Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

I NTERACTION P ATTERNS IN C OMPUTER - MEDIATED C OMMUNICATION Presentation to NGL 2014 conference Högskolan Dalarna, Sweden 19-20 March, 2014 Jonathan.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "I NTERACTION P ATTERNS IN C OMPUTER - MEDIATED C OMMUNICATION Presentation to NGL 2014 conference Högskolan Dalarna, Sweden 19-20 March, 2014 Jonathan."— Presentation transcript:

1 I NTERACTION P ATTERNS IN C OMPUTER - MEDIATED C OMMUNICATION Presentation to NGL 2014 conference Högskolan Dalarna, Sweden 19-20 March, 2014 Jonathan White (

2 E LLIPSIS AND C ONTEXT Q: Where did you see him? A: Over there Merchant (2001, 2004) proposes syntactic ellipsis in such examples Stainton (2006) notes examples with no syntactic context: [father to daughter holding a full cup] Both hands!

3 S OCIAL A UTONOMY AND L EARNER A UTONOMY Language learning needs socio- cultural context (since Vygotsky 1978; see Bax 2011 for recent discussion) Learner autonomy requires social autonomy (Benson 2001) Interaction is marker of social autonomy (Warschauer 1996)

4 S TRATEGIES FOR I NTERACTION Turn-taking (Kitade 2000, among many others) Greeting/leave-taking Intersubjectivity (Darhower 2002) Requests for/provision of assistance Continuers Off-task discussion Self-/other-initiated correction (Peterson 2009: 305) Repetition (Cogo 2009: 260; Suvimiitty 2012: chapter 7; Mauranen 2012: chapter 7)

5 T HE D ATA My corpus of chatlogs (ca. 160,000 words) Textchat data in academic context (non- native speakers of English, students on MA in English Linguistics) Survey course in English Linguistics Pre-seminars and seminars (Skype textchat)

6 F UNCTIONS S TUDIED The functions identified were: Intersubjectivity Continuers Correction Repetition Comments

7 C OMMENTS Comments come in two types: [8:49:10 PM] Student 4 says: In some coferences, seminars, meetings.. men tend to contribute more information and opinion, while women contribute more agreeing Do u think so [8:49:27 PM] Student 1 says: Absolutely right or: [8:07:02 PM] Student 8 says: i type slowly Student 9 … [8:07:20 PM] Student 9 says: ok, no problem Examples of Peterson’s Continuers, or Comments

8 A NSWERS TO Q UESTIONS /F OLLOW - ON Q UESTIONS Similarly, answers to questions and follow-on questions are clearly interactive [9:30:57 PM] Student 7 says: what do u think that he focused on his achivement?... [9:31:27 PM] Student 5 says: to express his ability [9:31:39 PM] Student 5 says: his capacity [9:03:37 PM] Student 9 says: yes, [9:03:54 PM] Student 9 says: I am frank in giving my own opinion [9:04:32 PM] Student 9 says: and you can see much interruption in w/m's conversation [9:04:34 PM] Student 10 says: so do I my husband said I am too frank so canot be leader [9:04:35 PM] Student 9 says: Why ? They are examples of Intersubjectivity (context allows recovery of proposition)

9 R EPAIR /C ORRECTION There are many examples of students repairing mistakes/mistypings [9:35:40 PM] Student 5 says: gender refer to social catagory... [9:36:03 PM] Student 1 says: Yes, Student 5... [9:36:18 PM] Student 5 says: some cases that's tue... [9:36:21 PM] Student 5 says: true Examples of Peterson’s function of Self-/other-initiated repair (what I have called Corrections)

10 R EPETITION Repetition is common for confirming details [9:08:08 PM] Student 7 says: " The term PC originate with left wind-politician, it has now been largely "hijacked" by those on the right. […two contributions missing…] [9:09:12 PM] Student 3 says: in page 40 Student 7? [… two contributions missing…] [9:10:17 PM] Student 7 says: Yes in 40

