A cross-cultural analysis of disagreements in classroom discourse: Comparative case studies from England, the United States, and Israel
-
Hadar Netz
Hadar Netz is a Lecturer in the Program for Multilingual Education of the School of Education at Tel-Aviv University. Her main research interests are classroom discourse and its relation to learning opportunities as well as social issues in the encoding of gender in discourse.
und
Adam Lefstein
Adam Lefstein is Associate Professor in Education at the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Israel and Director of the Laboratory for the Study of Pedagogy. He researches pedagogy, classroom interaction, teacher learning, and educational change. His book
Better than best practice: Developing teaching and learning through dialogue , co-written with Julia Snell, was published in 2014 by Routledge.
Abstract
How do cultural and institutional factors interact in shaping preference structures? This paper presents a cross-cultural analysis of disagreements in three different classroom settings: (1) a year 6 (ages 11–12) mainstream class in England, (2) a fifth-grade class of gifted students in the United States, and (3) a fourth-grade mainstream class in Israel. The aim of the study is to investigate how disagreements are enacted in these settings, exploring the influence of cultural communicative norms on the one hand and pedagogical goals and norms on the other. The study highlights culture-specific discursive patterns that emerge as the teacher and students manage a delicate balance between often clashing cultural and educational motives.
About the authors
Hadar Netz is a Lecturer in the Program for Multilingual Education of the School of Education at Tel-Aviv University. Her main research interests are classroom discourse and its relation to learning opportunities as well as social issues in the encoding of gender in discourse.
Adam Lefstein is Associate Professor in Education at the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Israel and Director of the Laboratory for the Study of Pedagogy. He researches pedagogy, classroom interaction, teacher learning, and educational change. His book Better than best practice: Developing teaching and learning through dialogue, co-written with Julia Snell, was published in 2014 by Routledge.
References
Alexander, Robin J. 2001. Culture and pedagogy: International comparisons in primary education. Oxford: Blackwell.Suche in Google Scholar
Alexander, Robin. J. 2004. Towards dialogic thinking: Rethinking classroom talk, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Dialogos.Suche in Google Scholar
Alexander, Robin J. 2012. Moral panic, miracle cures and educational policy: What can we really learn from international comparison? Scottish Educational Review 44(1). 4–21.10.1163/27730840-04401002Suche in Google Scholar
Angouri, Jo. 2012. Managing disagreement in problem solving meeting talk. Journal of Pragmatics 44(12). 1565–1579.10.1016/j.pragma.2012.06.010Suche in Google Scholar
Angouri, Jo & Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini. 2011. “So what problems bother you and you are not speeding up your work?”: Problem solving talk at work. Discourse and Communication 5(3). 209–229.10.1177/1750481311405589Suche in Google Scholar
Angouri, Jo & Miriam A. Locher. 2012. Theorizing disagreement. Journal of Pragmatics 44(12). 1549–1553.10.1016/j.pragma.2012.06.011Suche in Google Scholar
Angouri, Jo & Theodora Tseliga. 2010. “You have no idea what you are talking about”: From e-disagreement to e-impoliteness in two online fora. Journal of Politeness Research 6(1). 57–82.10.1515/jplr.2010.004Suche in Google Scholar
