The use of material resources in vocabulary explanations: a conversation analytic inquiry
-
Tuncay Koç
Tuncay Koç received his PhD in English Language Teaching from Gazi University and is currently working as Head of the Foreign Languages Department at Bil College in Aydın, Turkey. His research interests include classroom discourse and interaction in institutional settings.
and
Hatice Ergül
Hatice Ergül is an Assistant Professor of English Language Teaching at Hacettepe University, Turkey. She has taught several courses on language teaching and teacher education over the years. Her research and publication interests include conversation analysis, gender, and language, teaching English to young learners, vocabulary teaching, and language teacher education.
Abstract
Recent studies have examined the interactional management of verbal and non-verbal vocabulary explanations in second language (L2) classrooms. However, the use of material resources in vocabulary explanations has not been fully investigated yet. Based on a corpus of fourteen class-hours of (50-min each) video recordings of an L2 Oral Communication classroom at a higher education setting in Turkey, this study explores how material resources are employed in vocabulary explanation sequences in combination with talk and gestures. Using the micro-analytic lens of multimodal Conversation Analysis (CA) for the examination of the detailed transcriptions of vocabulary explanation sequences with material resources, three different patterns were identified: (1) gesture + material resources; (2) talk + gesture + material resources; and (3) scene enactment + material resources. The findings of this study contribute to classroom interaction research, more specifically to studies on vocabulary teaching, by providing a micro-analytic account of how material resources are employed in vocabulary explanations.
About the authors
Tuncay Koç received his PhD in English Language Teaching from Gazi University and is currently working as Head of the Foreign Languages Department at Bil College in Aydın, Turkey. His research interests include classroom discourse and interaction in institutional settings.
Hatice Ergül is an Assistant Professor of English Language Teaching at Hacettepe University, Turkey. She has taught several courses on language teaching and teacher education over the years. Her research and publication interests include conversation analysis, gender, and language, teaching English to young learners, vocabulary teaching, and language teacher education.
Appendix A: Jeffersonian transcription conventions[1]
| [ ] | Square brackets indicates overlapping utterances ([ beginning) and ( end]) |
| ↑↓ | Pointed arrows represent a marked falling or rising pitch |
| Underlines indicate speaker emphasizes the specific syllable of the word | |
| CAPITAL represents loud speech | |
| ◦◦ | Degree signs indicate that enclosed talk is quitter |
| (0.4) | The number in brackets represents the tenths of a second between utterances |
| (.) | A dot enclosed in bracket represents a pause less than 0.2 s |
| (( )) | Double bracket encloses the transcriber’s notes about the background information |
| ꞉ | Indicates extension of a sound in a word |
| hhh | Exhalations |
| .hhh | Inhalations |
| What? | A question mark indicates that there is slightly rising intonation |
| yes, | A comma indicates that there is slightly falling intonation |
| yeah. | Full stop indicates falling, stopping intonation |
| the- | A dash represents an abrupt stop of articulation |
| > this is< | More than signs indicate that the talk they surround is faster |
| < that is> | Less than signs indicate that the talk they surround is slower |
| = = | The equals sign shows contiguous utterances |
| heh heh | Hearable laughers |
| ( ) | Empty parentheses shows that there is an unclear word or phrase |
| ( guess) | The words and phrases within single bracket show the transcriber’s guess for an unclear utterance |
| → | Arrow in the left margin shows the specific parts of an excerpt that is analytically significant |
| # | Sign indicates the exact place of the figure in the transcript |
| £smiley£ | Sterling signs indicate a smiley or jokey voice |
| Italics | English translation |
Appendix B: Mondada (2016) conventions for multimodal transcription
| ** | Gestures and descriptions of embodied actions are delimited between |
| ++ | Two identical symbols (one symbol per participant) |
| ΔΔ | And are synchronized with corresponding stretches of talk. |
| *—> | The action described continues across subsequent lines. |
| ——>* | Until the same symbol is reached. |
| > > | The action described begins before the excerpt’s beginning. |
| —>> | The action described continues after the excerpt’s end. |
| ….. | Action’s preparation. |
| —— | Action’s apex is reached and maintained. |
| ,,,,,,,, | Action’s retraction. |
| ric | Participant doing the embodied action is identified when (s)he is not the speaker. |
| fig | The exact moment at which a screen shot has been taken. |
| # | Is indicated with a specific symbol showing its position within the turn at talk. |
References
Belhiah, Hassan. 2013. Gesture as a resource for intersubjectivity in second-language learning situations. Classroom Discourse 4(2). 111–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2012.671273.Search in Google Scholar
Brouwer, E. Catherine. 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
Goodwin, Charles. 2007. Participation, stance and affect in the organization of activities. Discourse & Society 18(1). 53–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926507069457.Search in Google Scholar
Heller, Vivien. 2016. Meanings at hand: Coordinating semiotic resources in explaining mathematical terms in classroom discourse. Classroom Discourse 7(3). 253–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2016.1207551.Search in Google Scholar
Henriksen, Birgit. 1999. Three dimensions of vocabulary development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 21(2). 303–317. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263199002089.Search in Google Scholar
Hutchby, Ian & Robit Wooffitt. 1998. Conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press.Search in Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail. 2004. Glossary of transcript symbols with an Introduction. In Gene H. Lerner (ed.), Conversation Analysis: Studies from the first generation, 13–23. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.125.02jefSearch in Google Scholar
Koç, Tuncay. 2019. A micro-analytic investigation of word explanation sequences in L2 classroom interaction. Ankara: Gazi University PhD thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Koç, Tuncay, Kedriye D. Bacanak & Hatice Ergül. 2021. Gaze and other non-verbal resources in student clarification requests: A micro-analytic investigation. Language Learning Journal. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2021.1933142.Search in Google Scholar
Koole, Tom. 2010. Display of epistemic access: Student response to teacher explanations. Research on Language and Social Interaction 43(2). 183–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351811003737846.Search in Google Scholar
Lazaraton, Anne. 2004. Gesture and speech in the vocabulary explanations of one ESL teacher: A micro-analytic inquiry. Language Learning 54(1). 79–117. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00249.x.Search in Google Scholar
Lilja, Niina. 2014. Partial repetitions as other-initiations of repair in second language talk: Re-establishing understanding and doing learning. Journal of Pragmatics 71. 98–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.07.011.Search in Google Scholar
Majlesi, Ali Reza. 2018. Instructed vision: Navigating grammatical rules by using landmarks for linguistic structures in corrective feedback sequences. The Modern Language Journal 18. 11–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12452.Search in Google Scholar
Majlesi, Ali Reza & Mathias 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
Markee, Numa. 1995. Teachers’ answers to students’ questions: Problematizing the issue of making meaning. Issues in Applied Linguistics 6(2). 63–92. https://doi.org/10.5070/l462005218.Search in Google Scholar
Matsumoto, Yumi. 2021. Student self-initiated use of smartphones in multilingual writing classrooms: Making learner agency and multiple involvements visible. The Modern Language Journal 105. 142–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12688.Search in Google Scholar
Merke, Saija. 2016. Establishing the explainable in Finnish-as-a-foreign-languageclassroom interaction: Student-initiated explanation sequences. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction 9. 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2016.03.002.Search in Google Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza. 2016. Conventions for multimodal transcription. Basel: Romanisches Seminar der Universitat. Available at: https://franz.unibas.ch/fileadmin/franz/user_upload/redaktion/Mondada_conv_multimodality.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Mortensen, Kristian. 2011. Doing word explanation in interaction. In Gabriele Pallotti & Johannes Wagner (eds.), L2 learning as social practice: Conversation-analytic perspectives, 135–162. Honolulu: University of Hawaii.Search in Google Scholar
