Abstract
Research on spoken classroom discourse has a comparatively long tradition in linguistics, applied linguistics, and education in general. This, of course, is due to the fact that communication is central to educational contexts. It is through language that teachers conduct their work and students display what they have acquired. Language use in L2/foreign language classrooms, however, serves a distinct purpose, one that is quite unique from that of other classrooms. In most L2 classrooms, language is not only the medium of instruction but also the objective of learning (Lee 2010; Long 1983). In other words, “the medium is the message” in language teaching (Hammadou and Bernhardt 1987, p. 302). While teachers who teach in students’ L1 (e.g., teachers who teach Korean to L1 Korean speakers) also use the language as medium and object of instruction, one difference between L1 and L2 classrooms is the fact that, unlike L1 students, L2 learners in many cases have yet to develop high levels of proficiency in the target language. In order to gain a deeper appreciation of the complexity of L2 classroom discourse, researchers have used different analytical frameworks, including interaction analysis (e.g., Allen et al. 1984), discourse analysis (e.g., Cullen 2002), and conversation analysis (e.g., Lee 2007). The vast majority of research in these traditions, however, has mostly limited the analysis to the micro-levels of teacher-student interaction, focusing on the distribution and functions of teacher and student contributions to the three-part exchange structure: teacher initiation, student response, and teacher feedback (or IRF) (Sinclair and Coulthard 1975). Little research has examined L2 classroom discourse, particularly that of EAP classrooms, from a corpus linguistic perspective.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Allen, P., Fröhlich, M., & Spada, N. (1984). The communicative orientation of language teaching: An observation scheme. In J. Handscombe, R. A. Orem, & B. P. Taylor (Eds.), On TESOL ‘83: The question of control (pp. 231–252). Washington, DC: TESOL.
Csomay, E. (2007). A corpus-based look at linguistic variation in classroom interaction: Teacher talk versus student talk in American university classes. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6, 336–355.
Cullen, R. (2002). Supportive teacher talk: The importance of the F-move. ELT Journal, 56, 117–127.
Fanselow, J. (1977). Beyond Rashomon – Conceptualizing and describing the teaching act. TESOL Quarterly, 11, 17–39.
Hammadou, J., & Bernhardt, E. (1987). On being and becoming a foreign language teacher. Theory into Practice, 26, 301–306.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: Continuum.
Lee, Y.-A. (2007). Third turn position in teacher talk: Contingency and the work of teaching. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 180–206.
Lee, J. J. (2010). The uniqueness of EFL teachers: Perceptions of Japanese learners. TESOL Journal, 1, 23–48.
Lee, J. J. (2011). A genre analysis of second language classroom discourse: Exploring the rhetorical, linguistic, and contextual dimensions of language lessons. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University, Atlanta.
Lee, J. J. (2016). “There’s intentionality behind it…”: A genre analysis of EAP classroom lessons. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 23, 99–112.
Lee, J. J., & Subtirelu, N. (2015). Metadiscourse in the classroom: A comparative analysis of EAP lessons and university lectures. English for Specific Purposes, 37, 52–63.
Long, M. H. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 4, 126–141.
Moskowitz, G. (1971). Interaction analysis – A new modern language for supervisors. Foreign Language Annals, 5, 211–221.
O’Boyle, A. (2014). “You” and “I” in university seminars and spoken learner discourse. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 16, 40–56.
Seedhouse, P. (2004). The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A conversation analysis perspective. Malden: Blackwell.
Sinclair, J. M., & Coulthard, R. M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.
Spada, N., & Fröhlich, M. (1995). COLT observation scheme. Sydney: The National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research, Macquarie University.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tsui, A. B. M. (1985). Analyzing input and interaction in second language classrooms. RELC Journal, 16, 8–32.
van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy and authenticity. New York: Longman.
Walsh, S. (2002). Construction of obstruction: Teacher talk and learner involvement in the EFL classroom. Language Teaching Research, 6, 3–23.
Yang, S. (2014). Investigating discourse markers in Chinese college EFL teacher talk: A multi-layered analytical approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Friginal, E., Lee, J.J., Polat, B., Roberson, A. (2017). Learner (and Teacher) Talk in EAP Classroom Discourse. In: Exploring Spoken English Learner Language Using Corpora. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59900-7_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59900-7_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-59899-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-59900-7
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)