Applebee, Arthur N., Judith A. Langer, Martin Nystrand & Adam Gamoran. 2003. Discussion-based approaches to developing understanding: Classroom instruction and student performance in middle and high school English. American Educational Research Journal 40(3). 685–730.10.3102/00028312040003685Suche in Google Scholar
Arcidiacono, Francesco & Clotilde Pontecorvo. 2009. Cultural practices in Italian family conversations: Verbal conflict between parents and preadolescents. European Journal of Psychology of Education 24(1). 97–117.10.1007/BF03173477Suche in Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana. 1997. Dinner talk: Cultural patterns of sociability and socialization in family discourse. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Suche in Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, Menahem Blondheim & Gonen Hacohen. 2002. Traditions of dispute: From negotiations of Talmudic texts to the arena of political discourse in the media. Journal of Pragmatics 34. 1569–1594.10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00076-0Suche in Google Scholar
Boyd, Maureen Patricia & William C. Markarian. 2011. Dialogic teaching: Talk in service of a dialogic stance. Language and Education 25(6). 515–534.10.1080/09500782.2011.597861Suche in Google Scholar
Brendefur, Jonathan & Jeffrey Frykholm. 2000. Promoting mathematical communication in the classroom: Two perspective teachers’ conceptions and practices. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education 3. 125–153.10.1023/A:1009947032694Suche in Google Scholar
Brigham, Frederick J. & Jeffrey P. Bakken. 2014. Assessment of individuals who are gifted and talented. In Jeffrey P. Bakken, Festus E. Obiakor & Anthony F. Rotatori (eds.), Gifted education: Current perspectives and issues (Advances in Special Education 26), 21–40. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.10.1108/S0270-4013(2014)0000026002Suche in Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope & Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511813085Suche in Google Scholar
Cazden, Courtney B. 1988. Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Suche in Google Scholar
Cheng, Winnie & Amy B. M. Tsui. 2009. “Ahh ((laugh)) well there is no comparison between the two I think”: How do Hong Kong Chinese and native speakers of English disagree with each other? Journal of Pragmatics 41. 2365–2380.10.1016/j.pragma.2009.04.003Suche in Google Scholar
Chinn, Clark A., Richard C. Anderson & Martha A. Waggoner. 2001. Patterns of discourse in two kinds of literature discussion. Reading Research Quarterly 36(4). 378–411.10.1598/RRQ.36.4.3Suche in Google Scholar
Corsaro, William A. & Thomas A. Rizzo. 1990. Disputes in the peer culture of American and Italian nursery-school children. In Allen D. Grimshaw (ed.), Conflict talk, 21–66. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Dori-Hacohen, Gonen. 2012. Types of interaction on Israeli political radio phone-in programs and their relations to the public sphere. Javnost – The Public 19(3). 21–40.10.1080/13183222.2012.11009089Suche in Google Scholar
Drew, Paul & John Heritage. 1992. Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In Paul Drew and John Heritage (eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings, 3–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W. 2006. Comparison of transcription symbols. http://www.linguistics.ucsb.edu/projects/transcription/representing (accessed March 2015).Suche in Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W. 2007. The stance triangle. In Robert Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, 139–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.164.07duSuche in Google Scholar
Edstrom, Anne. 2004. Expressions of disagreement by Venezuelans in conversation: Reconsidering the influence of culture. Journal of Pragmatics 36. 1499–1518.10.1016/j.pragma.2004.02.002Suche in Google Scholar