Morton, Tom. 2015. Vocabulary explanations in CLIL classrooms: A conversation analysis perspective. Language Learning Journal 43(3). 256–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2015.1053283.Search in Google Scholar
Nation, Paul. 1990. Teaching and learning vocabulary. New York: Newbury House.Search in Google Scholar
Nation, Paul. 2001. Learning vocabulary in another language. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524759Search in Google Scholar
Nation, Paul. 2008. Teaching vocabulary: Strategies and techniques. Boston: Heinle Cengage Learning.Search in Google Scholar
Ro, Eunseok. 2021. Using PowerPoint slides as a resource for coordinating understanding during presentation consultations at an L2 speaking center. Applied Linguistics Review. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2020-0052.Search in Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff & Gail 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
Smotrova, Tetyana & James P. Lantolf. 2013. The function of gesture in lexically focused L2 instructional conversations. The Modern Language Journal 97(2). 397–416. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12008.x.Search in Google Scholar
Svennevig, Jan. 2017. What’s it called in Norwegian? Acquiring L2 vocabulary items in the workplace. Journal of Pragmatics 126. 68–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.10.017.Search in Google Scholar
Stoewer, Kirsten & Nigel Musk. 2018. Impromptu vocabulary work in English mother tongue instruction. Classroom Discourse 10(2). 123–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2018.1516152.Search in Google Scholar
Tai, W. Kevin & Adam Brandt. 2018. Creating an imaginary context: teacher’s use of embodied enactments in addressing learner initiatives in a beginner-level adult ESOL classroom. Classroom Discourse 9(3). 244–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2018.1496345.Search in Google Scholar
Tai, W. Kevin & Nahal Khabbazbashi. 2019a. Vocabulary explanations in beginning-level adult ESOL classroom interactions: A conversation analysis perspective. Linguistics and Education 52. 61–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2019.06.006.Search in Google Scholar
Tai, W. Kevin & Nahal Khabbazbashi. 2019b. The mediation and organisation of gestures in vocabulary instructions: A microgenetic analysis of interactions in a beginning-level adult ESOL classroom. Language and Education 33(5). 445–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2019.1596122.Search in Google Scholar
Tai, Kevin W. H. & Wei Li. 2021. The affordances of iPad for constructing a technology-mediated space in Hong Kong English medium instruction secondary classrooms: A translanguaging view. Language Teaching Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211027851.Search in Google Scholar
Van Compernolle, Remi A. & Tetyana Smotrova. 2017. Gesture, meaning, and thinking-for-teaching in unplanned vocabulary explanations. Classroom Discourse 8(3). 194–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2016.1275028.Search in Google Scholar
Waring, Z. Hansun, Sarah Creider & Catherine D. Box. 2013. Explaining vocabulary in the language classroom. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction 2. 249–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2013.08.001.Search in Google Scholar
© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Research Articles
- The creative minds of Arab cartoonists: metaphor, culture and context
- Formulaic language in L1 and advanced L2 English speech: multiword structures in the speech of two Swedish groups compared to a group of L1 English speakers
- Developing an annotation protocol for evaluative stance and metaphor in discourse: theoretical and methodological considerations
- The use of material resources in vocabulary explanations: a conversation analytic inquiry
- Self-categorization: a resource for the management of experiential entitlement in talk about child death
- Preliminary jury instructing: a dilemmatic communication practice
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Research Articles
- The creative minds of Arab cartoonists: metaphor, culture and context
- Formulaic language in L1 and advanced L2 English speech: multiword structures in the speech of two Swedish groups compared to a group of L1 English speakers
- Developing an annotation protocol for evaluative stance and metaphor in discourse: theoretical and methodological considerations
- The use of material resources in vocabulary explanations: a conversation analytic inquiry
- Self-categorization: a resource for the management of experiential entitlement in talk about child death
- Preliminary jury instructing: a dilemmatic communication practice
