Difference between revisions of "Park2012a"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Innhwa Park |Title=Asking different types of polar questions: The interplay between turn, sequence, and context in writing conferences |...")
 
m
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|Author(s)=Innhwa Park
 
|Author(s)=Innhwa Park
 
|Title=Asking different types of polar questions: The interplay between turn, sequence, and context in writing conferences
 
|Title=Asking different types of polar questions: The interplay between turn, sequence, and context in writing conferences
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Polar Questions; Context;  
+
|Tag(s)=EMCA; polar questions; context; declaratives; epistemic asymmetry; interrogatives; pedagogical practices; question–answer sequences; student questions; writing conference
 
|Key=Park2012a
 
|Key=Park2012a
 
|Year=2012
 
|Year=2012
Line 9: Line 9:
 
|Volume=14
 
|Volume=14
 
|Number=5
 
|Number=5
|Pages=613-633
+
|Pages=613–633
 +
|URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1461445612454077
 +
|DOI=10.1177/1461445612454077
 +
|Abstract=Using video recordings of one-on-one writing conferences as data, this conversation analytic study provides a sequential analysis of student-initiated question–answer sequences and demonstrates that the building of social interaction is contingent upon the composition of a turn as well as its position in the larger sequence. In particular, the article focuses on the distinct sequential environments in which students use yes/no interrogatives and yes/no declaratives. In the context of writing conference, the epistemic asymmetry between the participants is made relevant throughout the session; in general, the teacher is in a more knowledgeable position, whereas the student is in a less knowledgeable position concerning writing practices. Nonetheless, students invoke a different degree of knowledge gap between the participants by using different forms of polar questions. This article illustrates how students convey their epistemic positions with different syntactic structures and how such distinct positions are ratified in the unfolding sequence. The analysis of this study contributes to finding new aspects of question–answer sequences and pedagogical practices.
 
}}
 
}}

Latest revision as of 08:04, 30 November 2019

Park2012a
BibType ARTICLE
Key Park2012a
Author(s) Innhwa Park
Title Asking different types of polar questions: The interplay between turn, sequence, and context in writing conferences
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, polar questions, context, declaratives, epistemic asymmetry, interrogatives, pedagogical practices, question–answer sequences, student questions, writing conference
Publisher
Year 2012
Language
City
Month
Journal Discourse Studies
Volume 14
Number 5
Pages 613–633
URL Link
DOI 10.1177/1461445612454077
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

Using video recordings of one-on-one writing conferences as data, this conversation analytic study provides a sequential analysis of student-initiated question–answer sequences and demonstrates that the building of social interaction is contingent upon the composition of a turn as well as its position in the larger sequence. In particular, the article focuses on the distinct sequential environments in which students use yes/no interrogatives and yes/no declaratives. In the context of writing conference, the epistemic asymmetry between the participants is made relevant throughout the session; in general, the teacher is in a more knowledgeable position, whereas the student is in a less knowledgeable position concerning writing practices. Nonetheless, students invoke a different degree of knowledge gap between the participants by using different forms of polar questions. This article illustrates how students convey their epistemic positions with different syntactic structures and how such distinct positions are ratified in the unfolding sequence. The analysis of this study contributes to finding new aspects of question–answer sequences and pedagogical practices.

Notes