Abstract
This study investigates how immigrant teachers and local Taiwanese students collaboratively construct cultural categories to create learning opportunities in a Southeast Asian cooking class. The data consist of 12.5 h of video recordings from an adult learning center. Drawing on sequential categorization analysis, the study examines how participants invoke formulation-, turn-, and sequence-generated cultural categories to organize epistemic authority and establish what counts as learnable knowledge. Three interactional practices are identified through which participants mobilize cultural categories to teach and learn about Southeast Asian cuisines: (a) generalizing features of Southeast Asian culinary practices, (b) constructing analogies bridging Taiwanese and Southeast Asian cuisines, and (c) contrasting observed Southeast Asian cooking with Taiwanese practices. These practices are accomplished through multimodal coordination, particularly gaze shifts that expand or change participation frameworks to index cultural distinction or affiliation. The findings extend research on identity construction in instruction beyond language learning contexts, revealing how cultural categories function as mutually constructed epistemic frameworks that simultaneously organize epistemic authority and create learning opportunities – making visible the category-bound predicates through which participants facilitate the learning of culture-specific culinary practices in situ.
摘要
本研究探討新住民教師與本地台灣學生如何在東南亞料理課程中共同建構文化類別以創造學習機會。數據來源為 12.5小時錄影。本研究採用序列類別分析法,檢視參與者如何運用表述生成、話輪生成與序列生成的文化類別來建立知識權威與何謂可學習的知識。研究發現三種互動實踐模式: 概括東南亞烹飪特徵、將東南亞料理與台灣料理類比、對比東南亞與台灣料理差異。透過協調多模態資源,特別是透過目光轉移來改變或擴展參與框架, 參與者共同建構標示彼此文化差異或歸屬的文化類別, 並將其作為知識框架來組織知識權威與創造學習機會, 使類別關聯謂詞 —— 參與者用以完成教學互動的資源 —— 變得可見。
Appendix: Transcription conventions
Conventions for glossing (Li and Thompson 1981)
- C
-
classifier (ge)
- EMPH
-
emphasizer
- N
-
negator
- NOM
-
nominalizer
- PL
-
plural
- POS
-
possessive (de)
- PRT
-
particle (ne, a)
- Q
-
question marker
Conventions for Talk (Jefferson 2004)
- ,
-
continuing intonation
- .
-
falling intonation
- ?
-
rising intonation
- ↑↓
-
sharply rising or falling intonation
- wo:rd
-
lengthening of the previous sound
- word-
-
abrupt cut-off
- word
-
stress or emphasis
- WORD
-
louder speech
- °word°
-
quieter speech
- >word<
-
quicker speech
- <word>
-
slower speech
- £word£
-
smiley voice
- %word%
-
English and other foreign languages
- [ ]
-
beginning and ending of overlapping talk
- word = word
-
latches or contiguous utterances
- (0.7)
-
pause timed in tenths of a second
- (.)
-
micropause, less than 0.2 seconds
- ((chewing))
-
transcriptionist comment
Conventions for Embodied Actions (Kasper and Burch 2016)
- gz
-
gaze
- +
-
place where an embodied action begins
- ----Lx
-
action maintained until Line x
- ---->>
-
action continued to the end of the excerpt
- fig
-
the moment at which a screenshot was taken
References
Brouwer, C. 2003. Word searches in NNS-NS interaction: Opportunities for language learning? The Modern Language Journal 87(4). 534–545. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00206.Search in Google Scholar
Bushnell, C. 2014. On developing a systematic methodology for analyzing categories in talk-in-interaction: Sequential categorization analysis. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) 24(4). 735–756. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.24.4.03bus.Search in Google Scholar
Chin, W. 2014. A comparative study on YE in Chinese Mandarin and Taiwan Mandarin. International Journal of Knowledge and Language Processing 5(4). 14–36.Search in Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E. & M. Selting. 2018. Interactional linguistics: Studying language in social interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781139507318Search in Google Scholar
Deardorff, D. K. 2006. Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies in International Education 10(3). 241–266. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315306287002.Search in Google Scholar
Eisenberg, J., H. J. Lee, F. Brück, B. Brenner, M. T. Claes, J. Mironski & R. Bell. 2013. Can business schools make students culturally competent? Effects of cross-cultural management courses on cultural intelligence. Academy of Management Learning & Education 12(4). 603–621. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2012.0022.Search in Google Scholar
Endo, T. 2019. Embodying stance: wo juede ‘I feel/think’ and gaze. In X. Li & T. Ono (eds.), Multimodality in Chinese interaction, 148–178. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110462395-007Search in Google Scholar
Eskildsen, S. W. 2019. Learning behaviors in the wild: How people achieve L2 learning outside of class. In J. Hellermann, S. Eskildsen, S. Pekarek Doehler & A. Piirainen-Marsh (eds.), Conversation Analytic Research on Learning-in-Action: The Complex Ecology of Second Language Interaction “in the wild”, 105–129. Gewerbestrasse: Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-22165-2_5Search in Google Scholar
Eskildsen, S. W. & G. Theodórsdóttir. 2017. Constructing L2 learning spaces: Ways to achieve learning inside and outside the classroom. Applied Linguistics 38(2). 143–164. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv010.Search in Google Scholar
Eskildsen, S. W., S. Pekarek Doehler, A. Piirainen-Marsh & J. Hellermann. 2019. Introduction: On the complex ecology of language learning ‘in the wild. In J. Hellermann, S. W. Eskildsen, S. P. Doehler & A. Piirainen-Marsh (eds.), Conversation analytic research on learning-in-action: The complex ecology of second language interaction ‘in the wild’, 1–21. Gewerbestrasse: Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-22165-2_1Search in Google Scholar
