Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presenter: Wenwen Tian Co-authors: Dr. Pattamawan Jimarkon Asst. Prof. Dr. Wareesiri Singhasiri 22 nd April 2011 Designing a Transcription System for Face-

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Presenter: Wenwen Tian Co-authors: Dr. Pattamawan Jimarkon Asst. Prof. Dr. Wareesiri Singhasiri 22 nd April 2011 Designing a Transcription System for Face-"— Presentation transcript:

1 Presenter: Wenwen Tian Co-authors: Dr. Pattamawan Jimarkon Asst. Prof. Dr. Wareesiri Singhasiri 22 nd April 2011 Designing a Transcription System for Face- to-face PhD Supervisory Discourse: A Selective-specificity Model

2 2 1.Rationale 2.Overview of data 3.Theoretical background 4.Procedures 5.Conclusion 6.Reflections &Implications Outline

3 3 1. Rationale -What should be transcribed? -How is it transcribed? -Who should do it? Why? -Research interests & data analysis focus? -Principles & conventions? ????……………………………………..

4 4 Recent research has been dominantly focused on reviewing transcription principles and comparing transcription conventions (e.g., Cook, 1995; Dressler & Kreuz, 2000; Du Bois, 2010; O’Connell & Kowal, 1999, 2010). Qualitative studies normally end up with several words (e.g., “verbatim” or “detailed” transcription was completed) documenting the transcription process as a take-for-grant method rather than the result of a series of choices (Davidson, 2009; Ochs, 1979). Empirical accounts of transcription process are needed (Davidson, 2009; Lapadat & Lindsay, 1998). 1. Rationale (Cont’d)

5 5 2. Overview of data  Type: Audio-taped face-to-face supervisory meetings  Time: June – September 2010  Participants: supervisors & PhD candidates  Setting: international doctoral program in Applied Linguistics  Medium language: English  Research purposes (PhD thesis research): To investigate knowledge building & power manifestation by exploring linguistic features & supervisory discourse patterns

6 6 3. Theoretical background 3.1 Transcription as theory—Theoretical decisions  Transcription is a selective process reflecting theoretical goals and definitions” (Ochs,1979, p. 44).  Researchers make decisions about transcription that imprint the discourse theories they hold (Lapadat & Lindsay,1998).  A continuum of discourse theories (Oliver, et al., 2005): Naturalism_ _denaturalism Be dynamic/reflective by interacting with data

7 7 3. Theoretical background (Cont’d) 3.2 Transcription as a method—Methodological decisions - A series of methodological choices to seek, select, and thereby develop a transcription system for specific research purposes (Du, Bois, 1991; Ochs, 1979).  How to organize the layout the transcripts?  What conventions should be used?  How paralinguistic and nonverbal information should be symbolized?

8 8 3.3 Transcription as a tool for data analysis  Psathas and Anderson (1990) view that the process of transcribing is analytical.  Bucholtz (2000) argues that transcription is a reflective discourse analysis involving both interpretive and representational processes.  Bailey (2008) perceives transcription as an interpretive process therefore the first step in analyzing data. 3. Theoretical background (Cont’d)

9 9 4.1 Stage one: Select basic principles for designing a transcription system (Fixed menu vs. buffet) --- Being selective & specific Table1. A summary of four current transcription systems AuthorTitlePrincipleMaxims Du Bois (1991, 1993) Transcription design principles for spoken Discourse research ( DT) Transcription is a broad-to-narrow way of understanding and representing data. - Category definition - Accessibility - Robustness - Economy - Adaptability Ehlich (1993)Heuristic Interpretative Auditory Transcription (HlAT) Transcription is interpretative, and segmentation and commentary of data are based on researchers’ reflective knowledge. - Simplicity and validity - Good readability and correctability - Minimum of transcriber and user training Jefferson ( 1984, 1989) Transcription notation Transcription is practical for apprehending naturally occurred conversation and making it available for extended analysis - Explanatory - Readability - Systematic MacWhinney (1991) Codes for the Human Analysis of Transcripts (CHAT) Making the data compatible for computer data entry - Readability - Clarity (See details in O'Connell & Kowal, 2010) 4. Procedures