11 R EPETITION, CONT. …also repeating analysis: [14:00:07] Teacher 2 says: so, what about question 2 from the handout? what allomorphs are there of PLURAL and PAST morphemes? [14:00:29] Student 25 says: s, es [14:00:30] Student 1 says: regular ; irregular and zero morphs [14:00:31] Student 24 says: s, es,ed [14:00:33] Student 25 says: ed [14:00:35] Student 20 says: is it -s and - ed [14:00:38] Student 7 says: plural e,es [14:00:41] Student 10 says: ed, -s [14:00:44] Student 7 says: past ed

12 F REQUENCY OF D IFFERENT F UNCTIONS InterSubjContinuersCorrectionRepetitionComment Media 41660640135 Politics 306631021106 Gender 398881615110 Phonetics 1331541424 Phonology 1582432823 Morphology 72815621286130 Syntax 66344255 Total (/3698) 2205 (59.63%)440 (11.90%)64 (1.73%)406 (10.98%)583 (15.77%)

13 C ONTEXTS FOR F REQUENCIES Frequencies depend on the discourse context Academic seminars expected to have much Intersubjectivity (question, answer, clarification, negotiation of understanding) Not many examples in Phonetics/Phonology/Syntax (more one-direction communication from teacher) Repetition very high in Morphology (analysis repeated by many students)

14 C ONTEXTS FOR F REQUENCIES, CONT. Comments/Continuers expected in group developing social norms (seen in early sessions, not much in Phonetics/Phonology/Syntax – less discussion, group is cohesive already) Continuers high in Morphology (support on analysis) Very few Corrections (only self-corrections of language errors, others correct analysis)

15 D ISCUSSION My conclusions are the following: Intersubjectivity is the most common function – academic discussions are expected to have this feature Continuers and Comments are common in order to develop group socially Repetition is a feature of analysis sessions Self-correction of language errors, but other- correction of analysis

16 R EFERENCES Bax, Stephen. (2011). Normalisation revisited: The effective use of technology in language education. IJCALLT 1, 2, 1-15. Benson, Phil. (2001). Autonomy in language learning. Essex: Pearson Education Limited. Cogo, Alessia. (2009). Accommodating difference in EFL conversations: A study of pragmatic strategies. In Anna Mauranen and Elina Ranta (eds.). English as a lingua franca: Studies and findings 254-273. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Darhower, Mark. (2002). Interactional features of synchronous computer-mediated communication in the intermediate L2 class: A sociocultural case study. Calico 19, 2, 249-277. Kitade, Keiko. (2000). L2 learners´ discourse and SLA theories in CMC: Collaborative interaction in Internet chat. Computer Assisted Language Learning 13(2), 143.166.

17 R EFERENCES, CONT. Mauranen, Anna. (2012). Exploring ELF: Academic English shaped by non-native speakers. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Merchant, Jason. (2001). The syntax of silence. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Merchant, Jason. (2004). Fragments and ellipsis. Linguistics and Philosophy 27, 661-738. Peterson, Mark. (2009). Learner interaction in synchronous CMC: A sociocultural perspective. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22, 4, 303-321.

18 R EFERENCES, CONT. Stainton, Robert. (2006). Words and thoughts: Subsentences, ellipsis and the philosophy of language. Oxford: Clarendon. Suviniitty, Jaana. (2012). Lectures in English as a lingua franca: Interactional features. PhD thesis: University of Helsinki. Vygotsky, Lev. (1978). Mind in Society. Harvard: Harvard University Press. Warschauer, Mark. (1996). Comparing face-to-face and electronic discussion in the second language classroom. Calico 13, 2, 7-26.

Download ppt "I NTERACTION P ATTERNS IN C OMPUTER - MEDIATED C OMMUNICATION Presentation to NGL 2014 conference Högskolan Dalarna, Sweden 19-20 March, 2014 Jonathan."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google