Gardner, R. 2008. Conversation analysis and orientation to learning. Journal of Applied Linguistics 5(3). 229–244. https://doi.org/10.1558/japl.v5i3.229.Search in Google Scholar
Garfinkel, H. 1967. Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Search in Google Scholar
Goldstein, S. B. 2022. A systematic review of short-term study abroad research methodology and intercultural competence outcomes. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 87. 26–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2022.01.001.Search in Google Scholar
Goodwin, C. 2000. Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 32(10). 1489–1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-2166(99)00096-x.Search in Google Scholar
Goodwin, C. 2018. Co-operative action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781139016735Search in Google Scholar
Greer, T. 2019. Noticing in the wild. In J. Hellermann, S. W. Eskildsen, S. Pekarek Doehler & A. Piirainen-Marsh (eds.), Conversation analytic research on learning-in-action: The complex ecology of second language interaction ‘in the wild’, 131–158. Gewerbestrasse: Springer.Search in Google Scholar
Hammer, M. R., M. J. Bennett & R. Wiseman. 2003. Measuring intercultural sensitivity: The intercultural development inventory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 27(4). 421–443. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0147-1767(03)00032-4.Search in Google Scholar
Heritage, J. 2012. Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45(1). 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.646684.Search in Google Scholar
Heritage, J. & G. Raymond. 2012. Navigating epistemic landscapes: Acquiescence, agency and resistance in responses to polar questions. In J. P. D. Ruiter (ed.), Questions: Formal, functional and interactional perspectives, 179–192. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139045414.013Search in Google Scholar
Heritage, J. C. & D. R. Watson. 1979. Formulations as conversational objects. In G. Psathas (ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology, 123–162. New York: Irvington.Search in Google Scholar
Hester, S. & P. Eglin. 1996. Membership categorization analysis: An introduction. In S. Hester & P. Eglin (eds.), Culture in action: Studies in membership categorization analysis, 1–24. New York: Bloomsbury.Search in Google Scholar
Hosoda, Y. 2006. Repair and relevance of differential language expertise in second language conversations. Applied linguistics 27(1). 25–50. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami022.Search in Google Scholar
Housley, W. & R. Fitzgerald. 2002. The reconsidered model of membership categorization analysis. Qualitative Research 2(1). 59–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794102002001639.Search in Google Scholar
Jefferson, G. 2004. Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. Pragmatics and Beyond New Series 125. 13–34.10.1075/pbns.125.02jefSearch in Google Scholar
Jokipohja, A. K. & N. Lilja. 2022. Depictive hand gestures as candidate understandings. Research on Language and Social Interaction 55(2). 123–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2022.2067425.Search in Google Scholar
Kasper, G. 2009. Locating cognition in second language interaction and learning: Inside the skull or in public view? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 47. 11–36. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2009.002.Search in Google Scholar
Kasper, G. & A. R. Burch. 2016. Focus on form in the wild. In R. A. Van Compernolle & J. McGregor (eds.), Authenticity, language, and interaction in second language contexts, 198–232. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.2307/jj.27080053.13Search in Google Scholar
Kendon, A. 2004. Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511807572Search in Google Scholar
Lee, Y. 2010. Using cultural categories in language classroom discourse. 담화와인지 17(2). 69–94.10.15718/discog.2010.17.2.69Search in Google Scholar
Li, C. N. & S. A. Thompson. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Oakland: University of California Press.10.1525/9780520352858Search in Google Scholar
Li, Y. 1999. Utterance-final particles in Taiwanese: A discourse-pragmatic analysis. Taipei: Wenhe Publisher.Search in Google Scholar
Lin, C. H. 2014. Utterance-final particles in Taiwan Mandarin: Contact, context, and core functions [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Leiden University.Search in Google Scholar
Majlesi, A. R. & M. Broth. 2012. Emergent learnables in second language classroom interaction. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction 1(3-4). 193–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.08.004.Search in Google Scholar
Mondada, L. 2016. Challenges of multimodality: Language and the body in social interaction. Journal of Sociolinguistics 20(3). 336–366. https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.1_12177.Search in Google Scholar
Mondada, L. 2020. Membership categorization and the sequential multimodal organization of action: Walking, perceiving, and talking in material-spatial ecologies. In R. J. Smith, R. Fitzgerald & W. Housley (eds.), On acks. Methodology, materials, and inspirations, 101–117. Oxfordshire: Routledge.10.4324/9780429024849-9Search in Google Scholar