10 10 4. Procedures (Cont’d) Listen to data back and forth---1 st step to analyze data - To interact & understand data - To categorize/group data Example 1 C2’s session: 2 Date: , 1:30 am Length: 17 minutes and 18 seconds Note: C2 recorded her session and transferred data to R immediately after her supervisory meeting. It should be noted that her 5-year- old son was sick that day and the young boy was playing alone outside A’s office when C2 had her supervision. Stage two: Tuning in data

11 11 4. Procedures (Cont’d) Why: Any established convention is not applicable to the current data. How: Select transcription symbols from different conventions Purposes: - Get a sketch of each supervisory session - Note down constraints & problems of using the selected transcription symbols See Table 2 for selected transcription symbols Stage three: Selecting transcription symbols for a broad transcription

12 12 Table 2 Selected transcription symbols SymbolsDescriptions …Three dots indicate a perceptible pause less more than 3 seconds within a turn. (.3)Numbers in parentheses show length of pauses which are more than 3 seconds..A full stop indicates a sentence-final falling intonation ?A question mark indicates rising inflection not necessarily indicating a question. CAPSCapitals indicate an emphatic tone / A forward slash indicates repeated utterances by a same speaker. =Equal signs indicate latched utterances spoken one after the other without a pause. { }A description enclosed in an empty parenthesis indicates transcriber’s comments (?)A question mark in bracket indicates an unclear fragment on the mark indicates laughter of a speaker. (Selected from: Bucholtz, 2007; Dressler & Kreuz, 2000; Du Bois et al., 1993; Jefferson, 1984, 1989; Schiffrin, 1994; Tannen, 1989)

13 13 4. Procedures (Cont’d) Case 1: Unexpected visitor(s) Case 2: Sensitive information Case 3: Overlapped turn Case 4: Laughter Case 5: Silence gaps within and between utterances Case 6: Unclear utterances Case 7: Errors and slips (Please see data examples in handouts.) Stage four: Identifying problematic cases and providing solutions

14 14 5. Conclusion Figure 1--A selective-specificity model Appendix--Transcription symbols

15 15 Company Logo Figure 1 A selective-specificity model for designing a transcription system Audio-taped recordings Transcription as theory Decide positions on discourse theories continuum Being selective and reflective Transcription as method Being selective and specific Decide transcription principles, conventions and symbols Transcription as analysis Being interpretive and reflective Decide analysis focuses Research interests

16 16 Appendix Transcription Symbols A Main supervisor B1, B2, B3Co-supervisor in different supervisory teams C1, C2, C3PhD student in different supervisory teams D. J, O, T, U, W, R Pseudonyms for people who appear or being mentioned …Three dots indicate a perceptible pause less than 3 seconds. (.3)Numbers in parentheses show a pause more than 3 seconds..A full stop indicates a sentence-final falling intonation. ? A question mark indicates a question or a rising intonation statement. CAPS Capitals indicate an emphatic tone. /A forward slash indicates repeated utterances by a same speaker. = Equal signs indicate latched utterances spoken one after the other without a pause. { } A description enclosed in an empty parenthesis indicates transcriber’s comments. Pointed brackets indicate an inserted turn within a stream @ One or more indicate quality of laughter of a speaker A mark in a bracket indicates shared-laughter of speakers. (xxx)Three xs in a bracket indicate unclear utterances

17 17 Garden Path Analysis— A pleasant pathway while playing with data: ‘Here are roses, there are jonquils, and aren’t daffodils lovely today!’ Everything seems interesting BUT…!? Lyn Richards, Adjunct Professor of RMIT University, Founder of QSR 6.1 Pains & Gains 6. Reflections & Implications

18 18 Pains  Transcription process is time-consuming.  Problematic cases  Gloomy and de- motivated Gains  Learn how to think & explain logically, reasonably, & critically in order to cook a delicious ‘ data soup’  Develop a transcription protocol for recording procedures and cases  Interact closely with and learn from academics 6. Reflections & Implications (Cont’d)

19 19 Hands-on experience helps to shed lights on the process of doing transcription Boost novice researchers’ confidence Stay open-minded and explore more cases and features along the process of doing transcription 6. Reflections & Implications (Cont’d)

20 THANKS for your attention! Your questions, comments & suggestions, PLEASE! suggestions, PLEASE!


Download ppt "Presenter: Wenwen Tian Co-authors: Dr. Pattamawan Jimarkon Asst. Prof. Dr. Wareesiri Singhasiri 22 nd April 2011 Designing a Transcription System for Face-"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google