Edwards, Anthony Davies & David P. G. Westgate. 1994. Investigating classroom talk, 2nd edn. London: Falmer.Suche in Google Scholar
Feniger, Yariv & Adam Lefstein. 2014. How not to reason with PISA data: An ironic investigation. Journal of Education Policy 29(6). 845–855.10.1080/02680939.2014.892156Suche in Google Scholar
Flyvbjerg, Bent. 2001. Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511810503Suche in Google Scholar
Galton, Maurice, Linda Hargreaves, Chris Comber, Debbie Wall & Tony Pell. 1999. Changes in patterns of teacher interaction in primary classrooms: 1976–96. British Educational Research Journal 25(1). 23–37.10.1080/0141192990250103Suche in Google Scholar
García, Carmen. 1989. Disagreeing and requesting by Americans and Venezuelans. Linguistics and Education 1. 299–322.10.1016/S0898-5898(89)80004-XSuche in Google Scholar
Georgakopoulou, Alexandra. 2001. Arguing about the future: On indirect disagreements in conversations. Journal of Pragmatics 33. 1881–1900.10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00034-5Suche in Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1967. Interaction ritual: Essays on face to face behavior. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.Suche in Google Scholar
Goodwin, Marjorie Harness. 1983. Aggravated correction and disagreement in children’s conversations. Journal of Pragmatics 7. 657–677.10.1016/0378-2166(83)90089-9Suche in Google Scholar
Greatbatch, David. 1992. On the management of disagreement between news interviewees. In Paul Drew & John Heritage (eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings, 268–301. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Gutiérrez, Kris D. & Joanne Larson. 1994. Language borders: Recitation as hegemonic discourse. International Journal of Educational Reform 3(1). 22–36.Suche in Google Scholar
Gutiérrez, Kris, Betsy Rymes & Joanne Larson. 1995. Script, counterscript, and underlife in the classroom: James Brown versus Brown v. Board of Education. Harvard Educational Review 65. 445–471.10.17763/haer.65.3.r16146n25h4mh384Suche in Google Scholar
Hacohen, Gonen. 2001. Jewish argumentation: Conversational features of two forms of arguments in Israel [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem MA thesis.Suche in Google Scholar
Hall, Joan Kelly & Meghan Walsh. 2002. Teacher-student interaction and language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 22. 186–203.10.1017/S0267190502000107Suche in Google Scholar
Kakava, Christina. 2002. Opposition in Modern Greek discourse: Cultural and contextual constraints. Journal of Pragmatics 34. 1537–1568.10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00075-9Suche in Google Scholar
Kangasharju, Helena. 2002. Alignment in disagreement: Forming oppositional alliances in committee meetings. Journal of Pragmatics 34. 1447–1471.10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00073-5Suche in Google Scholar
Katriel, Tamar. 1986. Talking straight: Dugri speech in Israeli Sabra culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Koshik, Irene. 2002. Designedly incomplete utterances: A pedagogical practice for eliciting knowledge displays in error correction sequences. Research on Language and Social Interaction 35(3). 277–309.10.1207/S15327973RLSI3503_2Suche in Google Scholar
Knuth, Eric & Dominic Peressini. 2001. Unpacking the nature of discourse in mathematics classrooms. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School 6(5). 320–325.10.5951/MTMS.6.5.0320Suche in Google Scholar
Kreutel, Karen. 2007. “I’m not agree with you.”: ESL learners’ expressions of disagreement. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language 11(3). 1–23.Suche in Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 1983. Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.Suche in Google Scholar
