844l
    https://doi.org/10.1525/aeq.1989.20.2.05x0844l [Google Scholar]
  16. Paoletti, Isabella, and Giolo Fele
    2004 “Order and Disorder in the Classroom.” Pragmatics14 (1): 69–85.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Park, Yujong
    2014 “The Roles of Third-Turn Repeats in Two L2 Classroom Interactional Contexts.” Applied Linguistics35 (2): 145–167. 10.1093/applin/amt006
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt006 [Google Scholar]
  18. Payne, George, and David Hustler
    1980 “Teaching the Class: The Practical Management of a Cohort.” British Journal of Sociology of Education1 (1): 49–66. 10.1080/0142569800010104
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0142569800010104 [Google Scholar]
  19. Petitjean, Cécile
    2014 “Social Representations of Turn-taking in Classrooms: From Compulsory to Post-compulsory Schooling in French-speaking Switzerland.” Classroom Discourse5 (2): 138–157. 10.1080/19463014.2013.823350
    https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2013.823350 [Google Scholar]
  20. Philips, Susan U.
    1972 “Participant Structures and Communicative Competence: Warm Springs Children in Community and Classroom.” InFunctions of Language in the Classroom, ed. byCourtney B. Cazden, Vera P. John, and Dell Hymes, 370–394. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Poole, Deborah
    2005 “Cross-cultural Variation in Classroom Turn-taking Practices.” InDirections in Applied Linguistics, ed. byBruthiaux Paul, Atkinson Dwight, Eggington William, Grabe William, and Ramanathan Vaidehi, 201–220. Clevedon, OH: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781853598500‑018
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853598500-018 [Google Scholar]
  22. Sacks, Harvey
    1975 “Everyone Has to Lie.” InSociocultural Dimensions of Language Use, ed. byMarie Sanches, and Ben Blount, 57–80. New York, NY: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Sahlström, Fritjof
    2002 “The Interactional Organization of Hand Raising in Classroom Interaction.” The Journal of Classroom Interaction37 (2): 47–57.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    2007Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis, Vol.11. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511791208
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
  25. Schwab, Götz
    2011 “From Dialogue to Multilogue: A Different View on Participation in the English Foreign‐Language Classroom.” Classroom Discourse2 (1): 3–19. 10.1080/19463014.2011.562654
    https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2011.562654 [Google Scholar]
  26. Seedhouse, Paul
    2004The Interactional Architecture of the Language Classroom: A Conversation Analysis Perspective, Language Learning. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Sidnell, Jack, and Tanya Stivers
    eds. 2012The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 10.1002/9781118325001
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001 [Google Scholar]
  28. Sinclair, John McHardy, and Malcolm Coulthard
    1975Towards an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used by Teachers and Pupils. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Stevanovic, Melisa, and Anssi Peräkylä
    2012 “Deontic Authority in Interaction: The Right to Announce, Propose, and Decide.” Research on Language and Social Interaction45 (3): 297–321. 10.1080/08351813.2012.699260
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.699260 [Google Scholar]
  30. Stoffelsma, Lieke, and Tessa Cyrina van Charldorp
    2020 “A Closer Look at the Interactional Construction of Choral Responses in South African Township Schools.” Linguistics and Education581: 100829. 10.1016/j.linged.2020.100829
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2020.100829 [Google Scholar]
  31. Takahashi, Junko
    2018 “Practices of Self-Selection in the Graduate Classroom: Extension, Redirection, and Disjunction.” Linguistics and Education461: 70–81. 10.1016/j.linged.2018.06.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2018.06.002 [Google Scholar]
  32. Van Dam, Jet
    2002 “Ritual, Face, and Play in a First English Lesson: Bootstrapping a Classroom Culture.” InLanguage Acquisition and Language Socialization, ed. byClaire Kramsch, 237–65. New York, NY: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Waring, Hansun Zhang
    2013 “Managing Competing Voices in the Second Language Classroom.” Discourse Processes50 (5): 316–338. 10.1080/0163853X.2013.779552
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2013.779552 [Google Scholar]
  34. Xie, Xiaoyan
    2010 “Turn Allocation Patterns and Learning Opportunities.” ELT Journal65 (3): 240–250. 10.1093/elt/ccq064
    https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccq064 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/prag.22001.par
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