Difference between revisions of "Hellermann2009"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) m |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
|Journal=International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching | |Journal=International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching | ||
|Volume=47 | |Volume=47 | ||
| + | |Number=1 | ||
|Pages=95–126 | |Pages=95–126 | ||
| − | |Abstract=Responding in a manner that does not align with an action or | + | |URL=http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/iral.2009.47.issue-1/iral.2009.005/iral.2009.005.xml |
| − | a stance implicated in just prior talk is potentially sensitive work. | + | |DOI=10.1515/iral.2009.005 |
| − | + | |Abstract=Responding in a manner that does not align with an action or affiliate with a stance implicated in just prior talk is potentially sensitive work. Conversation Analysis (CA) has shown that participants orient to the sensitive nature of sequences of talk used to project responses that do not align, or, are dispreferred (Pomerantz, Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes, Cambridge University Press, 1984) in some way. This paper examines such responses, especially with the use of no tokens. The talk comes from the interactions of one adult learner of English in a language learning classroom over the course of five ten-week terms. The findings show that the participant's use of no (for other-correction, third-position repair, and multiple sayings) is oriented to by peers as appropriate for the classroom community of practice. Learning, it is suggested, may be seen in the learner's orientation to the preference for affiliation when doing negative responses. | |
| − | of sequences of talk used to project responses that do not align, or, are | ||
| − | |||
| − | especially with the use of no tokens. The talk comes from the interactions of | ||
| − | one adult learner of English in a language learning classroom over the course | ||
| − | of | ||
| − | other-correction, third-position repair, and multiple sayings) is oriented to by | ||
| − | peers as appropriate for the classroom community of practice. Learning, it is | ||
| − | suggested, may be seen in the | ||
| − | |||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 11:24, 18 February 2016
| Hellermann2009 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Hellermann2009 |
| Author(s) | John Hellermann |
| Title | Practices for dispreferred responses using 'no' by a learner of English |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Interactional Linguistics, Preference, Second Language |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2009 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching |
| Volume | 47 |
| Number | 1 |
| Pages | 95–126 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1515/iral.2009.005 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Responding in a manner that does not align with an action or affiliate with a stance implicated in just prior talk is potentially sensitive work. Conversation Analysis (CA) has shown that participants orient to the sensitive nature of sequences of talk used to project responses that do not align, or, are dispreferred (Pomerantz, Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes, Cambridge University Press, 1984) in some way. This paper examines such responses, especially with the use of no tokens. The talk comes from the interactions of one adult learner of English in a language learning classroom over the course of five ten-week terms. The findings show that the participant's use of no (for other-correction, third-position repair, and multiple sayings) is oriented to by peers as appropriate for the classroom community of practice. Learning, it is suggested, may be seen in the learner's orientation to the preference for affiliation when doing negative responses.
Notes