Lefstein, Adam & Julia Snell. 2011. Classroom discourse: The promise and complexity of dialogic practice. In Sue Ellis, Elspeth McCartney & Jill Bourne (eds.), Insight and impact: Applied linguistics and the primary school, 165–185. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511921605.018Suche in Google Scholar
Lefstein, Adam & Julia Snell. 2014. Better than best practice: Developing teaching and learning through dialogue. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.10.4324/9781315884516Suche in Google Scholar
Lemke, Jay, L. 1982. Classroom communication of science. Final report submitted to the National Science Foundation, April.Suche in Google Scholar
Littleton, Karen & Christine Howe. 2010. Educational dialogues: Understanding and promoting productive interaction. Abingdon: Routledge.10.4324/9780203863510Suche in Google Scholar
Locher, Miriam A. 2004. Power and politeness in action: Disagreements in oral communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110926552Suche in Google Scholar
Lotman, Yury M. 1988. Text within a text. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology 26(3). 32–51.10.2753/RPO1061-0405260332Suche in Google Scholar
Maíz-Arévalo, Carmen. 2014. Expressing disagreement in English as a lingua franca: Whose pragmatic rules? Intercultural Pragmatics 11(2). 199–224.10.1515/ip-2014-0009Suche in Google Scholar
Margutti, Piera. 2006. “Are you human beings?”: Order and knowledge construction through questioning in primary classroom interaction. Linguistics and Education 17. 313–346.10.1016/j.linged.2006.12.002Suche in Google Scholar
Margutti, Piera. 2010. On designedly incomplete utterances: What counts as learning for teachers and students in primary classroom interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction 43(4). 315–345.10.1080/08351813.2010.497629Suche in Google Scholar
Marra, Meredith, 2012. Disagreeing without being disagreeable: Negotiating workplace communities as an outsider. Journal of Pragmatics 44(12). 1580–1590.10.1016/j.pragma.2012.06.009Suche in Google Scholar
Mehan, Hugh, 1979. Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.10.4159/harvard.9780674420106Suche in Google Scholar
Mercer, Neil & Karen Littleton. 2007. Dialogue and the development of children’s thinking. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203946657Suche in Google Scholar
Meyer, Heinz-Dieter & Aaron Benavot. 2013. PISA, power and policy: The emergence of global educational governance. Oxford: Symposium Books.10.15730/books.85Suche in Google Scholar
Mitchell, J. Clyde. 1983. Case and situation analysis. Sociological Review 31(2). 187–211.10.1111/j.1467-954X.1983.tb00387.xSuche in Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne. 2012. Tags: Cross-linguistic diversity and commonality. Journal of Pragmatics 44. 2165–2182.10.1016/j.pragma.2012.09.010Suche in Google Scholar
Mori, Junko. 1999. Negotiating agreement and disagreement in Japanese: Connective expressions and turn construction. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/sidag.8Suche in Google Scholar
Muntigl, Peter & William Turnbull. 1998. Conversational structure and facework in arguing. Journal of Pragmatics 29. 225–256.10.1016/S0378-2166(97)00048-9Suche in Google Scholar
Myers, Greg. 2004. Matters of opinion: Talking about public issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486708Suche in Google Scholar
Netz, Hadar. 2014a. Disagreement patterns in gifted classes. Journal of Pragmatics 61. 142–160.10.1016/j.pragma.2013.09.007Suche in Google Scholar
Netz, Hadar. 2014b. Gifted conversations: Discursive patterns in gifted classes. Gifted Child Quarterly 58(2). 149–163.10.1177/0016986214523312Suche in Google Scholar
Netz, Hadar. 2016. Designedly Incomplete Utterances and student participation. Linguistics and Education 33. 56–73.10.1016/j.linged.2016.01.001Suche in Google Scholar
Nystrand, Martin, Adam Gamoran, Robert Kachur & Catherine Prendergast. 1997. Opening dialogue: Understanding the dynamics of language and learning in the English classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Osborne, Jonathan, Sibel Erduran & Shirley Simon. 2004. Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 41(10). 994–1020.10.1002/tea.20035Suche in Google Scholar
Paramasivam, Shamala. 2007. Managing disagreement while managing not to disagree: Polite disagreement in negotiation discourse. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 36(2). 91–116.10.1080/17475750701478661Suche in Google Scholar
Peled-Elhanan, Nurit & Shoshana Blum-Kulka. 2006. Dialogue in the Israeli classroom: Types of teacher-student talk. Language and Education 23(1). 3–54.10.1080/09500780608668716Suche in Google Scholar
Pollak, Itay, Aliza Segal & Adam Lefstein. 2015. Pedagogy in Israel: Activity and discourse in classrooms. Be’er Sheva: Laboratory for the Study of Pedagogy, Department of Education, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev.Suche in Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1984. Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511665868.008Suche in Google Scholar
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA). 2005. Opening up talk (DVD). London: QCA.Suche in Google Scholar
Rees-Miller, Janie. 2000. Power, severity, and context in disagreement. Journal of Pragmatics 32. 1087–1111.10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00088-0Suche in Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1987 [1973]. On the preference for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation. In Graham B. Button & John R. E. Lee (eds.), Talk and social organization, 54–69. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Suche in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1980. Preliminaries to preliminaries: “Can I ask you a question?” Social Inquiry 50(3/4). 104–152.10.1111/j.1475-682X.1980.tb00018.xSuche in Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah, 1984. Jewish argument as sociability. Language in Society 13. 311–335.10.1017/S0047404500010526Suche in Google Scholar
Seedhouse, Paul. 2004. The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A conversation analysis perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Suche in Google Scholar
Sellar, Sam & Bob Lingard. 2013. The OECD and global governance in education. Journal of Education Policy 28(5).710–725.10.1080/02680939.2013.779791Suche in Google Scholar
Sifianou, Maria. 2012. Disagreements, face and politeness. Journal of Pragmatics 44(12). 1554–1564.10.1016/j.pragma.2012.03.009Suche in Google Scholar
Sinclair, John M. H. & Malcolm Coulthard. 1975. Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. London: Longman.Suche in Google Scholar
Smith, Fay, Frank Hardman, Kate Wall & Maria Mroz. 2004. Interactive whole class teaching in the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies. British Educational Research Journal 30(3). 395–411.10.1080/01411920410001689706Suche in Google Scholar
Takahashi, Tomoko & Leslie Beebe. 1993. Cross-linguistic influence in the speech act of correction. In Gabriele Kasper & Shoshana Blum-Kulka (eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics, 138–157. New York: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. 1981. New York Jewish conversational style. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 30. 133–149.10.1002/9780470758434.ch9Suche in Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah, 2002. Agonism in academic discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 34. 1651–1669.10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00079-6Suche in Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah & Christina Kakava. 1992. Power and solidarity in Modern Greek conversation: Disagreeing to agree. Journal of Modern Greek Studies 10. 11–34.10.1353/mgs.2010.0203Suche in Google Scholar
Wells, Gordon. 1999. Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511605895Suche in Google Scholar
Wells, Gordon & Rebeca Mejía-Arauz. 2006. Dialogue in the classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences 15(3). 379–428.10.1207/s15327809jls1503_3Suche in Google Scholar
Wertsch, James V. 1991. Voices of the mind: Sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Appendix A: Transcription symbols [7]
| Meaning | Symbol |
| Unit | |
| word | SPACE |
| intonation unit | LINE |
| Pause | |
| pause, timed | (1.2) |
| pause, short | .. |
| latching | = |
| Sequence | |
| overlap | [ |
| Disfluency | |
| truncated word | wor– |
| Vocalism | |
| laughing word | wo@rd |
| laugh pulse | @ |
| Manner/Quality | |
| piano | °words° |
| forte | <F>words<F> |
| smile quality | <☺>words</☺> |
| Metatranscription | |
| unintelligible | ### |
| uncertain | #word |
| comment | ((words)) |
| Participation | |
| speaker | Jill: |
| unidentified student | S |
| Boundary | |
| terminative | . |
| continuative | , |
| truncated intonation unit | — |
| appeal | ? |
| exclamatory | ! |
| Prosody | |
| primary accent | ^ |
Appendix B: Excerpt (3) – full text
| 91 | Hagar: | bemarkivim meyuxadim še::, |
| in.components special that | ||
| “In special components that,” | ||
| 92 | Naftali carix litfos otam ke’ilu, | |
| Naftali needs to.catch them as.if | ||
| “Naftali needs to catch them like,” | ||
| 93 | .. lo carix le– ki ze ke’ilu ze lo [tofeset. | |
| no necessary to because this as.if this not tag | ||
| “you don’t need to- because it’s like it’s not tag.” | ||
| 94 | Ms E: | [meyuxadim, |
| special | ||
| “special,” | ||
| 95 | Naftali carix .. litfos otam. | |
| Naftali needs to.catch them | ||
| “Naftali needs to catch them.” | ||
| 96 | mi etmol amar et ze? | |
| who yesterday said ACC this | ||
| “Who yesterday said it?” | ||
| 97 | [dibarnu al ze, | |
| talked.we about this | ||
| “We talked about it,” | ||
| 98 | Hagar: | [ze lo— |
| this no | ||
| “it’s not-” | ||
| 99 | Ms E: | šeyesh km::o mis– misxak šel [e::h, |
| that.there.is like ga game of eh | ||
| “There’s like a ga- game of uh,” | ||
| 100 | Shira: | [ma ze aval ###, |
| what this but | ||
| “What but ???,” | ||
| 101 | Hagar: | [ze lo tofeset! |
| this not tag | ||
| “It’s not tag!” | ||
| 102 | Ms E: | [Ilan nir’a li. |
| Ilan seems to.me | ||
| “Ilan I think.” | ||
| 103 | Omer: | =yeš tofest maxbo’im. |
| there.is tag hide.and.seek | ||
| “There’s tag-hide-and-seek.” | ||
| 104 | Ms E: | =tofeset maxbo’im. |
| tag hide.and.seek | ||
| “Tag-hide-and-seek.” | ||
| 105 | aval ze lo maxbo’im regilim, | |
| but this not hide.and.seek regular | ||
| “But it’s not regular hide-and-seek,” | ||
| 106 | [ze, | |
| this | ||
| “it’s,” | ||
| 107 | Shira: | [lo, |
| no | ||
| “No,” | ||
| 108 | ze lo meyuxad! | |
| this not special | ||
| “it’s not special!” | ||
| 109 | Ms E: | ze lo meyuxad? |
| this not special | ||
| “It’s not special?” | ||
| 110 | Hagar: | [ze ken ki— |
| this yes becau- | ||
| “It is because” | ||
| 111 | Shira: | [lo. |
| no | ||
| “No.” | ||
| 112 | ani ken crixa le: [litfos. | |
| I yes need to to.catch | ||
| “I do need to to catch.” | ||
| 113 | Ms E: | [litfos? |
| to.catch | ||
| “To catch?” | ||
| 114 | im ani mesaxeket maxbo’im, | |
| if I play hide.and.seek | ||
| “If I play hide-and-seek,” | ||
| 115 | ani mesovevet et haroš, | |
| I turn ACC the.head | ||
| “I turn my head,” | ||
| 116 | m::e’a^h, ((imitating end of count)) | |
| one.hundred | ||
| “a hundred,” | ||
| 117 | veaz ra’iti et Hagar, | |
| and.then saw.I ACC Hagar | ||
| “and then I see Hagar,” | ||
| 118 | ani crixa litfos otax, | |
| I need to.catch you | ||
| “I need to catch you,” | ||
| 119 | o lehagid axat štayim šaloš Hagar? | |
| or to.say one two three Hagar | ||
| “or to say one two three Hagar?” | ||
| 120 | Ss: | ((talking together)) |
| 121 | Omer: | [###<F>taluy<F>, |
| depends | ||
| “??? it depends,” | ||
| 122 | ki yeš tofeset e:h ze, ((ss talking in the background)) | |
| because there.is tag eh this | ||
| “because there’s tag uh,” | ||
| 123 | yeš tofese:t, | |
| there.is tag | ||
| “There’s tag,” | ||
| 124 | [yeš tofeset gam. | |
| there.is tag too | ||
| “There’s tag also.” | ||
| 125 | Ms E: | [yeš tofeset maxbo’im, ((accelerated)) |
| there.is tag hide.and.seek | ||
| “There’s tag-hide-and-seek,” | ||
| 126 | veyeš maxbo’im. ((accelerated)) | |
| and.there.is hide.and.seek | ||
| “and there’s hide-and-seek.” | ||
| 127 | vehamisxak maxbo’im šelahem hu kcat meyuxad, ((accelerated)) | |
| and.the.game hide.and.seek their it a.bit special | ||
| “and their hide-and-seek is a bit special,” | ||
| 128 | ki kanir’e cari:x, | |
| because probably necessary | ||
| “because apparently you need to,” | ||
| 129 | Daniel: | No’am maca oto be’arba’im, |
| Noam found him in.forty | ||
| “Noam found him at forty,” | ||
| 130 | ### tofeset ### ### et [#hamiškafayim šelo. | |
| tag ACC the.glasses his | ||
| “??? tag ??? ??? his glasses.” | ||
| 131 | Omer: | [aval ze lo meyuxad! |
| But this not special | ||
| “But it’s not special!” | ||
| 132 | ze ragil! | |
| this regular | ||
| “It’s regular!” | ||
| 133 | ki ani afilu mesaxek [beze. | |
| because I even play in.this | ||
| “Because even I play it.” | ||
| 134 | Hagar: | [ma ragil beze? |
| what regular in.this | ||
| “What’s regular about it?” | ||
| 135 | S: | naxon. |
| right | ||
| “Right.” | ||
| 136 | Shira: | ken, |
| Yes | ||
| “Yeah,” | ||
| 137 | [gam ani! | |
| also I | ||
| “me too!” | ||
| 138 | S: | [gam ani mesaxeket beze, |
| also I play in.this | ||
| “I too play it,” | ||
| 139 | naxon. | |
| right | ||
| “Yeah.” | ||
| 140 | Ms E: | ata mesaxek et ze bemaxbo’im ragil? |
| you play ACC this in.hide.and.seek regular | ||
| “Do you play it in regular hide-and-seek?” | ||
| 141 | Omer: | (1) [lo. |
| No | ||
| “No.” | ||
| 142 | Ms E: | [o bemaxbo’im tofeset? |
| or in.hide.and.seek tag | ||
| “or in tag-hide-and-seek?” | ||
| 143 | Omer: | aval ze l— |
| But this n | ||
| “But it’s n”- | ||
| 144 | maxbo’im tofeset, | |
| hide.and.seek tag | ||
| “Tag-hide-and-seek,” | ||
| 145 | ze lo mašehu meyuxad, | |
| this not something special | ||
| “it’s not something special,” | ||
| 146 | ze xelek .. mimašehu, | |
| this part of.something | ||
| “It’s part of something,” | ||
| 147 | .. [še’at xoševet šehu meyuxad, | |
| that you think that.it special | ||
| “that you think is special,” | ||
| 148 | Hagar: | [az beštehem! |
| then in.both | ||
| “Then in both!” | ||
| 149 | beštehem tiršemi! | |
| in.both write | ||
| “In both write it!” | ||
| 150 | Omer: | aval ze bix– .. aval hu ragil. |
| But this no- but it regular | ||
| “But it’s n- but it’s regular.” | ||
| 151 | Ms E: | lama hu ragil? |
| why it regular | ||
| “Why is it regular?” | ||
| 152 | Omer: | ki at lo mekira et ze, |
| because you not know ACC this | ||
| “Because you don’t know it,” | ||
| 153 | aval anaxnu ken, | |
| but we yes | ||
| “but we do,” | ||
| 154 | veana@xnu yod’@im m@a z@e. | |
| and.we know what this | ||
| “and we know what it is.” | ||
| 155 | Ss: | naxon. |
| Right | ||
| “Yeah.” | ||
| 156 | Ss: | naxon. |
| right | ||
| “Yeah.” | ||
| 157 | Ss: | [naxon. |
| right | ||
| “Yeah.” | ||
| 158 | Ms E: | [bo’u ne— |
| Let’ ta | ||
| “Let’s g-” | ||
| 159 | [<☺>bo’u nelex le::</☺>, | |
| let’s go to | ||
| “Let’s go to,” | ||
| 160 | Ss: | [naxo::n. |
| right | ||
| “Yeah.” | ||
| 161 | Ms E: | <☺>okay</☺>, |
| okay | ||
| “Okay,” | ||
| 162 | <☺>bo’u na’ase hacba’a</☺>. | |
| let’s do vote | ||
| “let’s take a vote.” | ||
| 163 | mi [xošev šetofeset e::h maxbo— | |
| who thinks that.tag eh hide.an- | ||
| “Who thinks that tag uh hi-“ | ||
| 164 | S: | [@ |
| 165 | Ms E: | šelitfos et mi šemitxabe ze meyuxad, |
| that.to.catch ACC who that.hiding this special | ||
| “that catching the kid who’s hiding is special,” | ||
| 166 | šeyarim et hayad. | |
| that.raise ACC hand | ||
| “raise your hands.” | ||
| 167 | Ss: | (3) ((students raise their hands)) |
| 168 | Ms E: | mi xošev šeze lo meyuxad, |
| who thinks that.this not special | ||
| “Who thinks that it’s not special,” | ||
| 169 | šeyarim et hayad. | |
| that.raise ACC hand | ||
| “raise your hands.” | ||
| 170 | Ss: | @@@ |
| 171 | Ms E: | az kanir’e še’ani atika, |
| then probably that.I ancient | ||
| “So I must be ancient,” | ||
| 172 | ki bezmani, | |
| because in.time.my | ||
| “Because in my days,” | ||
| 173 | Researcher: | @ |
| 174 | Ms E: | <☺>litfos et ha:: et hamištatfim</☺>, |
| to.catch ACC the ACC the.participants | ||
| “catching the the players,” | ||
| 175 | ze ken <☺>haya::</☺>, | |
| this yes was | ||
| “it really was,” | ||
| 176 | <☺>ze lo haya ragil</☺>, | |
| this not was regular | ||
| “it wasn’t regular,” | ||
| 177 | <☺>haya carix rak [lehistakel aleyhem</☺>, | |
| was necessary only to.look at.them | ||
| “you only had to look at them,” | ||
| 178 | S: | [az axšav ze lo ragil. |
| then now this not regular | ||
| “So now it’s not regular.” | ||
| 179 | Ms E: | <☺>meraxok</☺>. |
| from.far | ||
| “from a distance.” |
Appendix C: Excerpt (4) – full text
| 59 | Ms E: | kše’anaxnu kotvim tšuvot, |
| when.we write answers | ||
| “When we write answers,” | ||
| 60 | anaxnu xayavim lehitbases al ha:, | |
| we must to.rely on the | ||
| “we must rely on the,” | ||
| 61 | Ss: | tekst. |
| text | ||
| “text.” | ||
| 62 | Ms E: | al ha:, |
| on the | ||
| “on the,” | ||
| 63 | Ss: | tekst. |
| text | ||
| “text.” | ||
| 64 | Ms E: | verak al ha:, |
| and.only on the | ||
| “and only on the,” | ||
| 65 | Ss: | tekst. |
| text | ||
| “text.” |
©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Uncommon ground
- Toward a typology of constative speech acts: Actions beyond evidentiality, epistemic modality, and factuality
- A cross-cultural analysis of disagreements in classroom discourse: Comparative case studies from England, the United States, and Israel
- Understanding refusal style and pragmatic competence of teenage Cantonese English learners in refusals: An exploratory study
- Forum
- Creating meso-contexts: The functions of metapragmatic expressions in argumentative TV talk shows
- Book Reviews
- Louise Cummings: Pragmatic disorders
- Deborah Tannen and Anna Marie Trester: Discourse 2.0: Language and new media
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Uncommon ground
- Toward a typology of constative speech acts: Actions beyond evidentiality, epistemic modality, and factuality
- A cross-cultural analysis of disagreements in classroom discourse: Comparative case studies from England, the United States, and Israel
- Understanding refusal style and pragmatic competence of teenage Cantonese English learners in refusals: An exploratory study
- Forum
- Creating meso-contexts: The functions of metapragmatic expressions in argumentative TV talk shows
- Book Reviews
- Louise Cummings: Pragmatic disorders
- Deborah Tannen and Anna Marie Trester: Discourse 2.0: Language and new media