Moody, S. J. 2024. Humor, identity, and belonging: Constructing the foreign in American-Japanese interaction. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.10.1515/9783110759877Search in Google Scholar
Mori, J. 2003. The construction of interculturality: A study of initial encounters between Japanese and American students. Research on Language and Social Interaction 36(2). 143–184. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3602_3.Search in Google Scholar
Narfström, L. N. 2025. Word searches in L2 peer interaction at language cafés: Opportunities for learning. Linguistics and Education 90. 101462.10.1016/j.linged.2025.101462Search in Google Scholar
Noda, C. & H. Zhu. 2022. Conversation for co-learning in the eikaiwa classroom. System 106. 102756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102756.Search in Google Scholar
Okada, Y. 2015. Contrasting identities: A language teacher’s practice in an English for specific purposes classroom. Classroom Discourse 6(1). 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2014.961092.Search in Google Scholar
Piller, I. 2011. Intercultural communication: A critical introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Pomerantz, A. 1984. Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In Atkinson & Heritage (eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511665868.008Search in Google Scholar
Rezaee, P. 2020. Word searches in Persian tutoring sessions: Opportunities for language learning. Applied Pragmatics 2(2). 148–173. https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.19016.rez.Search in Google Scholar
Richards, K. 2006. ‘Being the teacher’: Identity and classroom conversation. Applied linguistics 27(1). 51–77. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami041.Search in Google Scholar
Sacks, H. 1972. On the analyzability of stories by children. In J. J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (eds.), Directions in sociolinguistic: The ethnography of communication, 325–345. Austin: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Search in Google Scholar
Sacks, H. 1995. Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9781444328301Search in Google Scholar
Sacks, H., E. A. Schegloff & G. Jefferson. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50(4). 696–735. https://doi.org/10.2307/412243.Search in Google Scholar
Sharma, B. K. 2021. Interculturality and stereotypes in tourism instructional discourse. In B. K. Sharma & S. Gao (eds.), Language and intercultural communication in tourism, 57–77. Oxfordshire: Routledge.10.4324/9781003088028-5Search in Google Scholar
Shvidko, E. 2018. Writing conference feedback as moment-to-moment affiliative relationship building. Journal of Pragmatics 127. 20–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.01.004.Search in Google Scholar
Shvidko, E. 2021. Relating through instructing: Affiliative interactional resources used by the teacher when giving feedback on student work. Classroom Discourse 12(3). 233–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2020.1742174.Search in Google Scholar
Stokoe, E. 2012. Categorial systematics. Discourse Studies 14(3). 345–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445612441543.Search in Google Scholar
Stone, P. 2019. Repair sequences in ‘off-task’ conversations in an EFL university classroom in Japan: Japanese language resources and learning opportunities. Classroom Discourse 10(2). 188–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2018.1538886.Search in Google Scholar
Taylor, E. 2021. Use of non‐situational identities in teacher‐student interaction. Linguistics and Education 66. 100997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2021.100997.Search in Google Scholar
Tatar, S. 2005. Why keep silent? The classroom participation experiences of non-native-English-speaking students. Language and Intercultural Communication 5(3–4). 284–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708470508668902.Search in Google Scholar
Waring, H. Z. 2013. Doing being playful in the second language classroom. Applied Linguistics 34(2). 191–210. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams047.Search in Google Scholar
Watson, R. 1996. Some general reflections on “categorisation” and “sequence” in the analysis of conversation. In S. Hester & P. Eglin (eds.), Culture in action: Studies in membership categorisation analysis, 49–76. New York: Bloomsbury.Search in Google Scholar
Watson, R. 2015. De-reifying categories. In R. Fitzgerald & W. Housley (eds.), Advances in membership categorisation analysis, 23–50. Thousand Oaks: Sage.10.4135/9781473917873.n2Search in Google Scholar
Wu, R. J. 2004. Stance in talk: A conversation analysis of Mandarin final particles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.117Search in Google Scholar
Wu, R. J. & J. Heritage. 2017. Particles and epistemics: Convergences and divergences between English and Mandarin. In G. Raymond, G. H. Lerner & J. Heritage (eds.), Studies of talk-in-interaction in honor of Emanuel A. Schegloff, 273–297. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.273.14wuSearch in Google Scholar
Xu, Y. 2014. A corpus-based functional study of shi… de constructions. Chinese Language and Discourse 5(2). 146–184. https://doi.org/10.1075/cld.5.2.02xu.Search in Google Scholar
Zimmerman, D. 1998. Identities, context and interaction. In C. Antaki & S. Widdicomb (eds.), Identities in talk, 87–106. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Search in Google Scholar
© 2026 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston