Cover not available

In:Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Im/politeness
Edited by Marina Terkourafi
[AILA Applied Linguistics Series 14] 2015
► pp. 187–212

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Interactional competence and politeness

Native and non-native perceptions of collaborative talk in Spanish

Published online: 28 May 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.14.10bax
Few studies in politeness research have examined perception, and even fewer have examined perception at the level of discourse. Salient characteristics of discourse, turn-taking and collaborative talk have been linked to politeness. This study approaches collaborative talk from an unexplored perspective: experimental testing of speaker perception of collaborative talk according to the features of content and timing. This study quantitatively compared native and non-native perceptions of dialogues in Spanish, employing a new aural task which presented listeners with a turn followed by multiple possible responses. The instrument measured the perceived appropriateness of content (matched vs. unmatched) and timing in overlap, and how additional factors influenced perception. Evaluation of collaborative talk was influenced by different features for natives and non-natives.
References (54)
References
Bachman, L.F. 1990. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. 2010. Exploring the pragmatics of interlanguage pragmatics: Definition by design. In Pragmatics Across Languages and Cultures, A. Trosborg (ed.), 219–259. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. Assessing familiarity with pragmatic formulas: Planning oral/aural assessment. In Pragmatics: Teaching Natural Conversation, N. Houck & D. Tatsuki (eds), 7–22. Crofton MD: Capitol Communication Systems.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., Mossman, S. & Vellenga, H.E. 2014. The effect of instruction on pragmatic routines in academic discussion. Language Teaching Research 18, 1–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baxter, R. Forthcoming. Co-constructing turns as Interactional Competence: Collaborative Turn Sequences in L1 and L2 Spanish. Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington IN.
Berry, A. 1994. Spanish and American turn-taking styles: A comparative study. In Pragmatics and Language Learning Monograph Series, Volume 5, L.F. Bouton & Y. Kachru (eds), 180–190. Urbana-Champaign, IL: Division of English as an International Language.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, P. & Levinson, S.C. 1978. Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In Questions and Politeness, E.N. Goody (ed.), 56–289. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Canale, M. 1983. From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In Language and Communication, J. Richards & R. Schmidt (eds), 2–27. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Canale, M. & Swain, M. 1980. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics 1: 1–47. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carrell, P.L. & Konneker, B. 1981. Politeness: Comparing native and nonnative judgments. Language Learning 31: 17–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cekaite, A. 2007. A child’s development of interactional competence in a Swedish L2 Classroom. The Modern Language Journal 91: 45–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Celce-Murcia, M. 2008. Rethinking the role of communicative competence in language teaching. In Intercultural Language Use and Language Learning, E. Alcón Soler & M.P. Safont Jordà (eds), 41–57. Dordrecht: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chang, W.M. & Haugh, M. 2011. Evaluations of im/politeness of an intercultural apology. Intercultural Pragmatics 8: 411–442. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cohen, A.D. & Ishihara, N. 2013. Pragmatics. In Applied linguistics and Materials Development, B. Tomlinson (ed.). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dings, A. 2007. Developing Interactional Competence In a Second Language: A Case Study of a Spanish Language Learner. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.
Eckert, P. & McConnell-Ginet, S. 1992. Think practically and look locally: Language and gender as community-based practice. Annual Review of Anthropology 21: 461–490. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ford, C.E. & Thompson, S.A. 1996. Interactional units in conversation: Syntactic, intonational and pragmatic resources for the management of turns. In Interaction and Grammar, E. Ochs, E. Schegloff & S.A. Thompson (eds), 34–184. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gupta, S., Walker, M. & Romano, D. 2007. How rude are you?: Evaluating politeness and affect in interaction. In Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction, Vol. 4738, A.R. Paiva, R. Prada & R. Picard (eds), 203–217. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hall, J.K. 1995. (Re)creating our worlds with words: A sociohistorical perspective of face-to-face interaction. Applied Linguistics 16: 206–232. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
He, A.W. & Young, R. 1998. Language proficiency interviews: A discourse approach. In Talking and Testing: Discourse Approaches to the Assessment of Oral Proficiency [Studies in Bilingualism 14], R. Young & A.W. He (eds), 1–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jefferson, G. 1973. A case of precision timing in ordinary conversation: Overlapped tag-positioned address terms in closing sequences. Semiotica 9: 47–96. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1983a. Another failed hypothesis: Pitch/loudness as relevant to overlap resolution. Tilburg Papers in Language and Literature 38: 1–24.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1983b. On a failed hypothesis: ‘Conjunctionals’ as overlap-vulnerable. Tilburg Papers in Language and Literature 28: 1–33.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1986. Notes on ‘latency’ in overlap onset. Human Studies 9: 153–183. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kasper, G. 1990. Linguistic politeness. Journal of Pragmatics 14: 193–218. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kramsch, C. 1986. From language proficiency to interactional competence. The Modern Language Journal 7: 366–372. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lerner, G.H. 1991. On the syntax of sentences in progress. Language in Society 20: 441–458. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1996. Finding ‘face’ in the preference structures of talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly 59: 303–321. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. Collaborative turn sequences. In Conversation Analysis: Studies From the First Generation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 125], G.H. Lerner (ed.), 225–256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Locher, M. & Watts, R. 2008. Relational work and impoliteness: Negotiating norms of linguistic behavior. In Impoliteness in Language: Studies on Its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, D. Bousfield & M. Locher (eds), 77–99. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Markee, N. 2000. Conversation Analysis. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Márquez-Reiter, R. & Placencia, M.E. 2005. Spanish Pragmatics. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meier, A.J. 1995a. Defining politeness: Universality in appropriateness. Language Sciences 17: 345–356. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995b. Passages of politeness. Journal of Pragmatics 24: 381–392. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nguyen, H.T. 2008. Sequence organization as local and longitudinal achievement. Text & Talk 28: 501–528. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Orozco, L. 2006. No me hable de tú despectivo, hábleme de tú correcto. In Líderes Lingüísticos, P. Martín Butragueño (ed.), 131–158. México DF: El Colegio de México.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pomerantz, A.M. 1978. Compliment responses: Notes on the co-operation of multiple constraints. In Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction, J. Schenkein (ed.), 79–112. New York NY: Academic Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1984. Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In Structures of Social Action, J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds), 57–101. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schauer, G. 2009. Interlanguage Pragmatic Development: The Study Abroad Context. London: Continuum. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, E.A. 2000. Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language in Society 1: 1–63. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. 1983. Interaction, acculturation and the acquisition of communicative competence. In Sociolinguistics and Second Language Acquisition, N. Wolfson & E. Judd (eds), 137–174. Rowley MA: Newbury House. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schneider, K.P. 2012. Appropriate behaviour across varieties of English. Journal of Pragmatics 44: 1022–1037. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scollon, R. & Scollon, S.W. 2001. Intercultural Communication: A Discourse Approach, 2nd edn. Malden MA: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tannen, D. 1994. Gender and Discourse. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tokuda, M. 2001. L2 Learners’ Perceptions of Politeness in Japanese: The Evaluations on Non-Native Speaker in L2 Japanese. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Hawai’i.
Viejobueno, M., Preston, C.G. & Preston, D.R. 2008. How to be impolite: Rating offensive strategies. In Contributions to the Sociology of Language: Standards and Norms in the English Language, M. Locher & J. Strässler (eds), 367–391. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walters, J. 1979. The perception of politeness in English and Spanish. In On TESOL ‘79. The Learner in Focus, C.A. Yorio, K. Perkins & J. Schacter (eds), 288–296. Washington DC: TESOL.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yagi, K. 2007. The development of interactional competence in a situated practice by Japanese learners of English as a second language. In Hawai’i Pacific University TESOL Working Paper Series, T. Nguyen & J. Kirschenmann (eds). Honolulu HI: Hawai’i Pacific University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Young, R. 1999. Sociolinguistic approaches to SLA. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 19: 105–132. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. Language and Interaction: An Advanced Resource Book. New York NY: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. Interactional competence in language learning, teaching, and testing. In Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning, Volume 2, E. Hinkel (ed.), 426–443. New York NY: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Young, R. & Miller, E.R. 2004. Learning as changing participation: Discourse roles in ESL writing conferences. The Modern Language Journal 88: 519–535. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue